unbridled wrote:Of course you do.

Ben, I was tested by Andrew and he is as fair as they come.
The man has worked hard to get where he is and not without bumps in the road.
I admire his desire to run for the head office, knowing full well the **** he would have tossed at him.

Is he the man for the job ? History will let us know that.
But applaud the man foir stepping up to the plate.

If there are problems with his performance then it us the voters and the system that got him in office.

When you vote for name recognition that is what you get.

In the future we need more political forums and platforms presented to us, the members.
If folks don't want to participate (as Andrew, throughout the process, his public participation was so minimal I can only recal one time I read something from him)
then don't vote for them. Flat and simple.

Don't be so quick to blame the messenger when the message wasn't read properly or delivered properly.

Demand as members to have more public forums with the candidates.

My 2 cents worth

Rick Burten wrote:
Look at the portfolio of websites of iHorseshoe and equidiesis versus www.kramedjian.com

Who would you rather do work for you?

vthorseshoe wrote:
Well Bruce you summed up what I meant. I don't question Andrew's desire, ability, or fairness. But his action and reactions so far have me wondering. why put out the blog instead of getting the web site up with the membrs section active. This gives him control of what's put out and who can answer. That doesn't look good. Just my observation.

Also I did say I hope he succeeds, but's he's now in an uphill battle, he's going to need to be strong and resiliant cause he's going to get buffeted all the way.

Susan and Rick,

You both are engaging in exactly what has been described as the root of the problem on this board.

How can either of you preach or dispute when you are doing exactly the kind of thing that makes the public and farriers bored or tired of reading the threads.

Me thinks someone is speaking out of the side of their mouths at this moment.

Your personal disputes should be for private e-mails.

You both have stature and are looked up to by many of us.
Can't you see how you are both lowering the very standards you seek ?

my 2 cents worth

Bruce,

I posed a simple, straight forward business question in response to Rick's previous posting. How is that so mis-construed by you as "talking out of the side of one's mouth"? The AFA or any organization should be proud to choose the best supplier for their services and public image.

unbridled wrote:
Big deal. You have missed or ignored the point. And, Mr. Kramedjian has on numerous occasions spoken about his web site and why it looks the way it does.

Besides, because you apparently have failed to read for content in context, I am going to reiterate the following.
Rick Burten wrote:
Now, perhaps you understand? Put another way, the IT committee was responsible for the 'back side" stuff with the web site, not the "front side" stuff.

Now, having had occasion to listen to you talk about computers, computer savvy, etc, I am under the impression/understanding that you well know exactly what I mean. Is my impression/understanding incorrect?

By the way, I see that you(or whom ever it is that is the Moderator for Andrew's blog) have not allowed the comments I made, to be posted. And you come here and complain about the Site Administrator and Moderators? Talk about disingenuous!

Well, I'll tell you what. I'm going to post, right here and now, the comments I submitted to Andrew's blog. Perhaps then you'll be good enough to explain why they got axed. And for the record, I used my full, real name, not some anonymous screen name. See, I take and accept responsibility for what I write, say and do.

I said:

"The color scheme is a bit detracting, especially when trying to see/read the mission statement.

Though the layout has changed, the content seems to be much the same as the old web site.

With the old web site, the AFA owned all the content,including photos.

Now it would appear that Equidesis/ihorseshoe owns it. What's up with that?

Why, when I right click on the photo of the shod hoof, does this message appear " (copyright)April Raine|EquiDesis - all rights reserved" ? Especially when on the bottom right of the photo it says "Photo courtesy Jim Foy CJF".

When can we expect the rest of the links to become active?

What more are we(the AFA) getting for our money than we had before when we owned all the content and the web site?"

And your reply as to why this was not posted on the blog is......?

Your negativity, mud-slinging and ridiculous arguments over symantecs and personalities make the wholle of farriers look foolish to the horse-owning public. The farrier industry has image problems as it is and this forum contributes to the poor light farriers are held in by most of the equine industry. Again, sling your mud face-to-face or in private and stop presenting yourselves like *****s. Perception matters in the equine industry, if you'd step up to the plate and embrace your position as the foundation to the multi-billion dollar horse industry you'd all be so busy and making so much money that you wouldn't have time for the garbage you spew on this site for the whole world to see. And, oh by the way, don't blink or this post will be removed by the subjective administrators/moderators of horseshoes.com

Re: Spinoff: Re: the Political Forum

---

Rick,

You are in a state of delusion if you think I speak for anyone other than myself.
06-29-2008 01:11 PM

Re: Spinoff: Re: the Political Forum

---

Andrew can speak for himself, and Rick, you know where to reach him.

