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 may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums' policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

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 5/9/18)
See more
See less

Eventing Nation booted from covering Event in Unionville, PA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Things that strike me as very odd about this: Why does Glaccum say changing the name would be an insult to the landowner’s family when the historic name of the property was Logan’s Field, not Plantation Field? According to him in 2016, he suggested Plantation Field as the name
    of the event 20 years ago because he thought Logan’s Field “just didn’t fit.” That seems like a fairly flimsy reason to change a name, but the landowner agreed to it then. If history is so important here, let’s call it Logan’s Field Horse Trials and get on with things!

    Second, why on Earth did the board, with all it invested in improving the property, not have a lease that protected them from being kicked off immediately?

    Third, this Work to Ride thing. Glaccum mentioned it in his press release and it has taken a life of its own since there, as of Plantation Field is a major supporter of this organization.

    Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post
    I find it sad that neither the NYT or even the Philadelphia Inquirer made note of the actual story behind the property name, nor any of the philanthropic causes Mr. Walker’s family has been associated with for decades... not did the Philadelphia Inquirer even mention the relationship between the event, and fundraising for Work to Ride.
    Do you know what the relationship between the event and fundraising for Work to Ride is? As far as I can tell, Work to Ride was a beneficiary of the CIC in ONE of the 12 years it has been in existence, or the 20 years Plantation has been running. Nice, but worth a mention in the NYT, particularly as some kind of mitigation against allegations of a racist name?

    Last, as someone who once was Facebook “friends” with Glaccum: No amount of asking nicely would have changed his mind on this topic. A person can be a founding supporter of the sport of eventing and a bigot at the same time. This man proudly, repeatedly, posted “O’bama” birthed conspiracies, the plight of the Irish indentured servants as being far worse than that of African slaves, of how Muslims are trying to obliterate all Western countries and cultures, and criticism of the removal of Confederate monuments. Changing a name he picked to make people of color feel more welcome goes against everything he posted on social media.

    Comment


      Originally posted by Sandman View Post

      Last, as someone who once was Facebook “friends” with Glaccum: No amount of asking nicely would have changed his mind on this topic. A person can be a founding supporter of the sport of eventing and a bigot at the same time. This man proudly, repeatedly, posted “O’bama” birthed conspiracies, the plight of the Irish indentured servants as being far worse than that of African slaves, of how Muslims are trying to obliterate all Western countries and cultures, and criticism of the removal of Confederate monuments. Changing a name he picked to make people of color feel more welcome goes against everything he posted on social media.
      After my post wishing the LO had used this moment to make a positive change and highlight/celebrate his family even more, a couple friends local to the area contacted me to note the same thing about both men, along with other (publicly known, not gossip) news related to the LO and his local reputation and activities. I hear the LO's FB page was...eye opening, to say the least, which is why it quickly went private.

      That's why I think it's all a shame and such a missed opportunity all around. I guess I was wrong. This LO was never going to take the Dolly route to solving this problem. That's really a shame, but if it's so, it's so and good to know, I guess. [Note: posters here have both contended that he couldn't b/c he doesn't have "deep pockets" like Dolly, but also that he's a "multimillionaire" and "multigenerational landowner", etc., so that point seems to go both ways.]

      Let's use this lesson to (i) make other LO's feel appreciated for their generous support ,and (ii) work to cultivate some new LOs to come on board. Someone is already considering it (see the spinoff thread) so let's find those people and throw support behind them!


      ETA: if they've been over representing their support for Work to Ride, that's rubbish. I hope someone can clear that up and that it's not true.

      Comment


        Originally posted by Sandman View Post

        Last, as someone who once was Facebook “friends” with Glaccum: No amount of asking nicely would have changed his mind on this topic. A person can be a founding supporter of the sport of eventing and a bigot at the same time. This man proudly, repeatedly, posted “O’bama” birthed conspiracies, the plight of the Irish indentured servants as being far worse than that of African slaves, of how Muslims are trying to obliterate all Western countries and cultures, and criticism of the removal of Confederate monuments. Changing a name he picked to make people of color feel more welcome goes against everything he posted on social media.
        So if this is true about Glaccum and the landowner, then surely a truly woke individual would not want U.S. Eventing to have any involvement whatsoever with these two individuals, regardless of the name of the event. Am I understanding this correctly? It’s OK to rely on the beneficence of racists to sustain the sport as long as the name of the competition is not offensive?

