• 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 are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

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 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Objective versus subjective consideration in our team selection process?

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by Secret Dove View Post
    If Margie had a server concussion she should NOT have gone to the WCF!!! The selectors were watching the horses that showed there and Indigo didn't do well. ...
    I'm a complete outsider to this world, but given all the negative press lately about sports-induced concussions, and this rider choosing to ride before she was healed, it's not that surprising the selectors would be wary of her.
    You have to have experiences to gain experience.

    1998 Morgan mare Mythic Feronia "More Valley Girl Than Girl Scout!"

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by ynl063w View Post
      Maybe COTH holds a bit of responsibility for including her comments in that particular article. Perhaps a separate piece would have been more appropriate. .
      I kind of felt that way myself. Seemed a bit out of place in the article considering it took up 3/4 of the page and I don't remember the title having anything to do with her comments (if I remember correctly?). Funny how the "media" can do that to ruffle some feathers...
      Originally posted by rustbreeches
      [George Morris] doesn't always drink beer, but when he does, he prefers Dos Equis

      Comment

      • Original Poster

        #63
        Originally posted by jlphilli View Post
        I kind of felt that way myself. Seemed a bit out of place in the article considering it took up 3/4 of the page and I don't remember the title having anything to do with her comments (if I remember correctly?). Funny how the "media" can do that to ruffle some feathers...
        Yeah, the article had to do about the team not Margie being mad that she didn't make the team. I don't think COTH should've included her comments in the article either. I also think her comments should've been made public after the commotion of the team being made was over.

        Comment

        • Original Poster

          #64
          Originally posted by quietann View Post
          I'm a complete outsider to this world, but given all the negative press lately about sports-induced concussions, and this rider choosing to ride before she was healed, it's not that surprising the selectors would be wary of her.
          Well, it's not the first time that Margie made a bad decision. There are many times that I can recall that she was injured and choose to ride before the doctor wanted her too. There's something wrong when someone doesn't listen to their doctors orders!
          Last edited by Secret Dove; Jun. 20, 2012, 05:04 PM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Many people make decisions that are not always perfect but there are sometimes variables that we dont all know about such as obligations.to clients. I am sure in hindsight she wishes she did not go to WC too.
            As far as what she said about being disapointed l think this is a far cry from being mad or talking negative about anyone else. As a friend of hers I happen to know she did not call in to ask to talk about this and probably did not even know it was in the same article that it came out in They called her. As this is probably not the best timing to talk about the process if people take this as a negative towards anything to do with the Olympics I know she has asked them to take this out But l do think it is something we should talk about at some point as it never hurts to review anything and try to make it better. Arent we all always trying to improve?????

            Comment


            • #66
              As the author of the article in question, I'd like to just point out that getting Margie's comments was a very valid inclusion journalistically. She was a co-winner of the selection trials, and I think many people wondered why she did not make the final cut for the team. When we announced the news on the Chronicle's Facebook page, there were multiple people who responded 'What about Margie?'.

              We talk to people who make the team, but it's also newsworthy to talk to those who were considered favorites for the team but did not achieve that goal. The story wasn't just about the team, but also about what happened in the final stages of the selection process, trying to answer questions for readers about why certain names did and didn't appear.

              Margie very kindly responded to my request for her reaction, and while I tried to frame her responses in the tone which she intended, many of you misread her as expressing bitterness or sour grapes, which was definitely not her intention. After being informed of the debate here and some of the extremely negative comments, Margie has retracted much of her statement. She did not want to detract from positive discussion about the team named. Perhaps in the future she and I will discuss her thoughts on the selection process.

              As always, if you have any questions or comments about a Chronicle article, you can reach the writer in question directly via email through our website, which is a much more productive way to question our writing than through posting on the forums. My email is molly@chronofhorse.com

              Comment


              • #67
                Molly, can you clarify whether the nominated entries will be showing in Europe/anywhere before the games? And if so, whether the team is likely to change because of those results? Obviously if someone is hurt that would change things...but otherwise?

                ETA- In an interview with Reed she said the USEF was bringing the top 6 from the list, and she was bringing Mika because he was 7th, and will probably show before/after the games. I was just wondering if there would be an additional observation type event.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Molly, thanks for taking the time to post here.

                  As I stated earlier, I did not take Margie's comments as sour grapes or poor sportsmanship, but as an understandable reaction to the major shuffle in the placings for the final standings.

