• 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.

Announcement

Collapse

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

Catherine Haddad Finds God

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Crockpot View Post
    oh dear god...

    ...please forgive me for watching that lame-@$$ video. lol

    Comment


    • #62
      you get what you pay for..maybe you could ask for your money back.

      I'm not even a big fan of CH but I take my cue from southerners who are not in the least offended by this silliness. it was obviously not scripted amateur hour and was not a polished comedy act ..so advice to quit your day job -seems not necessary.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by fooler View Post
        Dang--tried to watch the clip and can't get the sound Now I REALLY need tech support out here.

        Back in my grad. school days, I specialized in theories of drama. In retrospect, we probably could have spent more time on the ways in which audience background, cultural affiliation, etc., affect perceptions of humor. I have, for example, had occasion to notice that a lot of Republications don't find Garrison Keillor funny at all. Come to think of it, I've actually discovered a few friends' political affiliations by attempting to share jokes with them.

        No doubt about it, humor is a form of attack/criticism-- and a very effective one. As we all know (if only from riding lessons), it's often difficult not to be offended by criticism, no matter how essential we know it is to learning.
        http://www.tunnelsendfarm.com

        Comment


        • #64
          Humor is definitely subjective. And I think only comedians should take that risk. Anyone who wants to represent the riders in this country really should think twice before taking the risk of pissing off southerners, Christians, etc. I think that when you get near the top you need to be more careful rather than less. JMO
          "And I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling." - Capt Reynolds "Firefly"

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by fish View Post
            Dang--tried to watch the clip and can't get the sound Now I REALLY need tech support out here.

            Back in my grad. school days, I specialized in theories of drama. In retrospect, we probably could have spent more time on the ways in which audience background, cultural affiliation, etc., affect perceptions of humor. I have, for example, had occasion to notice that a lot of Republications don't find Garrison Keillor funny at all. Come to think of it, I've actually discovered a few friends' political affiliations by attempting to share jokes with them.

            No doubt about it, humor is a form of attack/criticism-- and a very effective one. As we all know (if only from riding lessons), it's often difficult not to be offended by criticism, no matter how essential we know it is to learning.
            Go to YouTube and search for went with the breeze or by Carol Burnette. It is a clip from her show way back in the early 1970's.

            Personally have not not met any Repubs who dislike old Garrison. He is who he is and continues to be true to himself. Along the lines of Popeye the Sailor Man, I yam what I yam.
            "Never do anything that you have to explain twice to the paramedics."
            Courtesy my cousin Tim

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Velvet View Post
              Humor is definitely subjective. And I think only comedians should take that risk. Anyone who wants to represent the riders in this country really should think twice before taking the risk of pissing off southerners, Christians, etc. I think that when you get near the top you need to be more careful rather than less. JMO
              IMO, almost everything is subjective, and we all risk offending somebody almost every time we open our mouths. Indeed, thinking twice is almost always a good idea, but it seems to me that the best leaders are the ones with enough courage to risk pissing off lots of people if necessary in the pursuit of worthwhile goals-- you know, the ones who keep in mind what Lincoln said about never being able to please all of the people all of the time?

              I'm with those who give CH a lot of respect for having the courage to get up there for the benefit of U.S. dressage.
              http://www.tunnelsendfarm.com

              Comment


              • #67
                Go Fish! The success is the money raised, not the ratings. Humor and humiliation for a good cause.
                Anne
                -------
                "Where knowledge ends violence begins." B. Ljundquist

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by CFFarm View Post
                  I watched the first minute or so, when she got to the "I had to pee" sentence, I must admit, I shut it off.

                  Maybe if she had donned a $2,000 custom shadbelly and $3,000 custom boots and done a parity of a Dressage Queen I would have found it been a bit more clever and appropriate? JMHO
                  "parity"?? Perhaps you meant to use "parody"?

