Stallion Spotlight

0201171029b-1

Real Estate Spotlight

untitled (115 of 123)-Edit
  • 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 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

George Morris on the SS list

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

  • Good point, Texarkana about usef not requiring proof of I’d for membership. I always found that odd. I knew a few jr riders about 25 yrs ago, who lied about their birthday and gave themselves an extra jr year. It was suggested by the trainer at the time. You’d think in this day & age, Jrs would need to show birth certificate, then at 18 everyone needs to show there DL as proof.
    Anyone can age out or be suspended & move across the country and get a new membership.

    Comment


    • Did anyone listen to this podcast with Molly Bailey?

      https://www.chronofhorse.com/article...r-jenny-susser

      She states George Morris was put on the list "Thanks to allegations of misconduct with a minor" was an interesting one. I would have expect her to say "because" not 'thanks". In my opinion, using the word "thanks" give it a sarcastic tone.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

        I have pushing the analogy all along. Although I would think my anti-ISWG creds are pretty strong, I may have inflamed people by saying that there is a tiny bit of their rant that I agree with. I agree with the ISWG crowd on the point that the respondent has not had the opportunity to make their case in front of an independent, impartial adjudicator until AFTER the ban has been imposed and the name is on the list.

        I have zero problem with the procedure as it is. The respondent has the opportunity to make his case during the appeal.

        But it is frustrating to be bashed simply because I am expressing the view that there is a tiny element of truth in what the ISWG crowd is saying.

        Much of the whiplash seems to be due to something personal that has developed between Denali and me, so my decision to not respond to her posts should help considerably on that score.
        I haven't read the three pages between the post above and where my response will appear, so please forgive me if the conversation has moved on.

        Going back to our "friend" Sam from my HR example here...

        If SafeSport is the HR department, they fire Sam with cause based on their investigations. If Sam chooses to sue ACME Widgets for wrongful dismissal, or if he works with a union and they file a grievance, then THAT is comparable to "the opportunity to make their case in front of an independent, impartial adjudicator".

        He's still been fired by ACME Widgets or "banned" if you will. If he loses his lawsuit or his union grievance, that is akin to losing a SafeSport appeal.

        Not directly related to the post I quoted:

        Those saying a SafeSport ban is not equivalent to losing a regular job, because if you lose a regular job you just go work for someone else? Not entirely true. A lot of industries are tight-knit and insular. Everyone knows everyone. Sam, known to work for ACME Widgets, comes applying for a job WITHOUT A REFERENCE from ACME Widgets? He is NOT likely to be hired by KING Widgets Company.

        A lifetime ban from sport is a heavy penalty and it prevents one from continuing to work at the same level or in the same field. To someone with no other employable skills it is a real, serious threat to their livelihood. But I still think it is more comparable to being fired with cause than with a criminal case and penalty.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by spotnnotfarm View Post

          Just curious, is this nationwide? It was my understanding that once you are on the list, it remains public. If you can petition to remove your name from public view, what is the point? I live in a rural area and have several around me (shudder). I signed up to be notified when one moves in. It gives a surprising amount of information, inc,using their address.
          This was discussed on the RG thread at length. Navarro was originally on the NY state offender list as part of a plea deal for his 2000 offense. He was only to remain on that list for 10 (?) years I think... can’t remember. He moved to virginia before he was OFF the list in NY, then was placed on the Virginia list as well. He petitioned yo be removed from the Virginia list in 2011, But was unsuccessful. Tried again in 2015... and was successful that time.

          When he first moved to the area and started a business, he was still on the list and people were aware. After 2015, when he came off the sex offender list... those who didn’t know had no EASY way of knowing the risk... except for paying for a full background check. Until Safe Sport.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

            When he first moved to the area and started a business, he was still on the list and people were aware. After 2015, when he came off the sex offender list... those who didn’t know had no EASY way of knowing the risk... except for paying for a full background check. Until Safe Sport.
            Unfortunately, a lot of the parents of his current kids probably have never heard of SafeSport, either. So he continues to get away with it.

            Whenever someone asks for referrals about barns, I steer them away from Navarro/RCF and point out information here and other places to review themselves. What they choose to do with it, I can't guarantee. I'm amazed at how many of his current boarders with children in his program do know about it and still don't care.

            Comment


            • On a somewhat unrelated but interesting note regarding much of the last several PAGES and PAGES of this thread... just finished watching “The Tale” on HBO.

              Coincidentally, I have some ties to the area the author was from, and some of the background sporting communities related to this story.