                  I'm sure many, many people wondered about it, not just the ones who posted on Facebook. Thanks for your efforts to get the full story.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Molly! I for one support your decision, support that ME granted the space to gripe or in fact raise "questions"and comment that IN GENERAL we as a country are less civil as regards ANY disagreeing opinion! It all gets personal! It gets black and white! Nothing ever is so clear! Whatever happened to thoughtful disagreement! It can only lead to improving or defending why system should stay the same! How creative capital is built!
                    "Her life was okay. Sometimes she wished she were sleeping with the right man instead of with her dog, but she never felt she was sleeping with the wrong dog."



                    www.dontlookbackfarm.com

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Molly-

                      I did not take Margie's comments as "sour grapes." I think what caused me to pause for thought (after the previous comments) was the fact that the bulk of the article seemed to center around Margie's comments, when the title of the article was supposed to be about the selected team. I agree that "what about Margie?" does have to do with the selected team, but I guess it may have come across as misleading since she wasn't mentioned in the title? Just my thoughts as to why some could have considered it as such!
                      Last edited by jlphilli; Jun. 21, 2012, 10:00 AM. Reason: clarification
                      Originally posted by rustbreeches
                      [George Morris] doesn't always drink beer, but when he does, he prefers Dos Equis

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by jlphilli View Post
                        Molly-

                        I did not take Margie's comments as "sour grapes." I think what caused me to pause for thought (after the previous comments) was the fact that the bulk of the article seemed to center around Margie's comments, when the title of the article was supposed to be about the selected team. I agree that "what about Margie?" does have to do with the selected team, but I guess it may have come across as misleading since she wasn't mentioned in the title? Just my thoughts as to why some could have considered it as such!
                        I think what may have happened is the link we all followed went directly to the page with Margie's comments, thus omitting the (I think 3?) pages that preceded it.

                        Perception is everything. Molly, I fully agree that Margie's words were proper journalistic inclusion and am sad to see she has retracted them. Things are just perceived differently in the snapshot of life the online world gives us, and instantaneous judgement seems to be the outcome. My apologies, I don't know if a different layout would have saved her words or not.
                        EHJ | FB | #140 | watch | #insta

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by jlphilli View Post
                          I did not take Margie's comments as "sour grapes." I think what caused me to pause for thought (after the previous comments) was the fact that the bulk of the article seemed to center around Margie's comments, when the title of the article was supposed to be about the selected team. I agree that "what about Margie?" does have to do with the selected team, but I guess it may have come across as misleading since she wasn't mentioned in the title?
                          "The bulk of the article"? What article were you reading?

                          It's a six page article. Margie's original comments took up part of page five, IIRC.

                          The first four-and-a-half pages are about the ones who made the team.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by MHM View Post
                            "The bulk of the article"? What article were you reading?

                            It's a six page article. Margie's original comments took up part of page five, IIRC.

                            The first four-and-a-half pages are about the ones who made the team.
                            Oh sorry, it was awhile since I looked at it... I just saw the first page of it and must've not seen the pages after the Margie segment. I guess I didn't bother looking back b/c I assumed since everyone else was "in a fuss" it was what I had originally looked at. My mistake!
                            Last edited by jlphilli; Jun. 21, 2012, 10:26 AM. Reason: clarification
                            Originally posted by rustbreeches
                            [George Morris] doesn't always drink beer, but when he does, he prefers Dos Equis

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Molly maybe you could do an article about the selection process after the Olympics?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Molly - thanks for updating everyone about your intent and the motivation behind ME's comments.

                                I hope you also informed ME of the supportive comments regarding her remarks.

                                As posted before - an environment that makes it so uncomfortable to given an honest opinion when it is requested that the speaker feels a need to retract then is not one that will be open and honest or transparent and those are all things that we all want.

                                ME's remarks were both entirely supportive of the chosen team and questioning of the process.

                                Its too bad that so many failed to recognize that those two things are NOT mutually exclusive.

                                Comment


                                • #76
                                  ^^This

                                  Comment


                                  • #77
                                    Margie Engle is certainly not shy about saying what's on her mind. I found this in an article
                                    (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...on-london.html) from the Miami Herald published in March of this year:

                                    "The last time Engle tried to qualify for the Olympics, in 2004, she was riding with a painful, partially healed broken hip — one of a dozen fractures she has sustained in crushing falls over the years. Nevertheless, she won the trials, the first step in the process. Then U.S. equestrian team officials told her to stop riding and risking damage to her hip. She said she was assured a place on the team would be reserved for her, and she could resume riding in Europe before the Athens Games.

                                    “They reneged on the whole thing,” Engle said. “I should have gotten it in writing. I had to forget about the politics and move on.” "
                                    "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
                                    Rainy
                                    Stash

                                    Comment

                                    Working...
                                    X