        For those who feel strongly about changing the name, I suggest digging a little deeper into your commitment to effect fundamental change.
        "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu
        Semantics

        Comment


          Originally posted by Sandman View Post
          Things that strike me as very odd about this: Why does Glaccum say changing the name would be an insult to the landowner’s family when the historic name of the property was Logan’s Field, not Plantation Field? According to him in 2016, he suggested Plantation Field as the name
          of the event 20 years ago because he thought Logan’s Field “just didn’t fit.” That seems like a fairly flimsy reason to change a name, but the landowner agreed to it then. If history is so important here, let’s call it Logan’s Field Horse Trials and get on with things!

          Second, why on Earth did the board, with all it invested in improving the property, not have a lease that protected them from being kicked off immediately?

          Third, this Work to Ride thing. Glaccum mentioned it in his press release and it has taken a life of its own since there, as of Plantation Field is a major supporter of this organization.


          Do you know what the relationship between the event and fundraising for Work to Ride is? As far as I can tell, Work to Ride was a beneficiary of the CIC in ONE of the 12 years it has been in existence, or the 20 years Plantation has been running. Nice, but worth a mention in the NYT, particularly as some kind of mitigation against allegations of a racist name?

          Last, as someone who once was Facebook “friends” with Glaccum: No amount of asking nicely would have changed his mind on this topic. A person can be a founding supporter of the sport of eventing and a bigot at the same time. This man proudly, repeatedly, posted “O’bama” birthed conspiracies, the plight of the Irish indentured servants as being far worse than that of African slaves, of how Muslims are trying to obliterate all Western countries and cultures, and criticism of the removal of Confederate monuments. Changing a name he picked to make people of color feel more welcome goes against everything he posted on social media.
          So if this is true about Glaccum and the landowner, then surely a truly woke individual would not want U.S. Eventing to have any involvement whatsoever with these two individuals, regardless of the name of the event. Am I understanding this correctly? It’s OK to rely on the beneficence of racists to sustain the sport as long as the name of the competition is not offensive?

          For those who feel strongly about changing the name, I suggest digging a little deeper into your commitment to effect fundamental change.
          "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu
          Semantics

          Comment


            Originally posted by OverandOnward View Post

            Not because he didn't agree with what was being asked. But because he handled it so terribly.

            Unless there is some backstory compelling reason that hasn't yet been aired, in my opinion throwing away so much investment and work by others was reprehensible. He had a moral obligation to either ease out of the situation, or manage it more considerately, after having permitted so many people to pour their work, time and money into the event on his property.
            This is how this post reads to me - Land Owners do not ever let eventers use your land because once you do, no matter how they treat you or your land you better not ask them to leave because darn you they put work into your land so now you are morally evil for not letting them stay as long as they want to.

            Comment


              Originally posted by 2bayboys View Post

              So if this is true about Glaccum and the landowner, then surely a truly woke individual would not want U.S. Eventing to have any involvement whatsoever with these two individuals, regardless of the name of the event. Am I understanding this correctly? It’s OK to rely on the beneficence of racists to sustain the sport as long as the name of the competition is not offensive?

              For those who feel strongly about changing the name, I suggest digging a little deeper into your commitment to effect fundamental change.
              Let me apologize in advance.

              Comment


                Originally posted by OverandOnward View Post

                To be clear again - I am ***not*** discussing those people.

                It's everyone who gave a part of their lives to building, maintaining and competing at that event. Including and especially Denis Glaccum. They did not deserve to have it all thrown away in a hissy fit. Its clear from his statement that Cuyler Walker had no regard or consideration for all that they had put into that event, because he was mad at a situation that none of them created. As best we know so far, it seems that the pressure was definitely not from DG or his helpers/supporters. Cuyler Walker doesn't seem to have cared who was involved, or what was just and fair for all that work and investment.
                Using that logic, Mr. Walker should also have written a will that would leave the land to PFEE in the event of his untimely demise.

