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

GM Clinic at Persimmon Tree Farm

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

    The problem with getting to these things late is 20 pages of smashing my head on my keyboard...

    Exclusive Jurisdiction
    The Center has the exclusive jurisdiction to investigate and resolve allegations that a Participant engaged in one or more of the following:
    4. Aiding and Abetting, when it relates to the Center’s process
    When the relevant organization has reason to believe that the allegations presented fall within the Center’s exclusive jurisdiction, the organization—while able to impose measures—may not investigate or resolve those allegations.

    Comment


      Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

      No the farm owners (who are the clinic organizers correct?) being members would absolutely be a violation of the aiding and abetting clause. For them.
      I don’t think so if they don’t participate themselves (are coached) and all clinic attendees are non-members. There’s nothing in the examples in the guidelines about allowing coaching of non-members unless that would be outside of the list (which is “including but not limited to”). But I don’t make that inference from the examples.

      Comment


        https://www.ocregister.com/2020/09/0...te-suspension/

        "If a gymnast is still a member of USA Gymnastics, Haney cannot contact that gymnast even if she is belongs to a club that Is not registered with USA Gymnastics."

        "If made aware of a violation of suspension, USAG may also revoke the membership of clubs found to have contributed to the violation."

        Comment


          Originally posted by IPEsq View Post

          I don’t think so if they don’t participate themselves (are coached) and all clinic attendees are non-members. There’s nothing in the examples in the guidelines about allowing coaching of non-members unless that would be outside of the list (which is “including but not limited to”). But I don’t make that inference from the examples.
          I think you are wrong. They are making money off of George Morris giving a clinic at their property, and/or allowing George Morris to conduct business on their farm. That's literally the definition of aiding and abetting.
          Let me apologize in advance.

          Comment


            I hope when this is resolved that the resolution is made public because I would like to know how Safe Sport reads its own rules and how they are applied.

            I can totally see how both sides could be right.
            The only real answer has to come from Safe Sport.

            Comment


              Originally posted by trubandloki View Post
              I hope when this is resolved that the resolution is made public because I would like to know how Safe Sport reads its own rules and how they are applied.

              I can totally see how both sides could be right.
              The only real answer has to come from Safe Sport.
              I feel like safe sport has made it clear. And even in this thread people have posted the relevant guidelines.

              Safe sport is not going to contact (g) you personally. That's why their rules and guidelines are available and posted.

              People have posted them here. If you specifically have further questions about what the words/rules literally mean, you specifically can and should contact safe sport directly.

              What this thread feels like to me, except the answers are there, in print, and people seem to actively be avoiding reading them.

              Click image for larger version  Name:	w6xy8k872rb41.jpg Views:	0 Size:	12.4 KB ID:	10732461
              Let me apologize in advance.

              Comment


                Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

                The jurisdiction is really safe sport's and applies to all members of any sport under the umbrella of the national federation.

                This is why you can't train at a gym with a banned member, even if it's not a gymnastics competition, and so on and so forth.

                You can't professionally associate with banned by safe sport people and be a member in good standing of (sorry. Again) any national federation.
                Yes, but USEF reports to Safe Sport, Safe Sport does their investigation thing and USEF would then enforce any penalty/sanction/ban. Apparently there are issues with most NGB's not enforcing bans or sanctions. My apologies if i was unclear.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by gottagrey View Post

                  Yes, but USEF reports to Safe Sport, Safe Sport does their investigation thing and USEF would then enforce any penalty/sanction/ban. Apparently there are issues with most NGB's not enforcing bans or sanctions. My apologies if i was unclear.
                  Agree, agree, and thank you for clarifying!

                  USEF has proven time and time again that they hate having any rules or penalties that might impact revenues.
                  Let me apologize in advance.

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

                    Agree, agree, and thank you for clarifying!

                    USEF has proven time and time again that they hate having any rules or penalties that might impact revenues.
                    Going out here on a limb by saying it looks like they aren't alone as far as sports organizations go.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

                      I feel like safe sport has made it clear. And even in this thread people have posted the relevant guidelines.