                  Personally, I think dressage queens have been done to death in Eq. circles.
                  http://www.tunnelsendfarm.com

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by not again View Post
                    Go Fish! The success is the money raised, not the ratings. Humor and humiliation for a good cause.
                    Then again, we DO NOT KNOW if the money was raised because of her performance or despite it. The people are supporting the USEF, not her.
                    "And I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling." - Capt Reynolds "Firefly"

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by not again View Post
                      Go Fish! The success is the money raised, not the ratings. Humor and humiliation for a good cause.
                      What "ratings'?? Were there ratings? And yes, indeed, I wouldn't want to discourage anyone from popping onto a stage for a good cause.
                      http://www.tunnelsendfarm.com

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        It is clear some people look to be offended. just sayin!

                        Originally posted by fish View Post
                        IMO, almost everything is subjective, and we all risk offending somebody almost every time we open our mouths. Indeed, thinking twice is almost always a good idea, but it seems to me that the best leaders are the ones with enough courage to risk pissing off lots of people if necessary in the pursuit of worthwhile goals-- you know, the ones who keep in mind what Lincoln said about never being able to please all of the people all of the time?

                        I'm with those who give CH a lot of respect for having the courage to get up there for the benefit of U.S. dressage.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Then again, we DO NOT KNOW if the money was raised because of her performance or despite it. The people are supporting the USEF, not her.
                          keep beating that dead horse

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by fish View Post
                            "parity"?? Perhaps you meant to use "parody"?

                            Personally, I think dressage queens have been done to death in Eq. circles.
                            Thank you. My vocabulary doesn't match my spelling and vice versa.
                            Groom to trainer: "Where's the glamour? You promised me glamour!"

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Velvet View Post
                              Humor is definitely subjective. And I think only comedians should take that risk. Anyone who wants to represent the riders in this country really should think twice before taking the risk of pissing off southerners, Christians, etc. I think that when you get near the top you need to be more careful rather than less. JMO
                              In addition to all of the good points Fish made, there is the issue of freedom of speech. Someone, somewhere will be offended no matter what comes out of our mouths. Your post makes it sound like you are calling for censorship and as though no one should ever try to crack a joke or do a skit unless they are comedians. But, keep in mind, that EVERY comedian offends some group of people. So, either there should be no comedians at all, or we have to just accept that we can’t agree on what is humorous and live and let live.

                              As for the money raised, it came to $160,000. That’s a lot of money, so I think a larger number of people found the skit entertaining than not.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by suzy View Post
                                In addition to all of the good points Fish made, there is the issue of freedom of speech. Someone, somewhere will be offended no matter what comes out of our mouths. Your post makes it sound like you are calling for censorship and as though no one should ever try to crack a joke or do a skit unless they are comedians. But, keep in mind, that EVERY comedian offends some group of people. So, either there should be no comedians at all, or we have to just accept that we can’t agree on what is humorous and live and let live.

                                As for the money raised, it came to $160,000. That’s a lot of money, so I think a larger number of people found the skit entertaining than not.
                                Stating my response regarding CH's public presentation is to state that I do not believe in free speech is reductio ad absurdum. Should I also state that because you found her funny that she should have raised $100M or more due to her intensly funny content and the fact that she should quit her day job and become a commedienne? I know you're only reaching to take this outside of a discussion of CHs behavior alone since you really like her, but that's not a defense, nor argument. It's a Hail Mary for someone who's lost the argument.

                                If you reread what I wrote, and you quoted, it said:

                                Humor is definitely subjective. And I think only comedians should take that risk. Anyone who wants to represent the riders in this country really should think twice before taking the risk of pissing off southerners, Christians, etc. I think that when you get near the top you need to be more careful rather than less. JMO
                                My statement was directly aimed at CH. It was also directly aimed at the moment--which was VERY public (the proof being that it is also now on YouTube). I said that I think that only a comedian should attempt what CH did in such a public forum. That she does not have the skill and was not funny (IMO and that of many others out here--which if you'll look back you'll see via comments and thumbs up on posts). I also suggested she should really be more aware of what she is saying and doing in front of a public audience as her behavior could offend people. If that's what she wants to do, or she doesn't care if it does, I have no problem with that. My points had nothing to do with removing her rights (or anyone else's rights) to free speech. It should be obvious by now that I love freedom of speech.
                                "And I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling." - Capt Reynolds "Firefly"

