You are on a roll! :lol:
[QUOTE=RBABKA;8770068]
I also have a problem [/QUOTE]
I concur.
Wait, was that DeDoose tool or DeLoose Stool?
Signed,
DeNeandertological Queen.
I thought it was just too much of DeBooze.
[QUOTE=RBABKA;8770068]
I am looking up equine case law as well but I absolutely agree with your insurance resolution . I just wondered if everybody felt the same or do nothing and chaulk it up to bad luck.As far terminology , what terms. As far the deontological point of view , I studied and agree with Kant and the CI and too bad if you do not agree.I also have a problem with walking horse industry and the abuses adjudicated in court, which also will be studied and the racing industry also. I do not know you and I do not care to, the research will continue from a cross section of this country. As far as funding goes that will be disclosed when published. You guys are a rough crowd but it is okay as a veteran I have had to deal with worse.[/QUOTE]
And what the heck does all this have to do with finding an obscure trainer on an obscure COTH thread from 2009?
Conclusion: People are strange…except for Silverbridge. Clearly Silverbridge is awesome!
Ha, many of us, me included, actually ARE research scientists, that have real degrees and publish in real journals
If you do research (esp with a published result) are you not supposed to notify subjects and get written consent? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I seriously doubt this poster is for real, but still
Perhaps RBABKA is an amateur trying to pass as a professional.
[QUOTE=SillyHorse;8770409]
Perhaps RBABKA is an amateur trying to pass as a professional.[/QUOTE]
Presuming the username is the poster’s name, they’re not an active USEF member anyway, so like the status of the trainer in question on this 7 (
) year old thread, it’s a rather moot point.
[QUOTE=RBABKA;8770068]
I am looking up equine case law as well but I absolutely agree with your insurance resolution . I just wondered if everybody felt the same or do nothing and chaulk it up to bad luck.As far terminology , what terms. As far the deontological point of view , I studied and agree with Kant and the CI and too bad if you do not agree.I also have a problem with walking horse industry and the abuses adjudicated in court, which also will be studied and the racing industry also. I do not know you and I do not care to, the research will continue from a cross section of this country. As far as funding goes that will be disclosed when published. You guys are a rough crowd but it is okay as a veteran I have had to deal with worse.[/QUOTE]
You are missing my point. You do not have a research project here. Because you are trying to use academic language, but failing so badly, you make yourself look incompetent and a bit crazy, and people are laughing at you.
On the other hand, if what you are interested in is how people respond to moral or ethical dilemmas where the answer isn’t clear, then that is one of the specialties of COTH. People are always writing in to ask “I’m not sure what to do in this situation,” and getting advice. If you want to understand the general consensus of COTH, then you just need to read a couple hundred of those sorts of threads, and draw your own conclusions.
Your point on insurance could be phrased as one such question. “If you had a horse that was valuable enough to insure, and the barn owner caused his death, what would you do? Would you contact the insurance agency to pay up, would you take revenge on the barn owner by burning down his house, or would you just do nothing?”
Can you see how this is a ridiculous question, because there is only one answer that makes sense?
SilverBridge…please I implore you …take this poster to task! She/he is so tedious and with so little entertaining value. Have at it, Maestro!!
I can’t believe you guys have been keeping this thread to yourselves.
[QUOTE=SillyHorse;8770409]
Perhaps RBABKA is an amateur trying to pass as a professional.[/QUOTE]
…trying to pass as a human being. I say bot. I think we should research him/her/it. :lol::lol:
[QUOTE=DoubleTwistedWire;8770646]
Presuming the username is the poster’s name, they’re not an active USEF member anyway, so like the status of the trainer in question on this 7 ( ) year old thread, it’s a rather moot point.[/QUOTE]
I meant a professional research scientist.
RBABKA just received internet privileges and a day pass. Let’s go easy on her; this is part of her treatment plan.
LOL
Thanks for the day off. I had to turn a stupid old lady in for tying her horse to a mail box. Anyway, as i explored the GDP of the industry in the US,the tax codes for hobby farms are changing. More audits. Losses of the horses are being more restricted.More audits. This will be added as well to study. According to friends of mine the IRS is focusing on this business and charities and are being checked more now. All the organizations will be interviewed for opinions and I do not like it either. So I can look at leadership,ethics,IRS issues hobby vs a real business.
[QUOTE=Highflyer;8761481]
It looks like she joined as an amateur/ life member in 1994 and hasn’t updated her status since then. [/QUOTE]
USEF sends out annual verify/update info requests to all members, so MG has, and does, have the opportunity to correct the record at any time if she wants.
[QUOTE=Scribbler;8769955]
RBAKA, I don’t know what, if any, your academic background is…you can’t go around randomly dropping terms from critical theory, philosophy, and social science into one big word salad, and expect us to take you seriously. [/QUOTE]
Clearly English is not RBAKA’s first language. Some of the words he/she used have different common-usage meanings than what he/she is trying to convey.
Use these translations and the posts make a LITTLE bit more sense.
For example…
Neanderthal: coarse, or crude
Bigot: opinionated, or extremist
I know it takes away from the entertainment value of RBAKA’s post, but it makes them a little bit easier to understand. 
[QUOTE=Mardi;8771199]
Clearly English is not RBAKA’s first language. Some of the words he/she used have different common-usage meanings than what he/she is trying to convey.
Use these translations and the posts make a LITTLE bit more sense.
For example…
Neanderthal: coarse, or crude
Bigot: opinionated, or extremist
I know it takes away from the entertainment value of RBAKA’s post, but it makes them a little bit easier to understand. :)[/QUOTE]
You’re right, there is definitely an English as a Second Language issue here. But there’s no basic logic behind what RBAKA is saying. And when s/he uses academic or philosophical terms, which have more defined meanings across different languages, s/he is using them incorrectly. And the pose of being a “researcher” is totally empty.
OK, I have a pet peeve against people using academic language and the pose of being a scholar to try to muddle and intimidate, which is the case here (it’s not very effective, but that’s the intent). But yeah, taking it down in this case is kind of shooting fish in a barrel and I should desist.