                      Safe sport is not going to contact (g) you personally. That's why their rules and guidelines are available and posted.

                      People have posted them here. If you specifically have further questions about what the words/rules literally mean, you specifically can and should contact safe sport directly.

                      What this thread feels like to me, except the answers are there, in print, and people seem to actively be avoiding reading them.

                      Click image for larger version Name:	w6xy8k872rb41.jpg Views:	0 Size:	12.4 KB ID:	10732461
                      I am sorry that you think I have not been reading.
                      I have been reading.
                      Even the links and such.

                      My point is, it will be interesting to see how this is dealt with. I do not expect them to contact me personally. Geez. I do not think anyone thinks that.

                      But this is a good test situation for how the following of (or in this case, the not following of) rules is dealt with.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by trubandloki View Post

                        I am sorry that you think I have not been reading.
                        I have been reading.
                        Even the links and such.

                        My point is, it will be interesting to see how this is dealt with. I do not expect them to contact me personally. Geez. I do not think anyone thinks that.

                        But this is a good test situation for how the following of (or in this case, the not following of) rules is dealt with.
                        I definitely agree that it will be important if not interesting to see how this is dealt with.

                        As I said at the beginning of the thread, safe sport isnt about punishing people who break rules, it is about protecting athletes from predation.

                        And if the USEF cannot or will not protect athletes, US riders representing the US will cease to have a space in international competitions. As will any other US national federation who refuses to enforce rules and guidelines laid down by safe sport to protect athletes from predation by current membership and permanently ineligible individuals.

                        I did also say that I think this (maybe not this case, but tied to safe sport and federation strictures on free association by members) is going to end up in court though, and likely the supreme court ultimately, because this is all tied to an actual law, not just a mandate.

                        Should it? No. But do I think it will? Yes.

                        Because Egos.
                        Let me apologize in advance.

                        Comment


                          Well the good side of it ending up in court is, that remove all the question(s) of 'what exactly does this mean' that is floating around. A court decision will make it mean X and Y, period.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by omare View Post
                            https://www.ocregister.com/2020/01/2...al-misconduct/

                            Well this is strange--looks like the NCAA does not follow Safesport bans. Definitely an eye-opener if you are the parent of a student college athlete.
                            Thanks for that link; lots of interesting and sad reading to be had following up on where that has all gone. At first glance this seems to be directly at odds with the legal applicability of Safesport; to quote part of Equibrit's quotation of the enabling legislation update in 2018:

                            (b)Definition of Applicable Amateur Sports Organization.—In this section, the term “applicable amateur sports organization” means an amateur sports organization—
                            (1) that is not otherwise subject to the requirements under subchapter III;
                            (2) that participates in an interstate or international amateur athletic competition; and
                            (3) whose membership includes any adult who is in regular contact with an amateur athlete who is a minor.

                            I would think the NCAA would easily be three-for-three on those.

                            Nonetheless, to quote https://uscenterforsafesport.org/res...helpful-links/ :

                            Originally posted by Safesport web site
                            Does the U.S. Center for SafeSport have authority over sport organizations like the NFL, NCAA, and college athletics?

                            No. At this time, the Center’s authority only extends to the USOPC.
                            I am confused as to how those can possibly reconcile. (I will take the repeated suggestion above and actually ask Safesport, too, although at the very moment I am going to go rescue a saddle from UPS before they all sod off for the weekend.)

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by amb View Post

                              Thanks for that link; lots of interesting and sad reading to be had following up on where that has all gone. At first glance this seems to be directly at odds with the legal applicability of Safesport; to quote part of Equibrit's quotation of the enabling legislation update in 2018:

                              (b)Definition of Applicable Amateur Sports Organization.—In this section, the term “applicable amateur sports organization” means an amateur sports organization—
                              (1) that is not otherwise subject to the requirements under subchapter III;
                              (2) that participates in an interstate or international amateur athletic competition; and
                              (3) whose membership includes any adult who is in regular contact with an amateur athlete who is a minor.