                It is his land. It has been for generations. Contracts spell out the responsibilities of both parties and most have clauses that spell out how the contract can be brought to an early end. He doesn't "owe" the volunteers, PFEE, USEA or the competitors a thing.

                He did state that he would stay away from the event in order to not be a distraction and help PFEE remove their equipment after it was over. He certainly didn't have to do that, either.

                One of the BOD wrote a comment about the tone and frequency of Ms. Wylie's writings since June. She states they can't be released legally. As the BOD of PFEE also stood to lose this venue and knew the magnitude of the loss - literally and viscerally - her comments carry a lot of weight with me. Remember that Mr. Glaccum may have been in receipt of the first letter and it may even have solely been addressed to him - but he was a board member. He couldn't unilaterally make any changes or decisions without the board. Mr. Walker was also on that board so was privy to all the discussions. Whatever and however it was said or written by USEA, USEF and EN went too far.

                Again, he doesn't "owe" anyone anything regarding his property. Just the taxes to the county and state.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by 2bayboys View Post

                  So if this is true about Glaccum and the landowner, then surely a truly woke individual would not want U.S. Eventing to have any involvement whatsoever with these two individuals, regardless of the name of the event. Am I understanding this correctly? It’s OK to rely on the beneficence of racists to sustain the sport as long as the name of the competition is not offensive?

                  For those who feel strongly about changing the name, I suggest digging a little deeper into your commitment to effect fundamental change.
                  Perhaps the USEA should review the party affiliations of all its landowners and benefactors and terminate any arrangements with Trump supporters. Surely, anyone who believes the word "plantation" is racist also believes that supporting Trump is racist, so shouldn't USEA disavow such individuals?

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Horsegirl's Mom View Post

                    Perhaps the USEA should review the party affiliations of all its landowners and benefactors and terminate any arrangements with Trump supporters. Surely, anyone who believes the word "plantation" is racist also believes that supporting Trump is racist, so shouldn't USEA disavow such individuals?
                    As far as I can see, the whole business is ridiculous.

                    It is in the same vein as the field hunter individual having a hissy fit over the named color the shade of gray in her hunt's jackets. And perhaps Southerners feel that Unionville should change its name , etc, etc, etc.
                    Some riders change their horse, they change their saddle, they change their teacher; they never change themselves.

                    Remember the horse does all the work, we just sit there and look pretty.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

                      ...

                      As for booting EN from venues... I wholeheartedly agree. I think leadership with the governing bodies should have stepped in before this blew up though, and communicated clearly that it was NOT ok for EN to harass organizers or the land owner. Not if they want to continue being treated as a media outlet with press credentials, and given access to recognized competitions.
                      Preface: I am not an eventer, but if I were younger, I think I would have loved it! AND, I'm still trying to catch up with a thread that really, really started without me. I know this post is pages old. If some one has made this point already, please forgive..

                      That said - EN is supposedly a print/online media reporting entity. That means their JOB is to REPORT THE NEWS, NOT CREATE THE NEWS.

                      If creating the news is what EN wants to do moving forward, it would be within a venue's rights to deny EN access. Because who knows what they would come up with next?
                      “It’s up to you the voters to decide the future of our democracy. So get out and vote. ... As Abraham Lincoln said, the best way to predict the future is to choose it.” Professor Allan Lichtman

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Horsegirl's Mom View Post

                        The more accurate analogy would be this: I let you park a trailer on my land and you make it a wonderful place and live there for 20 years. Then one day you say to me, "I don't like the design of the yard anymore. I've come up with a landscape plan to add gardens, terraces, and a stream and you need to get it done asap... or else I'll go around and tell all the neighbors and the local paper what a rotten landlord you are." I'm pretty sure most landlords would say, "If you're no longer satisfied with this place the way it's been for the last 20 years, time for you to move your trailer somewhere else."
                        Yep
                        Always be yourself. Unless you can be Batman. Then always be Batman.