              Anyone else watch it yet? I don’t know that I will recommend it as it is INCREDIBLY triggering. I don’t quite know how I feel about the movie at this time.

              Regardless... it’s sort of bizarre how close some of the real life stuff behind this movie is to George Morris. The former Olympian “running” coach in the movie won a Gold at the 1960 Olympics... George Morris won Silver there. The movie theoretically happened at a “Carolina” horse farm. But the real life Jennifer Fox was from Narberth, PA. With a bit of piecing together different parts of the story... it’s possible to make a very good guess as to who the real life Bill Allen and Mrs. G are. Both are in their eighties now...

              I cross referenced the Safe Sport list to see if the person it seems like the Bill Allen character was based upon is on it (he was an Olympic athlete and has been a major coach in his sport for decades). The guy isn’t on the list. It’s sort of odd... if the story from the movie is true... there are very very very likely more victims out there. I hope Safe Sport is investigating the person the movie seems to point to.

              And it makes you wonder about the real life Mrs. G as well. It’s sad and really disturbing to think about. But the events in the movie are horrific.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Gainer View Post

                Unfortunately, a lot of the parents of his current kids probably have never heard of SafeSport, either. So he continues to get away with it.

                Whenever someone asks for referrals about barns, I steer them away from Navarro/RCF and point out information here and other places to review themselves. What they choose to do with it, I can't guarantee. I'm amazed at how many of his current boarders with children in his program do know about it and still don't care.
                I find it appalling and amusing all st the same time that they won “Best of Loudoun” a year of two ago. I guess those folks just counted votes and didn’t do any background research either

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Tackpud View Post

                  Sad isn’t it? Millions of dollars of horseflesh and equipment and no requirement for security except at the Premier level. But that’s for “the purpose of deterring the removal of horses and/or equipment from the grounds” not really advanced security and is usually provided by having nightwatch. But you have to have sharps containers...
                  Don't some of the venues themselves have security? That is how the big state fairgrounds operate- even the private state fairgrounds.

                  Comment


                  • So I have a question as it relates to arbitration and the absence or presence of subpoena power.

                    I thought that I have read situations in which once you accept arbitration a civil suit is no longer an option for your complaint. Could this be the reason why subpoena power is available or not? IE if arbitration is you last step it makes sense for subpoena power to exist for the arbitration.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

                      I find it appalling and amusing all st the same time that they won “Best of Loudoun” a year of two ago. I guess those folks just counted votes and didn’t do any background research either
                      Those are always quite humorous.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post
                        On a somewhat unrelated but interesting note regarding much of the last several PAGES and PAGES of this thread... just finished watching “The Tale” on HBO.

                        Coincidentally, I have some ties to the area the author was from, and some of the background sporting communities related to this story.

                        Anyone else watch it yet? I don’t know that I will recommend it as it is INCREDIBLY triggering. I don’t quite know how I feel about the movie at this time.

                        Regardless... it’s sort of bizarre how close some of the real life stuff behind this movie is to George Morris. The former Olympian “running” coach in the movie won a Gold at the 1960 Olympics... George Morris won Silver there. The movie theoretically happened at a “Carolina” horse farm. But the real life Jennifer Fox was from Narberth, PA. With a bit of piecing together different parts of the story... it’s possible to make a very good guess as to who the real life Bill Allen and Mrs. G are. Both are in their eighties now...

                        I cross referenced the Safe Sport list to see if the person it seems like the Bill Allen character was based upon is on it (he was an Olympic athlete and has been a major coach in his sport for decades). The guy isn’t on the list. It’s sort of odd... if the story from the movie is true... there are very very very likely more victims out there. I hope Safe Sport is investigating the person the movie seems to point to.

                        And it makes you wonder about the real life Mrs. G as well. It’s sad and really disturbing to think about. But the events in the movie are horrific.
                        Wow. Thanks for posting this. I had not heard about this movie. Just reading the summary was enough for me to know that I will never watch it. I already lived my own version. Part of grooming is convincing your victim that they are mature and making their own decision. It certainly worked on me. When a certain trainer 12 years my senior started paying attention to me, I didn’t really even know who he was. He spent 6 months grooming me and by the time all was said and done, I viewed it as a teenage mistake on my part. Very well done by Mr. BNT, very well done. I now know that I was one of many. At the same time. As far as I can tell, most, if not all, the other girls were even younger than I was.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by roseymare View Post

                          Don't some of the venues themselves have security? That is how the big state fairgrounds operate- even the private state fairgrounds.
                          Yes. Many state facilities do have security forces, but most private facilities do not provide any security. They’ll call local law enforcement if there’s a problem.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Tackpud View Post

                            Yes. Many state facilities do have security forces, but most private facilities do not provide any security. They’ll call local law enforcement if there’s a problem.

