Sport Horse Spotlight

Sandro Hit Standa Eylers

Real Estate Spotlight

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

People Attempting to Undermine Safe Sport

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

  • So basically the group wants to know if SS is using an assessment test on the accused so that they can try to throw that out or claim that because their beloved GM seems to pose a lowered risk due to his advanced age, he shouldn't be banned. Lovely! I'm sorry, but if there is a credible accusation of sexual misconduct and there is ANY risk whatsoever to a child, that person needs to be banned.

    Comment


    • USEF has this article up on their website, which includes a link https://www.usef.org/network/coverag...annualmeeting/ to the discussion. https://www.usef.org/media/press-rel...)&utm_content=

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post
        Thanks for sharing the article on this thread Denali.

        <snip>
        2nd... I find it really interesting to hear from one of the MANY MANY lawyers who are active in our sport, active with a platform like COTH about the really basic concept of our legal system criminal vs our civil legal system. Again... I am not a lawyer. But worked administratively for several years for legal departments, grew up in a family of lawyers, and at one time during my undergraduate years was pre law. So I know just enough to be dangerous. With that said, I’ve been STUPEFIED by how many adults seem to be unaware of basic things like the difference between the criminal
        system of justice, and civil law. So much of the Safe Sport resistance is out in Southern California. I would have thought after the mid 1990’s and the OJ Simpson legal saga, everyone of a certain generation who lives in that part of the country during that era would understand the difference. I was pretty much a teenager then on the other coast... but even I know that OJ was found not guilty of murder in criminal court, but sued for wrongful death by Ron Goldman’s father... who prevailed.
        <snip>
        Both Rob Gage and Jimmy Williams trained out of Southern California, which probably accounts for much of the resistance. George Morris did not, though he visited every year to do clinics and, by then, the #standwith____ people were pretty riled up anyway.

        With respect to OJ Simpson, while people are aware that he was found not guilty in criminal court and guilty in civil court, they probably don't realize the difference with respect to standard of proof. Though they can probably tell you that the car chase involved a Ford Bronco... Among other things, I remember walking out of my office in Santa Monica. and seeing more helicopters in the sky than I have ever seen and concluding that they must have reached a verdict in the civil case.
        The Evil Chem Prof

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Peggy View Post
          Among other things, I remember walking out of my office in Santa Monica. and seeing more helicopters in the sky than I have ever seen and concluding that they must have reached a verdict in the civil case.
          When the verdict came back on OJ Simpson’s criminal trial, it was piped over the PA at Capital Challenge. I was at the wash rack, and it took me a minute to figure out what was going on.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
            I say this a lot, here and in life, about a variety of horrifyingly ignorant people, but like, the bonus is that a lot of these people are old, and will die sooner rather than later. That's more often the way real change happens
            This is an ageist and “ horrifyingly ignorant “
            comment.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by fair judy View Post

              This is an ageist and “ horrifyingly ignorant “
              comment.
              It is all that you say. But, IME, it seems true... with some of the people, some of the time. Old white men seem to be "most in need of the demographic cure," IME. I will justify my opinion if you like, or you can just disagree with it without further consideration.

              Oh, and another point that's more on topic. A (female) friend of mine who is 60 was explaining what a swinger she was in the 1970s. She said, "This was a pretty unique moment-- in between the advent of birth control and legalized abortion, and before AIDS."

              I'm 51 and I grew up in the SF Bay Area. AIDS was on my radar by the time I was of dating age, and, thanks to people who fought hard before me and a vocally pro-choice mom, I got to take for granted that pregnancy was a choice rather than a risk. So my friend's point about how different sex might have looked to those who found it suddenly "without cost" that it had been for previous generations, and not at all like it was for me, where the "STD" you were avoiding would kill you with lots of suffering and stigma in the offing, was well-taken.