I have my own opinions about the farrier and horse industries and as you can read I liberally share them for the betterment of horses, farriers and owners.


Where is the question in this bantering. ?

Rick is also as much at fault for continueing to revamp.

Who is right ?
Frankly who cares but you two.,
Is it questions we see or is it verbal attacks back and forth ?
Who is going to get the solid ground ?
That is what I see, perhaps other may see something else.

my 2 cents worth :confused:

vthorseshoe wrote:
Sorry Bruce but I don't see it that way. Allegations and ad hominum remarks have been made and I will respond to them.

Fortunately, the AFA and its surrogates do not get to control what I say, when I say it or where I say it. On these forums, that absolute right is reserved to our leader, The Red Baron.

First, I am defrocked. next, I will dispute with facts and the truth. And as we all know, the truth is an absolute defense.

Speaking only for myself, you know that is not true of me.

Bruce, this isn't personal for me, its more like, entertainment.

I am the first to admit that I have feet of clay...

Always appreciated, considered and often, implemented by me.

"Blessed be the Peacemakers...."

However, my own compass reads "Si vis Pacem, Para Bellum". And I follow the course it sets.

Sigh... Rick started this thread by asking specific questions. Whether they were good or not isn't my concern. I just want to see the thread stay (sort of) on topic. No one has answered, or attempted to answer those questions. Posing another question (or questions) doesn't qualify as addressing the original questions. That's just a tactic to take the thread on a different tangent.

So why not drop all the intervening "noise" and focus back on answering/discussing the original questions.

Baron

ALWAYS THE TRUE STATESMAN !
Honesty and Valore before glory.

But remember civility and tempering brings in the masses with an open ear.

Not to be ,mistaken as foregoing what I said to Ms. kane.
She also has standards and business savy above many.

So I re-iterate,
civility and tempering brings in the masses with an open ear.

My 2 cents worth

Cyber Farrier wrote:
Precisely.

So, to get us back on topic, here is a recap of my original questions:

"My questions are:

How is the format 'easier'

Why could this not have been accomplished using the old web site?

Who owns the web site and its content?

If the answer is, "The AFA", then why is everything copyrighted to April Raines|EquiDesis?

Why, if we now have "people who are on the ball running it and working it" were they not doing the same with the old Web site?

How much did and will it cost the AFA for this service?

Has a written contract between the parties been signed and ratified by the BOD?

If so, when was this done? If not, why not? Especially considering the brouhaha and vitriol that surrounded the question of contracts with the outside/former IT consultants.

When will the rest of the links be up and running?

Are there ever going to be non-members open forums as there was until late in the game, with the old web site?

Why was this not accomplished with the IT committee months, if not years ago?

Shouldn't the new web site have been fully ready to be 'rolled out', including testing it, before it was put online?

How does the AFA leadership justify/explain the huge amount of money and volunteer hours that were spent upgrading, updating and moving the old web site to a new location, giving "ownership" to the AFA, and then trashing it(well, sort of, since its pretty much the same stuff as was on the other web site, dressed up and packaged a bit differently) and again having to spend more money to get what it now has?

Other than the updated 'look' what is so new, improved or different about the new web site?"

