Sport Horse Spotlight

calucci_cf_sq

Sale Spotlight

COTH_without Subscribe
  • 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

  • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

    No one is forced to appeal, but even an ardently pro-SS person like me thinks that the opportunity to appeal is an important safeguard to protect the rights of the accused (and thereby strengthen the legitimacy of SS).

    If you want to avail yourself of an appeal of your SS sanction, you, the respondent, must pay for the arbitration yourself. So you pay JAMS, not SS. The point is that the cost of arbitration of a SS sanction is borne by the respondent, not by SS. (Except in the case of hardship or if you win the appeal.)

    I have no problem with the respondent paying the arbitration costs, as that creates the right incentives, and the alternative is that the costs are paid by SS = taxpayer = me.

    But there are fees. Of all of Bonnie Navin’s complaints, this one is basically correct. If she is morally outraged that the accused pay for their defense and arbitration, she can channel that outrage into Go Fund Me campaigns to raise money to pay her to defend these people. All of that seems harmless to me.
    Yes but you are missing the point. She is making people think it’s Safe Sport who is charging.

    Also, she defended Tommy Serio pro bono. You wouldn’t know it based on Kathy’s much shared post on Facebook.

    It is really not hard to go through life without defending yourself against criminal allegations.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TheMoo View Post

      Yes but you are missing the point. She is making people think it’s Safe Sport who is charging.

      Also, she defended Tommy Serio pro bono. You wouldn’t know it based on Kathy’s much shared post on Facebook.

      It is really not hard to go through life without defending yourself against criminal allegations.
      Here is MY point:
      I agree (gasp) with Bonnie Navin that the option to appeal an interim suspension or a final sanction is an integral part of overall SS procedure that works toward protecting the respondent and thereby supporting the legitimacy of SafeSport. Availing yourself of arbitration is optional, but it is important that the option is there.
      If you, as respondent, want to exercise your right to arbitration, the respondent pays the arbitration costs, not SS, not the reporter. Makes no difference whatever whether you make the check out to “SafeSport” or “JAMS”. The accused bears the cost of arbitration. Also defense costs.

      So there are fees if you want to avail yourself of the important protection of independent arbitration. Why bash BN when she correctly says “There are fees”?

      Now BN undoubtedly thinks SS= taxpayer=you and I should pay arbitration and defense fees, and there I disagree with her.

      Comment


      • ((?? Nobody likes Moby Dick? Not even Chapter 89 fast fish loose fish? One of my all time favorites? Anyone? Anyone? It’s even about laws, so it has some relevance to this discussion!))

        Comment


        • Originally posted by punchy View Post
          ((?? Nobody likes Moby Dick? Not even Chapter 89 fast fish loose fish? One of my all time favorites? Anyone? Anyone? It’s even about laws, so it has some relevance to this discussion!))
          “Fast fish loose fish” is in Moby Dick?

          We have the literary antecedent to “Red fish, blue fish”?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

            Here is MY point:
            I agree (gasp) with Bonnie Navin that the option to appeal an interim suspension or a final sanction is an integral part of overall SS procedure that works toward protecting the respondent and thereby supporting the legitimacy of SafeSport. Availing yourself of arbitration is optional, but it is important that the option is there.
            If you, as respondent, want to exercise your right to arbitration, the respondent pays the arbitration costs, not SS, not the reporter. Makes no difference whatever whether you make the check out to “SafeSport” or “JAMS”. The accused bears the cost of arbitration. Also defense costs.

            So there are fees if you want to avail yourself of the important protection of independent arbitration. Why bash BN when she correctly says “There are fees”?

            Now BN undoubtedly thinks SS= taxpayer=you and I should pay arbitration and defense fees, and there I disagree with her.
            You are aware that IF the accused chooses to go to arbitration, and Safe Sport is overturned, Safe Sport reimburses the fees the accused had to pay. Correct? It was part of Michael Henry’s presentation.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

              You are aware that IF the accused chooses to go to arbitration, and Safe Sport is overturned, Safe Sport reimburses the fees the accused had to pay. Correct? It was part of Michael Henry’s presentation.
              Yes, which is why having the accused pay arbitration costs upfront, and having the arbitration costs reimbursed in the 1% of cases in which the appeal is successful creates the correct incentives. If the respondent did not bear the costs upfront, lots of respondents would appeal, even though the probability of winning the appeal is low.

