Thanks for the laugh

[abi king]

I've just read the 'How not to long rein thread' and all I can say is  That's the funniest testing of opinion I've ever seen.

There are currently over 3000 people registered as EE forum members. Of these 29 people responded with concern and support for the posting of the thread. This was trumpeted as being the 'vast majority' of responders (and therefore justifcation to keep posting such threads), which indeed it was, but is hardly a representative proportion of the membership numbers.

Three people clearly objected, one of whom appears to have decided to leave EE as a result. As soon as the third person objected, the thread was closed in case it became 'heated', thereby preventing anyone else from objecting.

 

I expect this will be closed/deleted now, but just wanted to say thanks for the giggle.

[Heather]

Well I am glad you found it funny, Abi. It clearly got your attention, which was of course, always my reason for posting it.

It might have escaped your notice that the vast majority of those members, are not able to post. There are only around 270 paying members, so pro rata, in the event of the type of poll undertaken for political puposes, 26- 3 makes a pretty large majority.

But I am truly sick and tired of being made to justify what I put on what is essentially MY forum and with the exception of one or two, whom I know to be genuine in their very pacificist beliefs to which they are entitled, it is always the same people ready to put the boot in. There are frequently threads on IHDG highlighting cruelty, including this clip, and there is never a debacle over it being shown, far from it,  only concern for the horse.

So why should EE be so different? I have always been contentious, always outspoken, some people admire me for it, some people clearly despise me for it. So you pays your money and you takes your choice, as they say.


Heather

[abi king]

My point being that 26 from 270 is not representative, and as soon as the third person started objecting you closed the thread on the grounds of it becoming heated which prevents anyone else from doing so! Yet you wanted to test opinion/reaction didn't you - so why close it when people object?  Not really a fair go is it 

Indeed you do not have to justify what you do on your forum. The thing is that many of us who 'put the boot in' as you put it, do so because we think you could reach more people with your message, if you spent your valuable time on the positive and less trawling the net for negative things to post (blimey and i don't even believe in the Secret!) Posting stuff on here about horse cruelty is just preaching to the converted isn't it?

But of course that is entirely up to you, and I for one have now chosen to bow out of such threads. Hence my not replying to the one on long reining.

[Heather]

I most certainly do not spend my time trawling the net looking for this sort of thing! I do have slightly better things to do with my time!! But the topic was posted first on IHDG, where not a single objection was raised from members, and then pointed out to me by one of our own moderators. I was shocked by what I saw, and decided to post it, indeed, to see if it did cause objections from any of our own members.

As the thread had been up several days, and the objections had been raised by the same people who normally object to such threads, I felt that it had run long enough to gauge the response of those who intended to reply, and as only three had objected, this was a considerable minority.

The thread was closed simply because I did not want those who had already posted to end up getting heated, whether for or against, what, this morning, had been an interesting and adult discussion which had gone on further from this clip, to include the 'horse tripping' and unacceptable way to 'train' piaffe, highlighted by my friend Bill from California.

I knew nothing about these actitivities, but the next objection stopped that conversation in its tracks and turned it in on itself, whereby I felt it had to be closed to prevent an argument rather than a civilised discussion.

I am sorry, but this amounts to censorship by members, and NOT by the appointed mods, and I do not think that this contributes to educated discussion. I was frankly shocked by the vitriol and sarcasm in your post!! Blunt I may be, but I always try to answer objectively and without spite.

Many members clearly do want this sort of discussion, so why should a few prevent this from happening for the rest?

There are forums whereby all discussion on possibly contentious topics is banned from ever being aired, and this, to my mind leads to a very sanitised and sterile environment, and a very narrow outlook, not conducive to a wide range of learning.

But EE is never going to be that politically correct, I freely admit that I am not politically correct, God forbid!!!- and I think that the majority of people who frequent this site, would not have me any other way. Maybe I am wrong, and people hate my guts, but that is their choice!!

But perhaps we actually should have a poll for all members to see whether they do, or do not want topics such as that posted?


Heather

[nix]

Attempts at censorship by any forum member will not be permitted and this is what this amounts to, there is a tiny minority of members that have issues with certain areas of the forum. I will be contacting you individually. Please note that membership of this forum is not mandatory, neither is reading or replying to any of the threads.

If the title of a topic does not appeal to someone, or its content, then I suggest they move onto one that does. If a member feels the content is inappropriate, please contact a moderator and any concerns will be addressed. Thank you.

[TashaKat]

I'm sorry Abi but I'm shocked at your attitude and, to be blunt, by your rudeness.

You may feel that critiques etc are uneccessary, many don't.  Is it right that you should impose your views on others?  I think not.  There's no obligation to read and reply to every post so why not just ignore the posts that you know that you will not like?

As Heather has said this issue was highlighted on the IHDG so it's not as though people are actively 'trawling' the net for something negative to post. 

Without the dreadful Yahoo group being hightlighted on the forums those evil excuses for human beings may not have been exposed for child abuse.  It was only through the outcry against their abuse against animals that they were investigated in the first place.  Should we close our eyes to everything that we don't like?  If only it were that simple.

[Heather]

I would like to thank the many members who have emailed and pm'd me in support, and expressing their shock and anger at my being attacked in this way on my own forum. In fact, I have literally been overwhelmed by the level of support this time, more than any other, to the point that I am having trouble keeping up with thankyou replies, hence this post.

But there does seem to be a small element in the membership, who seek every opportunity to try to discredit me, and I do not know what I have done to them to deserve it. It was an EE member who drew the attention of the trainer I had criticised in the last furore, to the discussions here, a 'mole' in other words, and not nice to think we have such a person in our midst. Why not pm me with their objections instead of creeping off to 'report' me, like a teenage sneak at school. :( ??

My only 'crime', as I see it, is to dare to stand up for the horse. If that is the only crime I ever have to admit to, when I come to face my Maker, then I will not be ashamed to own up.

Heather