Sport Horse Spotlight

BushyGeneology copy

Real Estate Spotlight

Hart_Barn 1

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 Texarkana View Post

    Remember there is a difference between interim suspension and a final sanction. I am sure you understand that, but many people still seem confused about the difference.

    Interim suspensions are delivered when there is enough preliminary evidence from the claim to believe the accused may be an active risk to minors. Similar to what a school might hand down to a teacher or coach accused of sexual misconduct. You remove the person ASAP to prevent abuse from continuing.

    I agree it’s a touchy subject. But when you read about many of the high profile cases (Nassar, etc.), it comes up again and again that these people were reported repeatedly, yet no actions were taken for a myriad of reasons. The interim suspension attempts to address this problem.

    Hopefully our society as a whole can change the overall perception of interim suspensions and recognize them as attempts to protect children, not the personal attacks that they feel like.

    I am well aware. I also feel not having a trained investigator involved to make this determination is a flaw.

    Comment


    • fordtraktor huh?

      with regards to George and Rob, there is nothing to wait for. the investigation concludes and they received lifetime bans. They can appeal, like Scott Peterson is appealing. Doesn't change the fact that a whole proceeding concluded and a sanction was awarded.


      With regards to Michael barisone, who jumped all over him??? Cause I think the answer is no one.

      This is all super disingenuous and full of logical fallacies for a lawyer.
      Let me apologize in advance.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Denali6298 View Post

        You are correct in that I find it just fine. As far as lack of nuance...... well I can point you to some appellate attorneys who have argued in front of the Supreme Court that agree with me. The law has gotten specialized and has been specialized for a while. I may not be a lawyer but be careful what you say. I may just prove you wrong. If you don’t work in constitutional law or appeals, I’m sorry I’m not going to take your word on the law.
        Do you? Please name them.

        You can’t prove someone wrong on a matter of opinion, by the way. Another nuance for you. I welcome you to PM me if you want to know my credentials and who “agrees with me.”

        Comment


        • Originally posted by fordtraktor View Post

          I am well aware. I also feel not having a trained investigator involved to make this determination is a flaw.
          541hunter

          apparently it is that they aren't trained, this is what I was responding to, asking for who specifically wasn't trained.
          Let me apologize in advance.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

            Which investigators aren't trained? Like can you name the individuals employed by safe sport who are demonstrably unqualified for their position?
            I am talking about the procedures only. The published procedures. geez, the poster asked for concrete examples of ways SafeSport could be improved. I suggested a concrete example where they should require the trained investigator earlier in the process, and should interview the accused earlier as their OWN POLICY SAYS THEY DO. I don’t see why any of this is so repulsive to you and Denali. Do you not think the interim suspension should be decided by someone trained? Do you not think they should follow their own policy? Really. This discussion is stupid and I am done now. Go ahead and lynch me for doing my job.

            Comment


            • fordtraktor it seems to me you are being disingenuous in this conversation.
              Let me apologize in advance.

              Comment


              • ladyj79 it's not that the investigators aren't trained, it's that the policy doesn't specify that the investigators are the ones evaluating the claim at the very beginning of the process. They assign a trained investigator after someone (unclear who) performs an "initial inquiry" to determine if the claim should be investigated. That "someone," it seems, has the right to decide if interim sanctions should be applied. Small distinction, and it may just be that the "someone" IS a trained investigator, but it's not laid out in the Code.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by fordtraktor View Post

                  I am talking about the procedures only. The published procedures. geez, the poster asked for concrete examples of ways SafeSport could be improved. I suggested a concrete example where they should require the trained investigator earlier in the process, and should interview the accused earlier as their OWN POLICY SAYS THEY DO. I don’t see why any of this is so repulsive to you and Denali. Do you not think the interim suspension should be decided by someone trained? Do you not think they should follow their own policy? Really. This discussion is stupid and I am done now. Go ahead and lynch me for doing my job.
                  Again, what you makes you think they arent trained?

                  Did you read the SS website, and all the PDFs with the procedures and policies or just look at the flow chart?

                  Do you really think someone as big and powerful as SS wouldn't have their ducks in a row as ensuring people are trained?
                  Boss Mare Eventing Blog

                  Comment


                  • fordtraktor then you must have problems with the Boy Scouts and how they proceed as well. A child has to make one complaint and then that adult is removed from contact with any child at that point. No trained investigator at all. I have problems with what the BS are doing in other areas, but their policies for protecting the children now are IMO well done.

                    Comment


                    • Jeez groups on facebook that I thought were full of relatively intelligent people are now going on about how "anyone that has a grudge can get someone banned now" and crap like that. I'm about to just get off facebook for a while...I've been staying pretty detached from this all but it's really getting annoying.

                      Comment


                      • It's really surprising to me that nobody has brought this up: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/them...oth-t7820.html

                        Note the date - ten years ago. This has been pretty common knowledge amongst trainers in the Midwest...there is no shock or surprise.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by midwestalter View Post
                          It's really surprising to me that nobody has brought this up: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/them...oth-t7820.html

                          Note the date - ten years ago. This has been pretty common knowledge amongst trainers in the Midwest...there is no shock or surprise.
                          This is actually the third time this has been posted on this thread alone
                          Let me apologize in advance.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by 541hunter View Post
                            Personally, I can see where that ambiguity of who is evaluating the claim during that time could be improved, especially when it involves the question of interim measures.
                            Obviously I don't know how SafeSport does it. But, hypothetically speaking, I can see how such a determination could be made early on in the process using a decision tree approach. For example:

                            Was the complaint made by the alleged victim him/herself? If yes:

                            Is there physical evidence (e.g. photos, text messages, e-mails, handwritten materials) to corroborate the claim? If yes:

                            Does the alleged violation include (insert certain specific physical actions)? If yes:

                            Does the alleged perpetrator currently have direct access to minors in situations in which abuse could occur? If yes:

                            Then interim suspension.