              Comment


              • About the funding of Safe Sport....I took from the presentation that most of the funding comes from the Olympic movement with some external funding. There are also some fed grants that have express restrictions against use for investigation. He didn't say exactly what those grants were used for. So, at this point there is no taxpayer money that could conceivably pay for arbitration. Correct me if I got it wrong.

                Comment


                • Who is this Duncan fellow? Here’s one more of his Facebook comments... bolded portion mine... is he saying that GM having sexual relationships with minors is “building connections?”


                  “I’m not trying to shame any victims. I’m not trying to dismiss anything. I’m a survivor I’ll be at I’m sure not as severe as many stories. And we think about immigrant stories now a days... ...It’s important to be compassionate and empathetic and to find restorative ways to move forward. I learned this from a specialist in the LA County school system that travels to the different schools and studies things like the key factor in school shootings. And that was disconnection. And here’s a guy confronting that, and being committed to creating connection whatever the starting point is.

                  And Jonathan actually worked for me briefly- so many aspects of his life were set up to crash and burn.

                  There is a tradition in Western culture, and in history of using the sacrificial lamb.

                  But nothing heals. My director, who just lost his wife thought many times about how the real essence of Christ was he was the last sacrificial lamb. And the tradition of blaming was supposed to end with him.

                  A little deep for this discussion but...”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                    Yes, which is why having the accused pay arbitration costs upfront, and having the arbitration costs reimbursed in the 1% of cases in which the appeal is successful creates the correct incentives. If the respondent did not bear the costs upfront, lots of respondents would appeal, even though the probability of winning the appeal is low.
                    Ummm it’s not upfront. This is what I and others are talking about with BN and her misinformation. Please watch the presentation.

                    Comment


                    • RegentLion a good overview of DM can be found in the live stream thread.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TheMoo View Post
                        RegentLion a good overview of DM can be found in the live stream thread.
                        I get that he’s a blow hard... I read that thread but I don’t know who he is in the industry (?)

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by TheMoo View Post

                          Ummm it’s not upfront. This is what I and others are talking about with BN and her misinformation. Please watch the presentation.

                          By “upfront”, I meant that if the respondent wants arbitration, they must pay prior to the arbitration happening (upfront), then are reimbursed after the arbitration if they win their appeal. Essentially, the loser pays the costs of arbitration.





                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by mkevent View Post
                            Capall

                            I don’t think the people referencing Lolita are trying to make those who didn’t read the book feel illiterate .

                            Lolita is written from Humbert’s (the pedophile) (or however he is classified) point of view. Because if this, the reader tends to see him as a bit less of a monster because he gets to put his spin on the events that occurred.

                            Lolita was a little girl (12?) when she met him. Her normal 12 year old behavior was viewed as seductive from someone with a proclivity towards towards being sexually attracted to children.

                            I believe what mvp is trying to explain is that any normal adult would read the book and be disgusted and appalled by the writers narrative. Being sexually attracted to children and acting on it is just wrong, no matter how sympathetic the narrator may seem.
                            Humbert puts the spin that Lolita seduced him and ruined his life, when in fact it was he who stole her innocence and ruined hers.

                            It is all about perspective. Blaming the victims (as what happens in Lolita) is what we are seeing with the ISWG group.

                            No matter how persuasive a narrator may be, it never makes the act of violating children or teens acceptable. Period.
                            Yes, kind of, but more:

                            1. Folks ought to consider just how they think about power in sexual relationships if they use the term "Lolita" to refer to the (female) apparently innocent, yet strangely and irresistibly perpetrator of the relationship. If you use that uncritically, you have entered Humbert's universe. If, on the other hand, you read the whole thing as sick, sad and frightening exploitation of a child, you inhabit my universe. But I acknowledged, too, that I'm an usual reader insofar as I have lived a version of like that looks more like Dolores' (Lolita's) life than Humbert's. I have read no criticism of _Lolita_, but I imagine that Nabokov thought most of his readers were in between these two positions, leaning more toward my position when they were watching someone else's pedophilia.

