• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.



Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Any news from the USEF Convention?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Any news from the USEF Convention?

    What's going on, particularly with reference to the "competition standards" proposal? Anybody know?
    Last edited by DennisM; Jan. 10, 2008, 11:52 AM. Reason: spelling error

  • #2
    There are discussions going on relative to this issue. Best to let them work it out now.


    • #3
      It would be great if someone whi is there can keep us updated on the discussions.


      • #4
        Best to let them work it out? I could not disagree more strongly. Please keep us updated . I have very low expectations of the outcome given their past history of listening to the membership at large.


        • #5
          I am not there.

          What I meant was, though, that I have been communicating with someone who is there and she felt that it was best to refrain from posting a lot of specific information, because everyone's feelings were pretty raw right then and she thought best not to further inflame the situation.

          I was taking her word for it. She is there as a representative from CDS and has been lobbying all week.

          Voting has apparently not taken place yet. There is some talk of adding another year to the proposed effective date.

          If the general proposed rule change (that there will be qualifying criteria) is voted on and passes, you can be sure that there will be continued action on the parts of almost every GMO. Shame on us for not being more active. I have learned that my GMO did receive the USEF booket of proposed rule changes (of which this was one), but the person who got it apparently didn't GET IT that she should study them and then ask for feedback from the GMO re the rule changes, so she could go to the USDF convention prepared with our GMOs position. That WILL NOT happen again.

          I had suggested on this board previously that I may attend the convention to assist in lobbying regarding this issue. There was very little response so I dropped the idea.

          At this point, I personally have called USDF and USEF officials; written to every single member of the USEF Dressage Committee (multiple times); sent emails and snail mail letters individually to every single member of the USEF Board of Directors; publicized the information on this, UDBB, and TheHorseCommunity as well as participating in the Dressage-L list and forwarding relevant information to various dressage officials; spoken personally to the President of the USDF, Sam Barish, as well as to Scott Hassler, George Williams, several judges, and Jeff Moore; contacted Mary Phelps at DressageDaily and been the impetus as well as contributing to writing (and editing several times) an article on DressageDaily; saw to it that a letter from PVDA was written and sent to the USEF convention with Connie Davenport from CDS; corresponded with CDS officials; corresponded with PVDA officials re why we didn't hear about it, and continued to participate in bulletin board discussions of this issue to encourage people to let their opinions be known and to help them know where to write.

          What else do you suggest be done at this point, Miss Dior???????
          Last edited by rebecca yount; Jan. 12, 2008, 07:49 PM.


          • #6
            so, RY are you saying that all the GMO's received word that this was going to be a voting issue BEFORE the USDF convention when it was presented to the 'public"?

            perhaps I will go to that awards meeting next weekend

            to whom was the mailing directed, the President of the GMO?
            -- * > hoopoe
            Procrastinate NOW
            Introverted Since 1957


            • #7
              I too have made certain that our area has been heard from. Aside from being there who knows. I have no idea how it is going to go down.


              • #8
                I was told by USEF that copies of the rule change booklet were mailed to all GMOs in October. That would have been before the USDF convention, yes.

                I was wondering what happened to the one that supposedly came to PVDA, since there was no discussion of that rule change at PVDA meetings, etc. Then I noticed that in an article in the PVDA newsletter AFTER the USDF convention (where this first got a lot of talk) by one of the PVDA delegates to the USDF convention. In it, she referred to the USEF rule changel booklet and said "it landed in my mailbox in October". So therefore she had it.

                What awards meeting are you talking about going to?


                • #9
                  our local GMO has one next weekend
                  -- * > hoopoe
                  Procrastinate NOW
                  Introverted Since 1957


                  • #10
                    I just went back to look at the first 'proposal thread', and that was November 7th.
                    So yes, it was late October that the GMOs etc got mailed the rule proposals.

                    BUT-- it's a lot of pages, whether in paper or online...and it was just because a friend and I were talking about the proposals and zipping through the pages that we got ,um, excited, when we found 275-07 with its non-specific ' we'll let you all know later the exact criteria' that I decided to start that thread.

                    And even with that--look how long and how many threads it took for all of us to really UNDERSTAND the implications and then DO something.

                    I am grateful to Rebecca, among others, for really getting the ball rolling (pardon the cliche)
                    one oak, lots of canyons



                    • #11


                      is a new interview with Janet Brown Foy explaining the latest developments at USEF Convention and how nearly 98% of us all 'misunderstood' the proposal ; AND the current status of the proposal--which has definitely undergone some changes ; AND what is still being worked on.
                      one oak, lots of canyons



                      • #12
                        hmmm, indeed. I thought one of the biggest objections was that it was an Open-ended Proposal?

                        So, reading this article, does it appear that the "open-ended" rule proposal was passed and now the Dressage Committee is going to determine the implementation and specifics of the qualification system?
                        Will the rule proposal be re-submitted with the specific criteria attached?

                        quote Dressage Daily:
                        "While it is premature to cover the specifics of the various proposals as they are not finalized, the plan is to continue discussing with the membership and within the Dressage Committee what the various qualification processes should include. These three proposals will then be finalized at the Dressage Committee’s June Meeting and then distributed through the USDF Group Membership Organizations (GMO) and Participating Membership (PM) Delegates to be disseminated among their constituencies. This will allow “the people a voice to give their feedback,” added Janet.
                        The Dressage Committee will then take all this feedback into consideration and will go to the December USDF Convention where they will have an open discussion about the proposals."