                        The Grove at Five Points

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by OverandOnward View Post

                          Just for the record, in Chester County, Cuyler Walker has lived a life that has been anything but obscure. He is a very well-known fixture in government, politics and civic activities in that area.
                          Worked for the US Attorney General and the UN.
                          ... _. ._ .._. .._

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Equibrit View Post

                            Worked for the US Attorney General and the UN.
                            Obviously he's trash and we should seize his property for....other wealthy white people and their athletes to prance luxury sport pets about on.




                            everyone is awful.
                            Let me apologize in advance.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Sandman View Post
                              Things that strike me as very odd about this: Why does Glaccum say changing the name would be an insult to the landowner’s family when the historic name of the property was Logan’s Field, not Plantation Field?
                              Just to set the record straight, as this was previously discussed, the name "Plantation Field" was derived from "Logan's Field" and "Plantation Woods", the latter of which was planted by the Boy Scout project (if I understand all I've read correctly).

                              Frankly, arguing about this online is not going to do a damn thing to fix the current situation. There is a lot of misinformation being shared and suppositions being made.

                              I stand by my original opinion that this is not so much about changing the name, which I have no problem with. The issue here is how EN went about it, with the nasty emails and threat to expose this story to the national press.

                              The politics of the stakeholders involved should not be held out as a reason to defend EN or USEA's actions. It doesn't take a rocket scientist (looking at you RAyers) to figure out that forcing a name change in this way was the absolute worst approach to take, especially if you know or anticipate that those you are asking may be less than amenable to the name change.

                              So be the bigger people and do it properly, starting with getting the Area II rep and surrounding community involved in the discussion, but most importantly, Black eventers and advocacy groups that are familiar with how to go about initiating change of potentially insensitive terminology/language.

                              Having a few privileged white people take this on and followed by a subsequent pile-up on social media of more mostly white privileged people has only created dissension and lessened the chance that this venue will ever be available again.

                              Maybe it's just the point we've reached with the election in a few weeks, but I am so TIRED of all the finger pointing taking place on social media. I do hope those who truly care and are invested in Area II eventing are able to come together and discuss this in a civilized and respectful manner.

                              Signed an Area II Liberal Millennial (and yes, my photo is from an event at Plantation Field)

                              Comment


                                Denis Glaccum must not have even one friend on COTH forum.

                                No one is speaking up for his position of having his 20 years worth of work yanked from underneath him, AND being blamed by Walker for "a smear campaign in the media".

                                read again, carefully for meaning, as to who he is blaming ...

                                "any of you" would be Denis first & foremost, and eventers the rest, it would seem, all being punished together -

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	PlantationFields-USEA-edit2-2020-09-16.jpg
Views:	562
Size:	20.3 KB
ID:	10736630

                                How is Denis responsible for what the media does? He was against it, according to what we know so far. He told "the media" that they were not welcome and then hung up on them, as it were.

                                Denis was on Walker's side. But Walker turned on him and cast him out, along with his 20 years of work. And people here on COTH are referring to both as if they are of a united opinion against the pressure from EN - but not so united, it seems, from Walker's point of view. For some reason.

                                So, instead of people offering sympathy to Denis for this loss of his work for 20 years and the betrayal of a landowner he must have trusted to invest in so heavily, people are pouring fire on EN & the USEA . And feeling sorry for the landowner who betrayed Denis, for something the landowner decided to do on his own. No one forced the landowner's decision. He had a temper tantrum, and this is the result.


                                "I would never have allowed any of you on the property" - Who is "you"? As this was addressed personally to Denis, by association this refers to eventers generally, especially those that have been to PF.

                                Are eventers getting this? In that email, the landowner is blaming YOU - especially if you have evented there. "You" were "on the property".

                                Since the first thing to do in a crisis is blame someone, everyone is pointing the finger at EN and somewhat at USEA. But the landowner who chucked you out is blaming you! And punishing you by terminating the event. You didn't even know this was happening, and he knew that.

                                Now many are ferociously defending Walker's point of view. But they are in the net of Walker's blame, and one of the two primary targets of his arbitrarily cruel punishment (with Denis).