              To be intellectually honest, then, I have to say that someone raised in my moment (and someone raised female) probably can't fully get into the shoes of a swinging gay man in the 1970s and walk a mile.
              The armchair saddler
              Politically Pro-Cat

              Comment


              • Originally posted by mvp View Post

                It is all that you say. But, IME, it seems true... with some of the people, some of the time. Old white men seem to be "most in need of the demographic cure," IME. I will justify my opinion if you like, or you can just disagree with it without further consideration.
                To be fair, when it comes to Safe Sport the old white women of the horse world need the “demographic cure.” The younger set are blinded by the “lifestyle.”

                Comment


                • Gross generalizations about broad demographic groups are simplistic and unwarranted. I’m one of those approaching demographic change in death white women. At 65, my world has depth, vision and strength. I am as steel hardened in fire and tempered by water. I am irreplaceable.

                  Comment


                  • I just watched the replay of the live feed of the Safesport presentation at the USEF meeting. What a difference from what we saw at the USHJA meeting. FYI, I am not at all criticizing the presentation by Safesport there or the comments by Mary Babick. Those were the highlights.

                    This time, having the panel format and composition was a great idea. Also questions from those attending were better and without “outliers” asking crazy questions as they did at USHJA. I don’t know what happened during the WEF session, but this was the first time I heard Bill Moroney make a very clear statement supporting Safesport, zero tolerance for abuse in our sport, support for victims and calling out those in our sport whose response to victims has been public shaming. Finally, a clear statement from the leadership of our federation.

                    Comment


                    • To clarify,

                      Not all old people refuse to see this problem. that's not what I said. At all.

                      But most people who refuse to see this problem for what it is are old. Not all, but most.


                      I have said the same thing on other threads, where I more clearly attributed this sentiment to a paraphrase of Oprah, who said a big part of eradicating racism was waiting for old racists to die.

                      Not that all old people are racist, that was not her point, but that most old school Jim crow racist, are, well, old.

                      This is an identical situation and I stand by my statement.

                      it means things generally are getting better, over time, generationally. I don't think you can really argue that people are more vocally and vigorously opposed to both racism and child rape these days, among other things.
                      Let me apologize in advance.

                      Comment


                      • Just got a news blast that Athletes For Equity blah blah is going to be having meetings
                        https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?i...8&__tn__=EHH-R
                        "You can't really debate with someone who has a prescient invisible friend"
                        carolprudm

                        Comment


                        • Due process, Constitutional rights... yada yada yada. I think they all have their fingers in their ears every time there's a SS Q&A session streaming. Here's the letter:


                          Athletes For Equity In Sport, inc.
                          AthletesForEquity@gmail.com
                          10130 Northlake Blvd. ste, 214-171
                          West Palm Beach, FL 33412
                          AthletesForEquity.org

                          Athletes for Equity in Sport holds educational and informational gatherings to discuss real life experiences of those reporting and those accused in the resolution processes of the U.S. Center for SafeSport and other national governing body (NGB) procedures.

                          « These groups are panels made up of licensed, practicing attorneys in addition to athletes from multiple sports with their own Safesport case experience.

                          « Each athlete has firsthand experience of either reporting or being accused of code violation(s) and how that procedure was navigated.

                          « The attorneys on the panel are experts from navigating the SafeSport process day in and day out for more than two years. They cite examples of Safesport not publicly posting their BOD meetings minutes since May 2019, as well as it being difficult to follow the SafeSport's system as it does not afford the due process guarantees — legal rights given to all Americans under the U.S. Constitution — that one has come to expect when dealing with such serious topics and such severe penalties as outcomes.

                          « Discussion from attorney’s and athletes from their experience regarding sanctions or interim measures and methods of reviewing or not reviewing evidence are shared. These facts are easily verified.

                          « Facts, real life experience during the handling of their case, not opinions, are presented and discussed during Athletes for Equity in Sport’s gatherings.

                          « Those who attend are given two hours for interaction in Q&A. Athletes for Equity in Sport is providing a service to all sports, it is not a product to be defended or sold to the public,

                          « At these gatherings. there are athletes sharing their experience along with an emphasis on contributing to solutions for ameliorating SafeSport's questionable procedures.