                                Comment


                                • #76
                                  I think you are still missing my point...some people DID find it funny. I think the $$$$ amount raised also supports the idea that a number of people were entertained. And, it could just be that the audience was comprised mostly of non-southern non-Christians OR southern Christians who can laugh at themselves. As far as it making it on to YouTube, I doubt CH had anything to do with that. The fact that is was publicized seems to also support a generally positive reception of the performance by the audience. OTOH, if you believe in conspiracy theories than some evil person made it public to undermine CH and the dressage organization.

                                  Comment


                                  • #77
                                    Originally posted by Catherine Haddad View Post
                                    WOW!!!! AND I THOUGHT THE GERMANS HAD NO SENSE OF HUMOR!!!?!

                                    Genius post Catherine, on many levels.

                                    Comment


                                    • #78
                                      Suzy, you keep attempting to paint me as a complete whack job to win your point. By saying I think it's a conspiracy when I've never made such statements anywhere on this topic or that I think free speech should be removed means to me that you really have nothing more to say on this. That you've said all you can and are only out here posting to continue to beat down my well thought out replies by using scary rhetoric.

                                      My point, again and again and again, is that she COULD be pissing a lot of people off. That it was (to me) inappropriate and that you have NO proof that she is one of the reasons that much money was raised. That she could have pissed people off and the money was raised for the USEF and despite her performance. There's really no proof one way or the other, but to claim her performance DID help raise that money is not supported and should not be part of this discussion because it cannot be proven. Maybe they would have raised even more if she hadn't performed. Who knows?

                                      The discussion out here is about whether or not it was a good idea for her to attempt a stand up routine. Whether or not people found her funny (some did, some didn't). And if this could negatively impact her career in the future (purely speculative at this point, but interesting to contemplate).

                                      No one is talking about whether or not she is a good rider. No one is talking about if she has a right or not to do a stand up routine in front of a large group of people. Her judgement regarding the subject matter and performing it in a public forum ( you can't tell me she's not bright enough to understand that SOMEONE would tape it and post it in this day and age) is what is being discussed--due to the number of people she might offend and the fact that she wants to some day represent those same people when being on the team.
                                      "And I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling." - Capt Reynolds "Firefly"

                                      Comment


                                      • #79
                                        Originally posted by Velvet View Post
                                        Suzy, you keep attempting to paint me as a complete whack job to win your point.
                                        And that's so hard to do.

                                        Originally posted by Velvet View Post
                                        That it was (to me) inappropriate and that you have NO proof that she is one of the reasons that much money was raised.
                                        And you DO have proof that she wasn't one of the reasons so much money was raised? Come on, Velvet, that was way too easy. You're taking the fun out of it for me.

                                        I seriously doubt this will hurt her career. She is a proven entity with a solid client base. And, if she is NOT selected for a team based on this video, than there is something really wrong with how we select people. This pales in comparison to the George Lindemann, Jr. debacle.

                                        Comment


                                        • #80
                                          You keep picking apart my replies to find what you want. In context I said --

                                          That it was (to me) inappropriate and that you have NO proof that she is one of the reasons that much money was raised. That she could have pissed people off and the money was raised for the USEF and despite her performance. There's really no proof one way or the other, but to claim her performance DID help raise that money is not supported and should not be part of this discussion because it cannot be proven.
                                          I also didn't say she wouldn't be selected to represent us, but that she might find it difficult to make the team. This could be due to a lack of backing in the future, etc. Some of this could come back to haunt her. Just not a smart decision in my mind.
                                          "And I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling." - Capt Reynolds "Firefly"

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X