Rick Burten wrote:I think it is laid out a little easier to navigate. Topics are plainly stated in a row with drop down menus.. I think it is easier to navigate and find what you wantSometimes you have to throw the steel in the dirt and start with a new piece of barstockI think a redhead and that scares me enough to not touch that topicI think Conan the Barbarian had that question posed to him once... "Conan, what are the best things in life?" He could have answer with the same answer for this question... power, command and controlI think the same reason I pull off someone elses old shoes and don't reset them, I put my own shoes on...I bet not as much as it is truly worth!probably but I don't knowdon't knowFeel pretty confident in answering this one though... soon, soon is the answer, not when I will answerWhy would we need non members in the AFA website....? We have horseshoes.comdifferent committee, different leadership, different agenda, different priorities?I would rather have a partially completed but functional website, partially completed but functional shoe board and partially completed but fully functional death star than non at all, wait, that last one was just a movie.. hmmmTakes money to make money, money makes the world go round, money is power, money doesn't make you happy but sure does fund happiness... the last cliche is my own personal one... I give other's free choice to paraphraseThe navigation is clear and concise.. the programs are better displayed, other items are coming soon and look to be easily updated for future reference...
I am pretty happy with the site

Dang, I finally figured out how to quote each line.... whew...

EDeSocio wrote:
OK. Question is why couldn't that be done with the other web site?

But Eric, in this case, the steel wasn't thrown in the dirt.

No guts, no glory. and no information

Then don't you think you should find out before responding?

So its more of the same as we've heard in the past. Fabulous!

So you don't want owners and others to come to the AFA web site inorder to interact with AFA farriers? Fair enough. I'm sure they will be quite happy to continue visiting us here at horseshoes.com. Evidently in your opinion, they really have no business on the AFA web site in the first place. I'm sure they will be heartened to hear that an AFA member feels that way. Makes me feel all warm and cuddly.

And what do we have to show for these differences? No newsletter, a late arriving lightweight magazine, an incompletely revamped website, little to no communication with our elected representatives, need I go on?

[quiote]I would rather have a partially completed but functional website, partially completed but functional shoe board and partially completed but fully functional death star than non at all, wait, that last one was just a movie.. hmmm[/quote]

OK, some folks are willing to settle for less. Good on you.

[quiote]The navigation is clear and concise.. the programs are better displayed, other items are coming soon and look to be easily updated for future reference...
I am pretty happy with the site[/quiote]

Like I said, some folks are willing to settle for less.

Good on you.

Rick Burten wrote:
Rick, personally I think this website is better.. looks better, easier to navigate and probably easier upkeep...

Well basically, they did away with the old website, throwing the steel in the dirt, and started with a new one... website/piece of steel

Actually that was an inside joke, when I got out of a bad relationship with a redhead, I was getting ready to fail a test and Danvers happened to be my tester, April was scribbing, the horse was a sorrel, I told Danvers that I might be in trouble here with two redheads within close proximity to my hammer and my thumb... knees a shaking, nails just don't stand still and the thumb is a bigger target... Those were just fears.. had no reflection on April.. I think she and Danvers are doing an outstanding job and I probably will be talking to them about doing a personal website for myself....
Rick, have you ever known me to speak outside of speculation?
But patience prevails.. I think they are getting the job done and look at what we have so far... a beautiful website... have faith... it wasn't a walk in the park that the new leadership was venturing into with the AFA... Things needed to be fixed.... fixing is in the works

errrrrrrrrt! Slap my face and call me willy... you got me on that one.. I was looking down the tunnel thinking I didn't want anti AFA bashers cluttering up the website... in our state association I kept trying to get an affiliate membership program for horse owners, trainers and vets so that everyone could communicate better... I totally didn't figure that part out... wasn't in the tunnel... so I correct myself in the order of flip flop.... I think that is a great idea.... vets, trainers, horse owners should have a place to communicate with the farriers, learn more so the horses benefit! By the way, I changed my ad from "Cocky, expensive and relative know it all" to "kinder/gentler, soft and cuddly type. Loves on horses before and after shoeing." How is that for an ad?
Revamping Rick, takes time.. Look how much better Danver's/Our/AFA magaizine is in this last issue compared to the first... it isn't an easy road... I wouldn't be able to do it.. He did it great and it is getting better... He is by the way, the most eloquent farrier! The news letter in my opinion is not as fulfilling as the Magazine.. I don't think that there is much in the news letter that isn't covered in the magazine...I vote to forgo the News letter and ad an extra page to the magazine.. kill two postage stamps with one mailing...
OK, some folks are willing to settle for less. Good on you.[/QUOTE]
Patience is a virtue
I don't think enjoying a better website is settling for less.. I don't think supporting the leadership right now is settling for less... I think the AFA was being driven into the mud and it is getting picked up, washed off and mended...
Weee