• 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

Online USEF Town Hall Meeting, 6/3- Video on Demand Up 6/4

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

  • I note we're at the 9pm mark and we haven't actually discussed the last agenda item yet, about expanding 'persons responsible' except maybe ever so tentatively to veterinarians.
    If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

    Comment

    • Original Poster

      Originally posted by poltroon View Post
      I note we're at the 9pm mark and we haven't actually discussed the last agenda item yet, about expanding 'persons responsible' except maybe ever so tentatively to veterinarians.
      I wonder if we should form a quick betting pool on the actual finish time. I will take 9:40 for $5, Alex.

      Comment


      • Interesting: rules committee member saying that many of his fellow members did not have the background necessary to understand the importance of the proposed rules.
        If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

        Comment


        • I've asked another question, we'll see...

          Comment


          • The vets are the big issue in expanding responsibility, because they usually are not USEF members or the official show vet and therefore are not directly under the USEF jurisdiction. We had that issue in the draft Code of Conduct for members and officials. Like Sonja just said, they are trying to find a way to get to the people who are really responsible and not just be limited to members and officials.

            BTW, for those who remember from a few years ago, the proposed Code of Conduct lives. The Ethics Committee revived it last year, we strengthened it, and it is now being circulated to the committees for comments. It is not getting the "we can't do that because we're just a show organization" objections that it got last time around.
            "I don't want to sound like a broken record here, but why is it that a woman will forgive homicidal behavior in a horse, yet be highly critical of a man for leaving the toilet seat up?" Dave Barry

            Comment


            • Hmmm, John Long wants to contact vets, Then let them join the mailing list for free/have a free info membership with a DVM license # and use the AAEP mailing list. It does not always need to be about a membership fee!
              Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

              Comment


              • If the only goal of the USEF with respect to veterinarians is only providing educational material, there's no need to cause them to be members - you can put the info online and have email lists for bulletins without charging. It seems to me we could use that plus the state boards to do what needs doing there.
                If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                Comment


                • Originally posted by poltroon View Post
                  Interesting: rules committee member saying that many of his fellow members did not have the background necessary to understand the importance of the proposed rules.
                  Well, you might as well put me on that thar committee, then.
                  The armchair saddler
                  Politically Pro-Cat

                  Comment


                  • I am not satisfied by the loophole of allowing a barn manager/head groom to sign as a trainer when drug infringements are assigned to that person by USEF rules. My question has not been addressed.

                    Comment


                    • Oh well.. I did try to participate, Mr. Long..

                      Comment


                      • None of the 3 questions that I submitted about a week ago were addressed. Was the audience hand picked? I can't believe that so few people attended, and there didn't appear to be many (any?) from the h/j community.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Teachequine View Post
                          I am not satisfied by the loophole of allowing a barn manager/head groom to sign as a trainer when drug infringements are assigned to that person by USEF rules. My question has not been addressed.
                          I asked that also and got no response.
                          "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief

                          Comment


                          • The meeting was in Lexington and not in conjunction with another event that would cause people to travel there, so the in-person crowd was bound to be weighted towards the saddle horse crowd. It wasn't hand picked, but it did have a lot of folks who are active in governance, which was also to be expected. I'll be interested to see what the numbers were for people online.
                            "I don't want to sound like a broken record here, but why is it that a woman will forgive homicidal behavior in a horse, yet be highly critical of a man for leaving the toilet seat up?" Dave Barry

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Portia View Post
                              The meeting was in Lexington and not in conjunction with another event that would cause people to travel there, so the in-person crowd was bound to be weighted towards the saddle horse crowd. It wasn't hand picked, but it did have a lot of folks who are active in governance, which was also to be expected. I'll be interested to see what the numbers were for people online.
                              I just asked @USEquestrian that on Twitter; I too will be interested. Will post if I get a reply.
                              "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief

                              Comment


                              • Unfortunately , the rest of the world will only see the online video replay and the questions asked and answered there, not the unanswered questions posed online and by other means.

                                Comment


                                • I would love for them to go after the vets. At the very least, it will give the vets an out so if a big-time client asks for, say Mag or Oxytocin, they can say "no, I could end up losing my license." I think many of these vets give in to trainers' demands because they make a lot of money from their barns, not because they support doping horses. They don't want to risk losing that source of income. And those really big barns can bring in a LOT of income.

                                  At the very least, it will help get rid of the sleazy vets...

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by Portia View Post
                                    The meeting was in Lexington and not in conjunction with another event that would cause people to travel there, so the in-person crowd was bound to be weighted towards the saddle horse crowd. It wasn't hand picked, but it did have a lot of folks who are active in governance, which was also to be expected. I'll be interested to see what the numbers were for people online.
                                    But Country Heir crowds will all pull in in the next 2-3 days, I don't understand why it was not scheduled for next Monday.

                                    Maybe I'm being selfish, but I really wanted a bigger HJ slant on this conversation.
                                    EHJ | FB | #140 | watch | #insta

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by Portia View Post
                                      The vets are the big issue in expanding responsibility, because they usually are not USEF members or the official show vet and therefore are not directly under the USEF jurisdiction. We had that issue in the draft Code of Conduct for members and officials. Like Sonja just said, they are trying to find a way to get to the people who are really responsible and not just be limited to members and officials.
                                      I think the vets know what's waiting for them and don't see any advantage to getting closer to the USEF.

                                      I don't see why enlarging the set of potentially culpable people surrounding a drugged horse helps. Why not just make the cheating hurt really, really bad for one central player and let him control everyone else?

                                      To wit: If the HO or trainer who would be kicked out of showing forever on her first D&M infraction would make damned sure the vet was in line.
                                      The armchair saddler
                                      Politically Pro-Cat

                                      Comment


                                      • So help me out here - I intend to send a follow-up letter - fill in the blanks w/ as many issues/unanswered questions as you have, and I'll include yours along w/ mine:

                                        The questions I have that were not answered are:

                                        What is the timetable for accomplishing the next steps?

                                        If members wish to become more involved in the process, are there any plans to make that happen other than us submitting more questions that don't get answered?

                                        Will the loophole issue of grooms signing as trainer ever be specifically addressed?

                                        [add yours]

                                        The most frustrating aspect of this meeting for me was:

                                        --No real timetable for next step

                                        --I really don't want to hear one SINGLE word more about allowing the Hearing Committee "flexibility" in penalties/suspensions: establish a range for each offense beyond which the Committee *cannot* stray. NO exceptions.

                                        --No real mechanism for members to volunteer to become more involved if they wish to be.

                                        [add yours]
                                        "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief

                                        Comment


                                        • My take away? Members outside H/J discipline want to decelerate the process, take a much closer look at these extraordinary rule change proposals before sending said rule change proposals to the BOD for a vote.
                                          I also heard John Long stress the affiliates should focus on their own house cleaning and then and only then bring it to the federation.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X