                                We have no way of knowing what was said, and what was represented, between June when this was raised and September 14th when he terminated the lease by email. But this landowner who is so experienced in the ways of the world thought so little of the lot of you that he didn't even give a notice period, much less offer to talk it out. He ran you off like picnickers who left trash and croquet divots all over the place.

                                And again - this landowner is not an humble retiring farmer sheltered from the outside world. Far from it. He is actively involved in law, business, charity, politics, government (had a county government position for a long time), and international affairs as well. He's handled bigger media than this in his time. He has to have handled and resolved many fusses and fights over the years, both business and legal. It should be second nature to him.

                                For a man with this background, this little fuss from a tiny, semi-journalistic (they are fans, after all) online horse publication would have been easy enough to divert and handle. Even if he thought they were going to the Inquirer and the Times, he could get there first. Plus he could he could also say "we are doing this and that to address concerns about the misunderstanding of the meaning of the name, we have always welcomed everyone" and re-spin the story.

                                But he didn't do that. Instead, he broke faith with a 20 year relationship of great significance on both sides. He was his worst self, rather than his best.

                                Comment


                                  Originally posted by KellyS View Post

                                  Having a few privileged white people take this on and followed by a subsequent pile-up on social media of more mostly white privileged people has only created dissension and lessened the chance that this venue will ever be available again.
                                  Love your whole post! I think this paragraph sums up the root of the issue...or at least why it became so intensely inflamed. Had the subject been approached in a more thoughtful, sensible manner, by actual persons affected, perhaps the response would have been heard differently.
                                  A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it.
                                  ? Albert Einstein

                                  ~AJ~

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by OverandOnward View Post
                                    Denis Glaccum must not have even one friend on COTH forum.

                                    <snip>

                                    So, instead of people offering sympathy to Denis for this loss of his work for 20 years and the betrayal of a landowner he must have trusted to invest in so heavily, people are pouring fire on EN & the USEA . And feeling sorry for the landowner who betrayed Denis, for something the landowner decided to do on his own. No one forced the landowner's decision. He had a temper tantrum, and this is the result.


                                    In my posts sticking up for the land owner, that is all I am doing, sticking up for the land owner. That does not mean I do not feel bad for the people who ran these shows.

                                    I think that was expressed many times in the thread, that this loss of land is a horrible loss for eventing and the organizers.

                                    A person can think the land owner is not evil and still feel bad for these organizers and the local eventing community.


                                    With what it appears happened here (from the well written posts that chronologically lay out the known information), I think the land owner did what was best for them and their family in this volatile time. Which was only made even more true by the NY Time article.

                                    This event being cancelled and this land lease being lost still can not be blamed on the land owner. Sure he said 'sorry, you can't play in my yard anymore' (clearly my words), but with good reason.

                                    Originally posted by OverandOnward
                                    "I would never have allowed any of you on the property" - Who is "you"? As this was addressed personally to Denis, by association this refers to eventers generally, especially those that have been to PF.

                                    Are eventers getting this? In that email, the landowner is blaming YOU - especially if you have evented there. "You" were "on the property".

                                    Since the first thing to do in a crisis is blame someone, everyone is pointing the finger at EN and somewhat at USEA. But the landowner who chucked you out is blaming you! And punishing you by terminating the event. You didn't even know this was happening, and he knew that.


                                    That is an interesting way to look at it. I read that part as 'with current events I am realizing that I should never have allowed this lease' not that he is blaming the individuals who were riding their horses around his property. He had just had the governing body of the organization in charge treat him like crap, those are the you he is referring to.



                                    You are free to hate whomever you want. But I still think you are making his point for him with all the 'how dare he do this' theatrics.

                                    Comment


                                      I've stood aside and read everything from the EN article and posts, to the NYT piece. I don't have the stomach for Twitter though it sounds about as pleasant as a colonoscopy.

                                      I only know the landowners family by reputation, and even the most horrible excuse for a journalist could have performed a quick Google search and discovered that the landowner and his family are credible, reputable people of good character. And people who perform good works and leave it at that. It is fairly evident that the journalist had an agenda - which is disturbing. And she would do well to not gloat about it on her FB page because her comments put a lie to the claims of innocence on the part of EN. As do the comments made by the owner.