                            2. That said, every time someone says something like "boys will be boys" they naturalize some form of exploitative sexual relationship. When they say, "Yes, but she was wearing a mini-skirt/drunk/walking by herself at night/lied to get into the bar," they redistribute power between perp and victim, adult and child, just as Humbert attempted to do in the telling of his story to us.

                            3. The point is that it's *not* clear to me just what we think "any normal adult" would think. In fact, that is why the victim blaming gets produced and consumed. If all of us saw this as something as plain as the sexual exploitation of a helpless child (Lolita is an orphan, by the way), the epithet, "Lolita" to refer tongue-in-cheek to a promiscuous girl would not have meaning.

                            Because of the #MeToo movement and a whole bunch of other changes, we are all now being required to think way more carefully about sex and power than we were before. I think that's great. But I don't think everyone is there yet, nor wants to be introspective about how they consume and spread ideas like children seducing adults.
                            The armchair saddler
                            Politically Pro-Cat

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post


                              By “upfront”, I meant that if the respondent wants arbitration, they must pay prior to the arbitration happening (upfront), then are reimbursed after the arbitration if they win their appeal. Essentially, the loser pays the costs of arbitration.




                              And? That’s not any different from any other type of appeal.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                                Hawthorne's short stories are way better than his novels.

                                The reform group members can't exhibit empathy for the victims, because they've channeled their empathy to people who rape children.

                                I'm an English professor who has never read a lot of things, Moby Dick is a hard pass.
                                There's always Huston's movie, with Gregory Peck, and Richard Basehart (wonderful voice) as Ishmael. ;0) There is a very interesting story about the filming of that movie in Alan Villiers' book, The Way of a Ship. They wanted to hire him as their sailing expert, he declined, then on vacation in Wales a year or two later he saw an odd ship at the Cardiff dock and that's what they were trying to film on. He got dragooned into sailing it, against his better judgment.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by TheMoo View Post

                                  In all fairness this is coming from someone who believes his 10 year old daughter can make her own choices about having sexual contact with an adult and she has to live with those choices. He also believes that one is ONLY a victim if they choose to remain quiet about abuse. If nothing else, he’s consistent.
                                  He would also seem to be "conditioning" her to the idea of voluntarily pursuing restorative justice over other recourse should she ever be unfortunate enough to find herself in a position to have to make that choice...

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                    How can the movie be 1955 with Jeremy Irons as Humbert?



                                    I think I got the movie's date wrong. Hang on (googling): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolita

                                    The novel was published in 1955. The movie(S!) were 1962 and 1997.

                                    The armchair saddler
                                    Politically Pro-Cat

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by TheMoo View Post

                                      And? That’s not any different from any other type of appeal.
                                      I have zero problem with the loser paying the cost of arbitration, zero problem with people creating or donating to GFM drives to pay arbitration fees for probably guilty people who want to appeal.

                                      Just didn’t understand the need to bash BN when she says, “There are fees.” This strikes me as a true statement. There are fees. Entirely sensible and legitimate fees, in my view.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Ubu&Goober View Post

                                        He would also seem to be "conditioning" her to the idea of voluntarily pursuing restorative justice over other recourse should she ever be unfortunate enough to find herself in a position to have to make that choice...
                                        I will refrain from speculation because I do not know him. It’s a sensitive topic and many statements raise my eyebrows, however it would be irresponsible of me to express any opinion beyond commenting on his words and how they read.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                          You meant “illiteracy” literally?

                                          “Illiteracy” means lacking the ability to read, which is different from “declined to study literature in college”.
                                          You can read my original comment to see if I used the term "illiterate" correctly. No, I don't think Illiterate means "declined to study literature in college." I'm not gratuitously snarky or careful about language. But I do reserve the right to be clear.
                                          The armchair saddler
                                          Politically Pro-Cat

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X