                            Not all large facilities are state run even though it would seem logical , some are city run and others are private. Not that it makes a difference as to if USEF requires security, it is just something I was surprised about.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Keep it Simple View Post
                              Did anyone listen to this podcast with Molly Bailey?

                              https://www.chronofhorse.com/article...r-jenny-susser

                              She states George Morris was put on the list "Thanks to allegations of misconduct with a minor" was an interesting one. I would have expect her to say "because" not 'thanks". In my opinion, using the word "thanks" give it a sarcastic tone.
                              I listened, and the first half hour was Packy going on about due process, de novo, civil liberties, and how SafeSport has become something like the purity police, and if SafeSport banned everyone who got arrested for drunk driving, there'd be almost no one left in the sport. He was also big on more transparency because we don't "see" the process or why individuals are banned. Molly did seem to wind him up and act like everything he said was accurate (e.g. The accused finds out they are being investigated when they see themselves on the SafeSport banned list.). I wish there had been a counter to his legal aspect, so that it someone within SafeSport could confirm or dispute.

                              I thought Dr. Jenny was a nice, calm, balanced counterpoint, especially on the banning, when she said "If I lose my driver's license, it's no one's business." Same with being banned.

                              USEF does not owe anyone a job or a career. Packy said banning someone takes away their right to compete in the Olympics. Um, when did that become a constitutional right? USEF is about the shows. You have to join to show. It is not intended to provide a career path for anyone, competitor or trainer. Why is that so hard for people to understand?
                              Last edited by Doberpei; Aug. 28, 2019, 03:52 PM. Reason: Remembered the correct word

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by roseymare View Post
                                So I have a question as it relates to arbitration and the absence or presence of subpoena power.

                                I thought that I have read situations in which once you accept arbitration a civil suit is no longer an option for your complaint. Could this be the reason why subpoena power is available or not? IE if arbitration is you last step it makes sense for subpoena power to exist for the arbitration.
                                One thing to remember is that "arbitration" is a term that encompasses a wide variety of processes. Arbitration can be a legal proceeding with all the authority of the legal system, including the issuing of subpoenas that HLMom/Horsegirl'sMom keeps harping on. This is the kind of arbitration that parties in a civil suit would accept. It is, in this context, a process of the judicial system.

                                But, arbitration can also be an administrative proceeding. In these situations it's a mutually agreed upon process for resolving a disagreement and it takes place outside the judicial system. This is the case with SafeSport. By joining USEF, you're agreeing to follow the SafeSport code, which specifies that disagreements will ultimately be settled by arbitration.

                                The specific process of an administrative arbitration proceeding is determined by the terms of the agreement between the involved parties, but people who aren't parties to the agreement are not obligated in any way to participate in the process. So, even if USEF agreed to give SafeSport the authority to issue subpoenas during the arbitration process and SafeSport agreed to accept that authority, as HLMom and YankeeDutchess keep suggesting, the only people who would be obligated to abide by those subpoenas are people who are members of USEF. And, the only thing USEF could do to someone who refused to abide by the subpoenas is revoke their USEF membership, or suspend them for some specific time.

                                In my opinion, the whole idea of having SafeSport issue subpoenas is nuts. Not only is it entirely unworkable, there is no evidence that it is necessary or would be useful, outside the strawman arguments thrown up by the proponents.
                                "Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything
                                that's even remotely true."

                                Homer Simpson

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by NoSuchPerson View Post

                                  One thing to remember is that "arbitration" is a term that encompasses a wide variety of processes. Arbitration can be a legal proceeding with all the authority of the legal system, including the issuing of subpoenas that HLMom/Horsegirl'sMom keeps harping on. This is the kind of arbitration that parties in a civil suit would accept. It is, in this context, a process of the judicial system.

                                  But, arbitration can also be an administrative proceeding. In these situations it's a mutually agreed upon process for resolving a disagreement and it takes place outside the judicial system. This is the case with SafeSport. By joining USEF, you're agreeing to follow the SafeSport code, which specifies that disagreements will ultimately be settled by arbitration.

