• 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

Humble Initiative: Sham Attempt by USEF to a Meeting

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

  • Originally posted by Purepony View Post
    AHF offering Free leases on some of their ponies. Is that part of her Initiative or something else?
    That contest was about a year ago, long before this... situation.

    Comment


    • The free leases is part of the initiative to get rid off overheads.. and then sue you if the pony that could not lease or sell doesn't win. LOL

      Comment


      • O.K. O.K. I know it's a pipe dream, but I just had to put it out there...

        I am so glad none of my hard earned money goes to the USEF, nor will it ever, especially in light of their continued mishandling (or not handling at all) of serious events occurring at shows sanctioned by them.

        Here is an idea, in a much more global context.
        The department I work in is audited every 2 years by the auditing department. We hate the audit, but it makes our work processes better. As we implement changes, additional audits come up with less findings.

        In a 'perfect world' members would demand that an outside organization (documented with no ties to USEF) completely audit the USEF on a regular basis and that the findings are incorporated into the rules. This organization could look at each rule and compare against other sporting bodies to determine where improvements should be made. They could also contact other entities/folks for information such as vets, lawyers, certain professionals, etc. Additionally, each audit could have some individual focus areas, as determined by recent events, or by the auditing organization. A follow-up audit could be performed by a different organization to determine if corrective actions have been implemented as appropriate.
        Yes, it would be expensive, but I wonder how many folks wouldn't mind their dues being used for this?
        It is unfortunate the USEF has not proactively adopted the practice of being independently audited on a regular basis to improve it's performance.
        Some days the best thing about my job is that the chair spins.

        Comment


        • I would love to see a truly professional organization for the horse industry, rather than the political, cliquish mess we have now.

          Comment


          • It is with great sadness that I share that el insider, on Diva, reported today that TT had announced on her page (since removed)that she settled with Great American insurance on EM's behalf for an undisclosed amount of money in compensation for the death of her pony at Devon. Humble Initiative, my Aunt Fanny. I feel like I'm in an episode of Fringe and not sure what plane of existence I'm on.

            Comment


            • ^^^^disgusting. Guess the insurance hands are tied. In 2013, you'd think we'd be beyond killing your pony and getting the insurance money.
              Come to the dark side, we have cookies

              Comment


              • Maybe the insurance company should here from this board.

                Comment


                • UNBELIEVABLE.

                  Edited to add: I mean, I believe it. It's just....guh.
                  "Aye God, Woodrow..."

                  Comment


                  • lawsuit expenses outweighed payout amount I assume
                    Nothing says "I love you" like a tractor. (Clydejumper)

                    The reports states, “Elizabeth reported that she accidently put down this pony, ........, at the show.”

                    Comment


                    • I also cannot believe she got PAID for killing her pony. Unbelievable. Isn't there a police report where she admits doing the deed flat-out? This just rocks my world.
                      Bolter Bolter Bolter!!

                      Comment


                      • I work for an insurrance company (disability income, not P&C) and the only reason for this that I can conceive of is that they are settling her claim in the context of either a lawsuit or a threatened one. Sometimes we have to make a business decision to pay someone SOMETHING, when we really don't think they are entitled to benefits, rather than spend hundreds of thousands of dollars litigating the case to a jury verdict. Juries don't like insurance companies.

                        Still stinks. Every time.
                        What's wrong with you?? Your cheese done slid off its cracker?!?!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by oliverreed View Post
                          I work for an insurrance company (disability income, not P&C) and the only reason for this that I can conceive of is that they are settling her claim in the context of either a lawsuit or a threatened one. Sometimes we have to make a business decision to pay someone SOMETHING, when we really don't think they are entitled to benefits, rather than spend hundreds of thousands of dollars litigating the case to a jury verdict. Juries don't like insurance companies.

                          Still stinks. Every time.
                          EM threatening to sue someone?

                          Inconceivable.

                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D58LpHBnvsI
                          "Aye God, Woodrow..."

                          Comment


                          • Holy cow. She ADMITS to "accidentally" putting the pony down yet collects on the pony's insurance. Unbelievable.

                            Comment


                            • don't insurance companies routinely void policies due to gross negligence? I mean if you get into an accident in your car and you are drunk don’t they void your insurance? Wouldn’t his be the same thing? Otherwise aren’t we back to killing horses for insurance money, I mean it’s even easier now with all the drugs you can push to fast or to much and give the horse a heart attack or respiratory failure , drugs that go un -detected ect..

                              Comment


                              • well that would explain how she is funding this years winter circuits.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by MIKES MCS View Post
                                  don't insurance companies routinely void policies due to gross negligence? I mean if you get into an accident in your car and you are drunk don’t they void your insurance? Wouldn’t his be the same thing? Otherwise aren’t we back to killing horses for insurance money, I mean it’s even easier now with all the drugs you can push to fast or to much and give the horse a heart attack or respiratory failure , drugs that go un -detected ect..
                                  I don't think so. We have policyholders who were injured while drunk and if they are in fact disabled we pay them. Heck, being an alcoholic or a drug addict is considered an "illness," so you could receive disability benefits if you cannot control your addiction and that results in your ability to work. Crazy but true. Now you can't collect Social Security disability benefits anymore for being an addict, but that only changed in the 1990s.
                                  What's wrong with you?? Your cheese done slid off its cracker?!?!

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by inca View Post
                                    Holy cow. She ADMITS to "accidentally" putting the pony down yet collects on the pony's insurance. Unbelievable.
                                    Another insurance person weighing in. The key is the claim of it being an accident. As awful as this situation was, I don't think she was deliberately trying to kill the pony.

                                    On the gross negilgence -- that's confusing apples with oranges. Negligence pertains to liability; your responsibility for damages to third parties or others. It doesn't apply to your own things. Gross negligence means willful wanton action that is far out of the norm.

                                    Mortality coverage is property coverage. Intentional acts that are aimed to damage one's own property are excluded. So if you torch your home, the insurance company isn't liable to pay the claim.

                                    In any case, I am sure the insurance carrier would have denied the claim if they could have found a legitimate reason to do so. I'll also bet they will never write a policy for this person ever again based on the circumstances of this claim.
                                    Where Fjeral Norwegian Fjords Rule
                                    http://www.ironwood-farm.com

                                    Comment


                                    • "On the gross negilgence -- that's confusing apples with oranges. Negligence pertains to liability; your responsibility for damages to third parties or others. It doesn't apply to your own things. Gross negligence means willful wanton action that is far out of the norm".

                                      that's my point , The person in question is the trainer and therefore legally responible for the care of the animal , wouldn't the minimal definaition of this responsability be to do nothing to cause the animals death .. wasn't there an admission of quilt in this istance , wouldn't that admission hold one liable for the animals death, failing to act in a responsible manor.. IE: if one has no medical training and preforms a medical act in a non life threatening situation doesn't that make that person negligent ? just a question on my part...

                                      Comment


                                      • My insurance policy specifically excludes death caused by "Any Medication or Substance unless administered by a licensed veterinarian(or experienced personnel directed by the veterinarian) and certified by the veterinarian to have been of a prophylactic nature or necessitated by accident, disease, or illness;"

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by EAY View Post
                                          My insurance policy specifically excludes death caused by "Any Medication or Substance unless administered by a licensed veterinarian(or experienced personnel directed by the veterinarian) and certified by the veterinarian to have been of a prophylactic nature or necessitated by accident, disease, or illness;"
                                          I assumed most policies did as well. Seems like a no brainer?
                                          "Aye God, Woodrow..."

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X