                          Athletes for Equity in Sport’s Executive group cordially invite any authorized representative of SafeSport or a NGB to meet with us. We look forward to the opportunity for sincere discussion, fact checking regarding statements made by representatives of SafeSport and those athletes and attorneys with experience in the Safesport case proceedings. Additional issues include an urgent need to address necessary revisions to the SafeSport code and solutions regarding non-covered individuals at NGB sanctioned event.

                          There should be no threat to NGBs or the U.S Center for SafeSport in the experience of the SafeSport process being discussed. The education about this experience by attorneys and athletes participating in the process is enlightening. Athletes for Equity in Sport will continue our efforts to build a better SafeSport to protect all athletes.
                          Last edited by Jenerationx; Jan. 10, 2020, 10:56 AM. Reason: Fixed the formatting

                          Comment

                          • Original Poster

                            I haven’t watched the replay yet, but read the write up. I’m really impressed by the steps taken, first with USHJA, and now USEF to make sure membership has a better understanding of SafeSport processes, and the opportunity to ask questions. And really good statements from Mary Babick back in December, and a Bill Moroney recently. Good for both of them.

                            I saw the Facebook announcements from Athletes for Equity. I found the whole notion that people are being solicited for “donations” in order to become a “member” kind of odd. Something about different levels of membership - bronze, silver, gold, platinum. Then they say in the other announcement that they aren’t selling a product to the public... nor do they need to defend their product... they are simply providing a service to all athletes. And apparently if you pay to be a member, you get to participate in “discussion panels” with “actual practicing attorneys” with expertise in this field of law, and get 2 hours for q & a. And to hear from other folks who have been through safe sport investigations, how the process worked for them, etc etc.

                            It seems like membership in Athletes for Equity essentially purchases folks legal advice regarding Safe Sport...

                            This strikes me as quite murky. I’m also curious about the athletes on their discussion panels who are sharing details about having gone through Safe Sport investigations. I’m assuming they are only including people who were not sanctioned and banned by Safe Sport on these panels. And not including banned individuals... but I actually sort of wonder. The way their announcements read is nebulous.

                            Comment

                            • Original Poster

                              As far as age related comments, and the reaction to Safe Sport bans in the sport community at large...

                              I understand where everyone who has weighed in on those comments is coming from. I really do.

                              I will share that I had a very personal experience before the holidays speaking to someone close to me... an in-law actually... about some of my own experiences. This particular individual was not someone I EVER anticipated speaking so honestly with. And I always presumed they would be judgemental if they knew my personal story. We are talking about a 70 something year old white woman, VERY conservative, a life long Catholic, very family oriented and very judgemental about family estrangement and people who struggle with issues like depression, etc.

                              Well... I was wrong. I’m glad I engaged with her. She reacted to my personal story with compassion and love and unconditional support. It was interesting. And deeply reassuring and healing for me.

                              So though I certainly understand where everyone who commented on that issue is coming from... sometimes people can be very surprising.

                              I don’t think I can speak with this in-law concerning my feelings about the Catholic church and the news of their abuse crisis that has been coming out for over 20 years and is international in scope. She has her fingers in her ears on that one But her response to my own personal story and struggle? I’m so glad I spoke with her. A lot of healing for me came from that. And a much more meaningful connection with this in-law.

                              Comment


                              • I've said this previously, but I'm going to repeat it for anyone who might be considering attending one of these meetings: When an athlete or their lawyer talks about their "Safe Sport experience" in any setting other than a Safe Sport hearing, they are free to say whatever would best advance their public cause and enhance or repair their reputation. They are under NO obligation to speak truthfully or factually. They are free to leave out crucial pieces of information and to insinuate that their Safe Sport violation was for something entirely different than what it was.