                              I would think the NCAA would easily be three-for-three on those.
                              )
                              Almost all college athletes are adults (in the eyes of the law, but probably not to their parents). Most school districts now say you have to be 5 by the start of kindergarten, so they'll be 18 by the time they start college, except for the small percentage who have birthdays in late August or graduated high school early.

                              Comment


                                The NCAA, much like the AAU, is not an NGB for any one sport but instead an athletes organization covering multiple sports. That is why it would not fall under safesport purview.

                                For example, the US Soccer Federation is the NGB for Soccer, even though there are many NCAA soccer tournaments.
                                Originally posted by PeanutButterPony
                                you can shackle your pony to a lawn chair at the show...so long as its in a conservative color.

                                Comment


                                  Regarding the NCAA, I think the Larry Nassar issue did confuse me, as he seemed to have two jobs, one for the US Olympic Team and one for Michigan State U. and abused athletes in both jobs, not sure if they ever involved the same athlete that was a MSU athlete and on the USO training team?

                                  Comment


                                    [QUOTE=Mango20;n10732778]

                                    Almost all college athletes are adults (in the eyes of the law, but probably not to their parents). Most school districts now say you have to be 5 by the start of kindergarten, so they'll be 18 by the time they start college, except for the small percentage who have birthdays in late August or graduated high school early.[/QUOTE

                                    Not sure what your point is that most college athletes are adults in the eyes of the law. I personally know of multiple athletes in college that were preyed upon by their coaches and could not/did not report for fear of losing their scholarship. I have a friend who is an attorney that works with these athletes and with SafeSport.

                                    Comment


                                      If SafeSport were given the NCAA's jurisdiction for sexual safety issues, we could presume that at least the methods and decisions about those cases would be more consistent between college athletics and other sports now under SS. Interesting, because I believe that many Olympic-bound athletes are also enrolled in college and participating in college sports. Also, SS would have to be many times the size it is now.


                                      Just for what it's worth ... in the context that of course the NCAA has been investigating infractions in its ranks for decades ...

                                      Recently the NCAA created its own independent investigations and review "process" to handle "complex cases", which I interpret to mean those with the highest scandal profile and dollar impact. The major change is that the "process" will exist outside the NCAA itself, using investigators and attorneys who are not otherwise involved with sports. The "process" is their term, they seem to be avoiding using terms such as "board" or "panel".

                                      So, it would seem that the NCAA has also determined that it is better to have an outside, independent process for handling major infractions.

                                      In 2018, NCAA membership made sweeping changes to the investigations and infractions process that created independent groups to prevent conflicts of interest. NCAA Division I cases deemed complex are now eligible for the Independent Accountability Resolution Process (IARP) Examples of complex cases include alleged violations of core NCAA values, such as prioritizing academics and the well-being of student-athletes; the possibility of major penalties; or adversarial behavior. Multiple parties are able to request a case be deemed complex: school representatives, NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions members or NCAA enforcement staff.
                                      http://www.ncaa.org/independent-acco...lution-process

                                      The "process" really started work in 2019 with several major cases that are taking time to work through. Covid was a major slow-down due to cancellation of meetings and interviews that were scheduled during the spring of 2020.

                                      This "process" was the recommendation of a commission engaged to study the problem, chaired by former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. Sometimes known as the "Rice Commission".

                                      The NCAA has been racked by several major scandals in the past few years, and has a history of serious infractions and corruption emerging from time to time. Apparently the NCAA has found that keeping investigations internal is not working well enough, even given a scale and a budget that far exceeds most sports organizations.

                                      The new "process" isn't focused on one type of infraction, but is currently working with a range of issues including a major basketball corruption problem that involved the FBI making arrests, and the sexual assault accusations against several (now former) members of the Baylor University football team (that triggered the firing of the head coach and the resignation of the university president).

                                      Just found it interesting that it would seem that sports organizations generally are finding it hard to investigate and police themselves. And less agonizing to have an outside agency figure things out for them. It makes sense, given the internally-political nature of any organization, especially one that is large and bureaucratic in nature.