                            I've got absolutely no problem with a SS staff member following that tree and making the call for an interim suspension prior to a trained investigator getting heavily involved in the investigation.

                            And I know it's been said many times before, but I'll repeat it. This is absolutely no different than if a complaint is filed against e.g. a teacher. The interim suspension happens right away. The complete investigation happens after.



                            "Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything
                            that's even remotely true."

                            Homer Simpson

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Denali6298 View Post

                              But I’m telling you Jim Giorgio is being given a plat form and he is a convicted child molester.
                              OK. I see what you are saying now. But the rights of convicted felons after they have served whatever sentence is a whole 'nother discussion. Personally, I'd never want Giorgio posting on my side of anything, but then again, I'm not a pedophile, ephibophile, abuser, or cruel, insecure or stupid.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by 541hunter View Post
                                ladyj79 it's not that the investigators aren't trained, it's that the policy doesn't specify that the investigators are the ones evaluating the claim at the very beginning of the process. They assign a trained investigator after someone (unclear who) performs an "initial inquiry" to determine if the claim should be investigated. That "someone," it seems, has the right to decide if interim sanctions should be applied. Small distinction, and it may just be that the "someone" IS a trained investigator, but it's not laid out in the Code.
                                I guess that's where the matter of trust comes in. I look at it and say, well, of course a qualified person is going to make that call. Why wouldn't you naturally assume that would be the case? You think Bob who empties the trash takes care of handing out interim suspensions, too? But, I have trust in the organization.

                                I suppose that if you don't have trust in the organization, you might well fear that if the policy doesn't specify precisely who makes the call then it could well be Mabel on the switchboard who pushes the big red "interim suspension button" on a whim.
                                "Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything
                                that's even remotely true."

                                Homer Simpson

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by Jealoushe View Post

                                  Again, what you makes you think they arent trained?

                                  Did you read the SS website, and all the PDFs with the procedures and policies or just look at the flow chart?

                                  Do you really think someone as big and powerful as SS wouldn't have their ducks in a row as ensuring people are trained?
                                  You're talking to some with experience in criminal law so chances are she probably already did all that.
                                  http://weanieeventer.blogspot.com/

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by NoSuchPerson View Post

                                    Obviously I don't know how SafeSport does it. But, hypothetically speaking, I can see how such a determination could be made early on in the process using a decision tree approach. For example:

                                    Was the complaint made by the alleged victim him/herself? If yes:

                                    Is there physical evidence (e.g. photos, text messages, e-mails, handwritten materials) to corroborate the claim? If yes:

                                    Does the alleged violation include (insert certain specific physical actions)? If yes:

                                    Does the alleged perpetrator currently have direct access to minors in situations in which abuse could occur? If yes:

                                    Then interim suspension.

                                    I've got absolutely no problem with a SS staff member following that tree and making the call for an interim suspension prior to a trained investigator getting heavily involved in the investigation.

                                    And I know it's been said many times before, but I'll repeat it. This is absolutely no different than if a complaint is filed against e.g. a teacher. The interim suspension happens right away. The complete investigation happens after.


                                    Oh trust, I 100% agree with this logic. I just see where the ambiguity in the written policy around who evaluates the claim pre-decision to launch a formal investigations can be tightened up. If those criteria were put into the code more or less as you've written them (or whatever criteria experts think is the right call) I think it would be an improvement.

                                    Once again though, my musings on ways the Safe Sport Code can be improved in no way indicate that I believe the current process is illegitimate.

                                    *edit: just want to reiterate, I do have a decent measure of trust in the process; I also think that tweaking a few clauses in the published code would go a long way towards engendering trust in those who DON'T yet, and hopefully quash a small measure of the hollering we're currently experiencing. And my motivation for wanting to quash that hollering is to protect survivors and victims who see all that and think it means nobody would ever support them if they came forward.

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by enjoytheride View Post

                                      You're talking to some with experience in criminal law so chances are she probably already did all that.
                                      So we can't presume investigators for safe sport are trained but we can presume a person on the internet who says they're a lawyer is a lawyer and has done all the research
                                      Let me apologize in advance.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

                                        So we can't presume investigators for safe sport are trained but we can presume a person on the internet who says they're a lawyer is a lawyer and has done all the research
                                        Or, you could actually take her up on her offer and PM her since her credentials are so important to you. But that probably won't be good enough since you're being so hostile.
                                        http://weanieeventer.blogspot.com/

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                                          It less like being fired from your job and more like not being allowed to work for Microsoft, and instead having to work for any of a million other smaller employers.

                                          He can still ply his trade all over the place, just not at select venues at select times.
                                          Just a quick note that downplaying the impact of an SS decision is disingenious. If it really only had the impact as noted above, they why even have it? What a waste of time and energy.

                                          The truth is that, while someone could still be involved in horse sports, it would look VERY different.

                                          Of note - when an employee is released from a job, there are options for wrongful termination. I know I mentioned it on another thread, but that does make me wonder if (when?) we will see lawsuits against SS or USEF.
                                          Keith: "Now...let's do something normal fathers and daughters do."
                                          Veronica: "Buy me a pony?"

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X