                        • #13

                          From Dressage Daily:

                          "I asked Janet (Foy) why she felt there was so much resistance to this proposal.

                          This is the United States and everyone is used to being free to do whatever we want. I ran across this a little in the breeding when I was standing a stallion. Everyone thought that even if their horse was lame or mentally unrideable that they should still be allowed to breed to my stallion.

                          In Europe you have to go through a strict process for breeding and it’s important to set standards. People are used to qualifying in other areas so this shouldn’t be that surprising.”

                          "Janet continued to explain that overall the committee was able to resolve most of the concerns voiced by the 500+ people who had emailed them.

                          Once I explained what we are doing and cleared up any misinformation, I would say 98% came back satisfied and some even apologized.

                          What people have to understand is that we don’t have hard hearts. We know the adult amateurs drive the sport but it’s a fine line between what is good for the sport and safe for the horses and fair to the riders,” she added."


                          • #14
                            SO we are 3%???????? How many on HERE apologized or were SATISFIED????
                            "Energy efficient vehicle. Runs on grass and oats. CAUTION: Avoid exhaust!"
                            I think we should eat trolls.
                            Troll meat. Now that's good eatin'.
                            by Hiddenlake


                            • #15
                              I am not nearly appologetic or happy.

                              The qualifying proposal is written too general, and I for one am reluctant to jump on board and support something that is so open ended and up to too much interpretation.


                              • #16
                                When you read through all three pages of the Dressage Daily article, all I have to say is that Janet Brown-Foy is the most elitist, obnoxious and stupid person I have ever had the privilege of reading.

                                Could the USEF and dressage leadership have a more obtuse spokesperson???

                                If she no longer has a breeding business it isn't difficult to understand why. She will have the recognized dressage arenas cleared out so quickly her head will spin if she is allowed to continue antagonizing people.

                                I was and still am against the proposed qualifying rule based on its merits but I would be against it in principle due to her ridiculous snobbery if for no other reason!
                                "We don't ride the clock. We ride the horse." Reiner Klimke.


                                • #17
                                  Has anyone actually seen a 3rd level test where the final score is a 30%? I haven't and trust me, Region 9 isn't exactly the cream of the crop for dressage. Barring a mental meltdown from the horse (which could happen if it was a spooky, hot horse) I just don't think there are a plethora of 30% rides being performed at recognized shows. And if it does happen, I bet it doesn't happen too often to the same rider. Who in their right mind is going to spend the boatload of money it costs to show at recognized shows to get a 30% over and over again.

                                  I like the end comment by Janet that it will take 2-3 shows MAXIMUM for people to get the necessary qualifying scores. I do think with the new proposal starting at 58% and only requiring 10 points, that will be true in a lot of cases. But, I don't think it will be quite as easy as she makes it sound.

                                  I do like that they have pushed this back to 2011 and also will count scores retroactively. It doesn't say how many years they will go back. But, the retroactive scores, even if they start now, should help a lot of people be qualified for 3rd level by the time the rule is in place.

                                  I agree that Janet needs a PR lesson.


                                  • #18
                                    I'm bumping this up hoping more people read the interview.
                                    one oak, lots of canyons



                                    • #19
                                      We have been involved in Dressage for many years and have never seen a 30% ride, at any level. And we are in the wild wild west! This qualification system is going to create a record keeping nightmare within an organization who already has trouble keeping things straight! And really, it isn't needed anyway. I don't think too many horses are "suffering" because their riders are SO BAD. I say if the Judges do their jobs, the cream will rise to the top
                                      Follow us on facebook - https://www.facebook.com/pages/River...ref=ts&fref=ts


                                      • #20
                                        I know this selection process is going to put into place

                                        I was not happy with the carte blanc they were asking for

                                        somewhere between the USDF convention and the USEF they officially decided to go with the lower 59 / 10 pts rather than the original 60% / 20pts for the approval jump???

                                        that is what the article sounds like. A point level such as the 60/20 was far to restricting on riders from less populated regions where it would mean for some at least 10 shows. I don't know about others but I prefer to show my horse ( 2nd level) only one ride per day. In our area most shows are two day. Some shows at three day and a few make it so friday is one show and saturday and sunday are considered a second show. I notice that this year a few venues are holding 2 one day shows back to back. This is a great way for people to get qualifying rides with minimal travel impact. As long as the judges are arranged to advantage that is a win /win for all

                                        I like that they seem to "get it" that for those of us scoring in the 55% - 62% range, our limitations might be more about our horses basic "non- warmblood quality" rather than heinous riding. I like the idea that someone presented ...the checking a box on the test "rider demonstrates proper understanding of riding basics" gather "X" number and you can pass.

                                        I think they learned that they could not do such a poor job with the communication process. I think a few GMO's are going to hear the same thing as well. I think they learned that dressage riders tend to be very involved with their shows and showing decisions.
                                        -- * > hoopoe
                                        Procrastinate NOW
                                        Introverted Since 1957