                                      It even has its own website.
                                      The Independent Accountability Resolution Process is comprised of independent investigators, advocates and adjudicators who are responsible for reviewing select infractions cases in Division I.
                                      http://iarpcc.org/


                                      The Rice Commission, as it became known, issued its recommendations on April 25, 2018[1]. One of the recommendations, the creation of an independent process to resolve NCAA infractions matters (also known as rules violations), is the focus of this article. The relevant recommendation taken from the section headings of the report:

                                      “Section 2: Establish Professional Neutral Investigation and Adjudication of Serious Infractions and Hold Institutions and Individuals Accountable

                                      - Implement independent investigation and adjudication of complex cases.
                                      - Enact and impose core punishments with significant deterrent effect.”
                                      https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/it...es-an-overview


                                      The new IARP has been given the Baylor sexual assault case mentioned above. The NCAA has been investigating this case since 2017, so the IARP is picking up on it as a work-in-progress. It was supposed to be resolved in the spring of 2020 but was delayed due to covid. Now they are looking toward 2021. It will be one of the first major cases for the IARP to see through to the end.

                                      If SS's scope included NCAA athletics, SS would have the Baylor case. That's interesting to think about, as it is an illustration of the more high-profile and widely public cases that would come from the NCAA.

                                      Interesting comment from Sports Illustrated. A "morals issue"? Wonder what SS would say about that take.
                                      Secondly, the backdrop of sexual violence and attempts by the NCAA to legislate that area is problematic. For years, the NCAA membership has wrestled with whether to implement bylaws regarding sexual assault by athletes, whether it is penalties or limiting enrollment and transfers of players accused or convicted of those crimes.

                                      Cases that have come with a moral element have long been tricky ones for the NCAA. From Penn State’s Sandusky scandal to a Miami case laden with details involving adult entertainers to a Louisville basketball case that revolved completely around strippers and prostitutes, outcomes have often been met with strong criticism.

                                      What happened at Baylor beyond the NCAA rules manual will color perceptions of the outcome, with a legion of outspoken critics likely to be heard no matter the outcome. Some will say the NCAA overreached; others will say it didn’t go far enough and the school got off lightly.

                                      This could be a no-win resolution for the NCAA. But at least that resolution is getting closer.
                                      https://www.si.com/college/2020/02/0...-investigation

                                      Comment


                                        [QUOTE=OntheFence;n10732956]
                                        Originally posted by Mango20 View Post

                                        Almost all college athletes are adults (in the eyes of the law, but probably not to their parents). Most school districts now say you have to be 5 by the start of kindergarten, so they'll be 18 by the time they start college, except for the small percentage who have birthdays in late August or graduated high school early.[/QUOTE

                                        Not sure what your point is that most college athletes are adults in the eyes of the law. I personally know of multiple athletes in college that were preyed upon by their coaches and could not/did not report for fear of losing their scholarship. I have a friend who is an attorney that works with these athletes and with SafeSport.
                                        My point was that criteria #3 for Safe Sport inclusion was that they were to have frequent contact with/jurisdiction over minors ((3) whose membership includes any adult who is in regular contact with an amateur athlete who is a minor.). So, since college students are not minors, they would not fall under this category. I agree that there are plenty of opportunities for bad things to happen to college athletes, and I personally don't see most of them as fully adults yet, but may be biased since I have a 19 year old college student myself.

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by Mango20 View Post

                                          My point was that criteria #3 for Safe Sport inclusion was that they were to have frequent contact with/jurisdiction over minors ((3) whose membership includes any adult who is in regular contact with an amateur athlete who is a minor.). So, since college students are not minors, they would not fall under this category. I agree that there are plenty of opportunities for bad things to happen to college athletes, and I personally don't see most of them as fully adults yet, but may be biased since I have a 19 year old college student myself.
                                          I don't think you're biased. An 18 year-old is hardly a fully-formed adult, but as an adult in the eyes of the law, he or she might *MIGHT* be more likely to report assaults by coaches and /or fellow athletes.
                                          "She is not fragile like a flower. She is fragile like a bomb."

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X