well, seeing as you’ve been backed into a corner, it’s no use beating a dead horse. Good luck with the AES, “Diane.”
6 Likes
I swear the album we had back in the day had this at a faster tempo. I am pretty sure it was a live recording from the Troubadour.
3 Likes
I am not Diane Carney. You have grossly misread my post.
I am flagging your post to send it to the mods for falsely accusing me of being Diane Carney.
In your post #434 you stated that you understood that everything I post DISAGREES with Diane Carney. Two minutes later you are accusing me of BEING Diane Carney.@blue_heron I should also mention that thread ruffled enough feathers for someone on HorseShow Diva to ask if anyone knew who the OP was in real life.
That’s also why we view those who play devils advocate with contempt. These people have threatened others in the industry. So to pretend to agree for arguments sake is just callous and stupid.
7 Likes
QFP
Unfortunately I’m all too familiar with the “pretend to defend” group…
I also haven’t deleted any posts, but it’s clear that facts aren’t very important here.
5 Likes
I’m very confused by someone actively supporting Robert Dover’s advocating for AES being offended by being likened to the founder. Especially someone who confusingly refers to themselves in the third person frequently and seemed to be doing so again in a now deleted post.
FWIW, I think it was a subject object problem in the writing, that happens when people are being overly complicated in their sentence construction.
That can happen when you–the general you–engage in strange, convoluted, circular arguments.
13 Likes
Oh I wasn’t saying you deleted posts. I’m just catching you up on threads that were started almost a year ago here.
5 Likes
I don’t think they actually support the position. I think they just like to play devils advocate and argue. Which as you said is gross.
7 Likes
It was a joke that didn’t work. Cest la vie.
@YankeeDuchess Sonce your argument has been thoroughly dismantled let me offer you this: I was falsely accused of retaliating inappropriately when a child hit me on a job. A person who didn’t like how I was leading the program told my upper that I had hurt the child. I had to write a testimony, and since the child was in no further danger, the stories were corroborated and I went back to my job. Had they chosen to terminate my employment then, they would have been right. The person who accused me had to be reported to the state.
there are consequences for people who make false accusations. But the bigger point is, innocent people don’t worry about whether a CHILD will lie about what did or didn’t happen to them. And people who don’t support pedophiles don’t argue the opposing side in ANY way.
11 Likes
@blue_heron I applaud your patience but many posters know what they know based on social media. They never bother to read the Safe Sport website.
7 Likes
Question: when a school teacher has been accused of abusing minors, is investigated by the teachers’ governing body, has the claims against them upheld, and is banned from teaching children, should that teacher be allowed to remain in the classroom until a formal appeal of the decision has taken place? And should be original verdict be kept secret so that parents are unaware there is a child predator working in their school system? Because, you know, we wouldn’t want to interfere with that teacher’s career, right?
17 Likes
I agree with you, I also agree with me :lol::lol:
5 Likes
Isn’t YankeeDuchess the 2nd or 3rd incarnation of a poster that was previously banned? For this type of behavior?
If I could think of the previous usernames, I would mention them, but I can’t remember.
You would hope someone would draw the line at advocating for child molesters, but nothing surprises me anymore. When it comes to anonymously posting online, some people feel that freedom removes all moral and ethical boundaries.
12 Likes
The post is not deleted. It was flagged as spam
when I edited to correct one instance of the spelling of Diane Carney’s name. Presumably it will resurface.
I am not Diane Carney. I am hugely offended at being accused of being her. Hugely. I am opposed to the motives of AES, which I interpret to be the undermining of SafeSport.
Here’s the gist of the longer post.
In Carney’s AES letter on the topic of this thread, the one “criticism” of the SS process was the statement “Contrary to what you may have heard, RM did not receive a hearing prior to the announcement of the ban.” (Paraphrasing)
I think that
1) This is, or might be, a true statement.
2) This statement is not a legitimate criticism
of SS.
I think that the respondent gets a 100% fair, impartial adjudication of the allegations in front of a retired judge, and therefore I think the SS process as a whole is completely fair to the respondent.
The ONLY point on which I disagree with the herd is that I view that impartial adjudication in front of the judge as occurring in arbitration, while the herd insists that the arbitrator presents a second shot, but that an initial impartial adjudication is already completed at the time that SS announces the ban.
Why does this matter?
1. According to my view, whatever huge condemnation of the pedophile is going to be unleashed, it is more appropriate to wait until 30 days after the announcement of the ban when the respondent has had his chance to defend himself in front of the retired judge. A formal hearing. I think that condemning Debbie McDonald for saying “He is innocent!” PRIOR to the conclusion of the arbitration is unwarranted. You may not want to keep an open mind until after the arbitration, but surely she has the right to. Various Olympic teammates of DM clicked “like” on a single specific FB post of RD. In that post, he said nothing that overtly undermined SS. His post mentioned one equestrian by name, and that was DM. He did not mention much less express support for RM or GM or any banned equestrians.
I have 1) DECLINED to express repugnance of 2) acclaimed non banned riders who CLICKED “like” on 3) one specific FB of RD. The FB post of RD did NOT even mention any banned equestrians by name. In terms of guilt by association, there are a lot of links to that chain.
2. Everyone, including me, wants to bat Diane Carney down. I can bat her down by saying, “Yeah, so? His hearing in front of a retired judge will happen within thirty days if he doesn’t ask for continuances”.
When the herd here and elsewhere keeps insisting that at the time of the announcement, the respondent has ALREADY received his 100% impartial adjudication, that ENABLES her statement that he has not yet received a hearing to SOUND like a criticism of SS, even though according to my understanding of the process is it NOT a valid criticism.
I think that DC may understand that the full fledged, 100% impartial adjudication is supposed to occur in the arbitration and that there is not supposed to be a hearing prior to the announcement. The reason she can make the statement “He has not yet received a hearing” SOUND like a criticism of SS when it is not, is because the condemnation of the pedophile 30 days prematurely makes it look like a formal hearing should already have taken place, but didn’t. Who do you think she is referring to when she says “Contrary to what you may have heard... “?
So
@ladyj79 , you’re a prof of English Lit? I could be wrong, but it’s not nearly as offensive as accusing you of being Diane Carney.
2 Likes
There are many names thrown about including alters of current members.
9 Likes
So now your accusing me of being Diane Carney was “a joke that didn’t work?
In what sense did it “not work”? It did not convince other posters that I was Diane Carney? It wasn’t funny?
You regretted it when I flagged it for the moderators?
I do not understand what point you are making about being falsely reported for “retaliating” (your word) against a child inappropriately.
I don’t support pedophiles. I do support SS. It is not clear to me that you fully understand my posts, because if you did you would realize that I am not supporting pedophiles in any way.
IMHO, no, and no.
In your scenario, should his wife be condemned as a supporter of pedophiles if she declines to denounce him or divorce him PRIOR to the conclusion of his formal appeal? Especially if the initial “charges deemed credible/ upheld was in-house in the school system, and the adjudicator at the appeal is a retired judge independent of the school?
1 Like
Thank you for confirming! That’s what I thought.
3 Likes