                                  The specific process of an administrative arbitration proceeding is determined by the terms of the agreement between the involved parties, but people who aren't parties to the agreement are not obligated in any way to participate in the process. So, even if USEF agreed to give SafeSport the authority to issue subpoenas during the arbitration process and SafeSport agreed to accept that authority, as HLMom and YankeeDutchess keep suggesting, the only people who would be obligated to abide by those subpoenas are people who are members of USEF. And, the only thing USEF could do to someone who refused to abide by the subpoenas is revoke their USEF membership, or suspend them for some specific time.

                                  In my opinion, the whole idea of having SafeSport issue subpoenas is nuts. Not only is it entirely unworkable, there is no evidence that it is necessary or would be useful, outside the strawman arguments thrown up by the proponents.
                                  Thanks for explaining what I was trying to get at.

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by ohmissbrittany View Post

                                    So I'm not sure how much reading you have done on the Lopez case, but the women were supposed to be given the right to testify REMOTELY, which they were not. The bans were overturned on a "technicality" because they refused to be in the room with the Lopez men. These women are now adding SS to the defendants in their "big boy court" case stating the bans were wrongfully overturned.

                                    Additionally, out of 211 lifetime bans (at last count) only 3 have been overturned, including the Lopez bros. That's a pretty low error rate.
                                    Are you saying the claim that their lawyers told them not to testify because testifying in the arbitration process would jeopardize their civil case is not true?

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                      Are you saying the claim that their lawyers told them not to testify because testifying in the arbitration process would jeopardize their civil case is not true?
                                      They can both be true though.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by oneequestrienne View Post

                                        Wow. Thanks for posting this. I had not heard about this movie. Just reading the summary was enough for me to know that I will never watch it. I already lived my own version. Part of grooming is convincing your victim that they are mature and making their own decision. It certainly worked on me. When a certain trainer 12 years my senior started paying attention to me, I didn’t really even know who he was. He spent 6 months grooming me and by the time all was said and done, I viewed it as a teenage mistake on my part. Very well done by Mr. BNT, very well done. I now know that I was one of many. At the same time. As far as I can tell, most, if not all, the other girls were even younger than I was.
                                        I think the film might be PROFOUNDLY triggering for you... hugs to you, you brave soul.

                                        The portrayal of how grooming works, especially when it comes to teenaged girls going through a rebellious phase from a less than ideal home life? That component was VERY accurate.

                                        The depiction of the film maker repressing/denying/reframing the facts of her abuse and reframing it as a sort of “relationship” I also thought was VERY accurate and well done.

                                        The choice of the film maker to put forth an INCREDIBLE number of clues as to the identities of both of these coaches... but then alter the story to make bill a running coach (I think he was actually a rowing coach), and to portray the farm as being in the Carolinas instead of the greater Philadelphia area... I am a little confused about.

                                        In later interviews, the film maker claims that she doesn’t want “justice” but rather to share the truth of the experience. However... I’m having trouble with that.

                                        After watching it and thinking about it, and then talking to some personal contacts about details of two prominent figures from local sporting communities...

                                        the two predatory coaches depicted in the movie are still alive. The male coach (if it is who I think it is) is HIGHLY regarded... still... on an Olympic and national scale. Not on the Safe Sport list. Based on the movie... it doesn’t matter how d he is. He should be banned for life. The female coach - “Mrs. G” - bears an incredibly close resemblance to someone in the area who is in her late 80’s. The film maker claimed in an interview that the real “Mrs. G” has passed away. I think that is an attempt to protect her identity though.

                                        I have trouble with this... it’s all very very disturbing. The way Mrs. G is portrayed toward the end of the movie is as though she was someone actively serving up young girls to the other coach, knowing he would groom and abuse them.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by ohmissbrittany View Post

                                          So I'm not sure how much reading you have done on the Lopez case, but the women were supposed to be given the right to testify REMOTELY, which they were not. The bans were overturned on a "technicality" because they refused to be in the room with the Lopez men. These women are now adding SS to the defendants in their "big boy court" case stating the bans were wrongfully overturned.

                                          Additionally, out of 211 lifetime bans (at last count) only 3 have been overturned, including the Lopez bros. That's a pretty low error rate.
                                          You account of the Lopez case is different from what was reported in newspapers. What is the authority for your statements?

                                          As for 211 lifetime bans, in how many of those cases has the arbitration process been completed? We know some lifetime bans still have the arbitration pending, such as GM.

                                          Also, why are your statistics limited to lifetime bans? Aren't there other forms of sanctions SS hands out? Have any of those cases been arbitrated?

                                          We need to know how many total cases have been arbitrated, and how many of those cases SS won.
                                          Last edited by Horsegirl's Mom; Aug. 28, 2019, 11:08 AM.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X