                                Comment

                                • Original Poster

                                  Originally posted by BeeHoney View Post
                                  I've said this previously, but I'm going to repeat it for anyone who might be considering attending one of these meetings: When an athlete or their lawyer talks about their "Safe Sport experience" in any setting other than a Safe Sport hearing, they are free to say whatever would best advance their public cause and enhance or repair their reputation. They are under NO obligation to speak truthfully or factually. They are free to leave out crucial pieces of information and to insinuate that their Safe Sport violation was for something entirely different than what it was.
                                  That’s definitely a point worth making.

                                  Jenerationx was kind enough to figure out how to post the details of the announcement concerning these meetings that Athletes for Equity posted to their FB page. The last two paragraphs are interesting... they

                                  “cordially” invite any authorized representative of SafeSport or an NGB to meet with them. They look forward to the opportunity for “sincere discussion” and “fact checking” regarding statements by representatives of SafeSport and those athletes and attorneys with experience in the Safe Sport case proceedings.

                                  There should be no threat to NGBs or the U.S Center for SafeSport in the experience of the SafeSport process being discussed. The education about this experience by attorneys and athletes participating in the process is enlightening.


                                  So, who precisely are the attorneys and athletes that will be sitting on discussion panels with Diane Carney’s group “educating” everyone about the SafeSport process? Or do we not get to know the answer to that unless we pony up a membership fee?

                                  How much does a bronze membership cost anyway? And what about platinum? And are the attorneys sitting on these panels being paid for their time spent at these meetings? By the Athletes for Equity membership fees? Or are they doing all this on a pro bono basis? After all... Bonnie Navin has done much of her Safe Sport work on a pro bono basis.

                                  It’s all really odd. 2 “educational” campaigns about Safe Sport going on at the same time.

                                  I wonder if Athletes for Equity will put up video of these discussions. Or perhaps they could put it behind a pay wall as well...

                                  Comment


                                  • They kind of lost me with the misplaced apostrophe while attempting to write the plural of attorney. Correct in one bullet point, but not in a subsequent one.
                                    The Evil Chem Prof

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                                      To clarify,

                                      Not all old people refuse to see this problem. that's not what I said. At all.

                                      But most people who refuse to see this problem for what it is are old. Not all, but most.


                                      I have said the same thing on other threads, where I more clearly attributed this sentiment to a paraphrase of Oprah, who said a big part of eradicating racism was waiting for old racists to die.

                                      Not that all old people are racist, that was not her point, but that most old school Jim crow racist, are, well, old.

                                      This is an identical situation and I stand by my statement.

                                      it means things generally are getting better, over time, generationally. I don't think you can really argue that people are more vocally and vigorously opposed to both racism and child rape these days, among other things.
                                      I understood what you meant. I also understand how the "I'm old but not uncool" does not invalidate the original argument. But thank you for explaining it.
                                      The armchair saddler
                                      Politically Pro-Cat

                                      Comment


                                      • Why is that letter written in the current tense in regards to the panels of athlete's and attorneys?

                                        To make it sound as if these meetings ARE happening now and will frequently occur? Or just simple lack of editing? Maybe just wishful thinking?

                                        Shouldn't the entire letter be written in the future tense?


                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

                                          So, who precisely are the attorneys and athletes that will be sitting on discussion panels with Diane Carney’s group “educating” everyone about the SafeSport process? Or do we not get to know the answer to that unless we pony up a membership fee?

                                          How much does a bronze membership cost anyway? And what about platinum? And are the attorneys sitting on these panels being paid for their time spent at these meetings? By the Athletes for Equity membership fees? Or are they doing all this on a pro bono basis? After all... Bonnie Navin has done much of her Safe Sport work on a pro bono basis.

                                          It’s all really odd. 2 “educational” campaigns about Safe Sport going on at the same time.

                                          I wonder if Athletes for Equity will put up video of these discussions. Or perhaps they could put it behind a pay wall as well...
                                          A quick glance at the website shows membership levels that range from $25-300.

                                          Does it sound like these panels will only be open to people who have paid the membership fee?

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X