                                      Unfortunately, her and her employer's crusade have not advanced efforts or outreach to attract more diverse participants. And by that I do not just mean minorities - I mean crossover participants from other horse sports (which are more racially diverse than eventing). In fact, quite the opposite. It has given eventing a black eye, and portrayed this sport in its participants in the most horrible light. This EN journalist made good on her threat to go to the mainstream media - who naturally and intentionally put an election year political spin on it.

                                      So - I guess my problem is - who appointed this journalist or EN the official spokesperson for civil rights? I didn't. I'm alarmed that any individual believes it is permissible to send threatening communications - basically engaging in extortion. You all should be concerned too - you may be next.

                                      The problem with smear campaigns is that they are effective. The victim has no way to defend him or herself. Just like in the Salem witch trials - all anyone has to do is stand up and point and shout, " I SAW GOODE PROCTOR SPORTIN' WITH THE DEVIL" And that is what happened here.

                                      There are consequences to making false accusations, or attempting to extort people and destroy personal or professional reputations. Being a bully works for a while, because people are afraid of being the next person accused or targeted.

                                      But eventually, someone comes along and pushes back. Bullies are always surprised to find themselves on the ground with a bloody nose - usually given by a person who stood up and said - enough.

                                      The landowners political party isn't relevant - except to people who are so blinded by hatred and partisanship that they believe any meme or lie told them. So the fact he leans right is enough to crucify him and his family. Will you be next? Your neighbor? The farmer down the road who lets the hunt through? Will you be the next Goode Proctor?

                                      The fact is - EN decided to jump on a very recent political/activist bandwagon about a WORD. Words do have power, and so we of course should be careful how we use them. But in this debacle we appear to forget that it was EN who used words to intentionally harm innocent people. With threats - which they made good on.

                                      In this case, while I understand the overtones of the word plantation - the fact is it is still a commonly used word to describe tree farming. When used in context - it is not racist nor intended to be. HOWEVER - I understand how it could be interpreted.

                                      What concerns me more is that so many people are vitriolic about a WORD, but do not appear to care that a great many venues take place over the unmarked graves of human beings who spent their lives in bondage. Others have brought up Morven Park - the fact the name is pleasant does not mean your horses are not desecrating the graves of slaves. So I have to wonder exactly how concerned you are all about righting the wrongs of the past. There has been no effort, at many of these venues, to do any digs or identify the actual graves. But I can assure you that your xc course was not a hayfield for 200 years. But - it's up to you if you feel ghoulish about this or not. I feel the same as if you were galloping over graves at Arlington Cemetery.

                                      Anyway - From what I can tell the safest route for the landowner to take is to simply disengage. Personally, had I been subjected to the treatment and smear campaign - I would have made the same decision to protect myself and my family - which is, after all, a higher duty.

                                      I'd also suggest that if the sport wants continued access to open space, you and your "journalists" comport yourself with a bit more dignity. The sport has made itself ridiculous - mostly through the actions of one or two "journalists" with an agenda. And again from what I can the sport has not furthered the cause of attracting a more diverse crowd into your ranks.


                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by Wingstem View Post
                                        I've stood aside and read everything from the EN article and posts, to the NYT piece. I don't have the stomach for Twitter though it sounds about as pleasant as a colonoscopy.

                                        I only know the landowners family by reputation, and even the most horrible excuse for a journalist could have performed a quick Google search and discovered that the landowner and his family are credible, reputable people of good character. And people who perform good works and leave it at that. It is fairly evident that the journalist had an agenda - which is disturbing. And she would do well to not gloat about it on her FB page because her comments put a lie to the claims of innocence on the part of EN. As do the comments made by the owner.

                                        Unfortunately, her and her employer's crusade have not advanced efforts or outreach to attract more diverse participants. And by that I do not just mean minorities - I mean crossover participants from other horse sports (which are more racially diverse than eventing). In fact, quite the opposite. It has given eventing a black eye, and portrayed this sport in its participants in the most horrible light. This EN journalist made good on her threat to go to the mainstream media - who naturally and intentionally put an election year political spin on it.

