Making accusations on interpretation of what is said is really not playing fair, or is it?
We have here a thread about one more horse with a questionable and sad story and of course, that is a good opportunity to go bat for the cause of the moment, "ban slaughter!" by the posters that have spent years at it now.
Where does pointing that some do that, that whatever we hear that may be going on in slaughter is either not true, taken out of context or someone breaking rules and, maybe as here, we don't quite know "the rest of the story", where is that against the posting rules or reason to jump on me for it, by the usual posters?
Stay with the story, debate what others, including me, have to say, but don't start with attacks and then, when anyone defends themselves, those for the opposite side take it as a chance to keep at one poster.
I don't know why the Moderators close threads, but maybe you could ask them if you really want to know, not again blame it on me?
Sorry, that seems a bit silly.
If the few of us that keep trying to explain there is more to the slaughter debates than one side and why and what it is are silenced, what will you do, since there will not be any debate then?
Oh, yes, I know, "ban slaughter".
To ban slaughter because this or that abuse or mismanagement, sorry to have to point that out again, is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Make the process so it suits you, that is what makes sense, because slaughter is, well, ignoring the millennia we have used SOME horses one more time once dead.