                                        So - I guess my problem is - who appointed this journalist or EN the official spokesperson for civil rights? I didn't. I'm alarmed that any individual believes it is permissible to send threatening communications - basically engaging in extortion. You all should be concerned too - you may be next.

                                        The problem with smear campaigns is that they are effective. The victim has no way to defend him or herself. Just like in the Salem witch trials - all anyone has to do is stand up and point and shout, " I SAW GOODE PROCTOR SPORTIN' WITH THE DEVIL" And that is what happened here.

                                        There are consequences to making false accusations, or attempting to extort people and destroy personal or professional reputations. Being a bully works for a while, because people are afraid of being the next person accused or targeted.

                                        But eventually, someone comes along and pushes back. Bullies are always surprised to find themselves on the ground with a bloody nose - usually given by a person who stood up and said - enough.

                                        The landowners political party isn't relevant - except to people who are so blinded by hatred and partisanship that they believe any meme or lie told them. So the fact he leans right is enough to crucify him and his family. Will you be next? Your neighbor? The farmer down the road who lets the hunt through? Will you be the next Goode Proctor?

                                        The fact is - EN decided to jump on a very recent political/activist bandwagon about a WORD. Words do have power, and so we of course should be careful how we use them. But in this debacle we appear to forget that it was EN who used words to intentionally harm innocent people. With threats - which they made good on.

                                        In this case, while I understand the overtones of the word plantation - the fact is it is still a commonly used word to describe tree farming. When used in context - it is not racist nor intended to be. HOWEVER - I understand how it could be interpreted.

                                        What concerns me more is that so many people are vitriolic about a WORD, but do not appear to care that a great many venues take place over the unmarked graves of human beings who spent their lives in bondage. Others have brought up Morven Park - the fact the name is pleasant does not mean your horses are not desecrating the graves of slaves. So I have to wonder exactly how concerned you are all about righting the wrongs of the past. There has been no effort, at many of these venues, to do any digs or identify the actual graves. But I can assure you that your xc course was not a hayfield for 200 years. But - it's up to you if you feel ghoulish about this or not. I feel the same as if you were galloping over graves at Arlington Cemetery.

                                        Anyway - From what I can tell the safest route for the landowner to take is to simply disengage. Personally, had I been subjected to the treatment and smear campaign - I would have made the same decision to protect myself and my family - which is, after all, a higher duty.

                                        I'd also suggest that if the sport wants continued access to open space, you and your "journalists" comport yourself with a bit more dignity. The sport has made itself ridiculous - mostly through the actions of one or two "journalists" with an agenda. And again from what I can the sport has not furthered the cause of attracting a more diverse crowd into your ranks.

                                        First post - QFP!

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by OverandOnward View Post

                                          So, instead of people offering sympathy to Denis for this loss of his work for 20 years and the betrayal of a landowner he must have trusted to invest in so heavily, people are pouring fire on EN & the USEA . And feeling sorry for the landowner who betrayed Denis, for something the landowner decided to do on his own. No one forced the landowner's decision. He had a temper tantrum, and this is the result.
                                          CORRECTION: A bunch of self-proclaimed "woke" people had a temper tantrum all over SoMe channels. Then EN decided to violate their role as journalists and become activists based on these very public and online temper tantrums, and then tried to force a land owner to make a change. The land owner responded in kind (with one exception - he didn't trash the "woke" EN followers or EN openly on social channels as they have done to him). Have you ever actually witnessed a temper tantrum? They aren't pretty. This landowner merely decided to walk away, and I don't really blame him. Sure, it's a shame that Denis was left with no venue, however, his anger shouldn't be directed at the landowner (whom you continue to blame, which is really weird). His anger should be directed at the very people who tried to force the landowner to make a quick change based on others' emotional response. Not the landowner's.

                                          As for the landowner, I completely respect him for walking away. When complete strangers start stalking you online to imply that you are racist and attempt to prove their point by digging into your past SoMe posts to find "conservative" content to make said point, I'd walk away as well. Any reasonable person would.

                                          Land owner took the high road. Too bad EN and their woke followers didn't or we would not likely have this thread and it's 799 posts.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X