Brian Purrington wrote:Farriers,
IMO some have missed the point.
Character is what should be in question here, not the offence.
Interesting. So, if someone knowingly and publicly mis-states or lies about facts of a situation and by so doing attempts to damage or in fact does damage the reputation and credibility of another, would you say that that individual's character, credibility and reputation should be called into question and his/her future involvements and statements discounted, disregarded and scoffed at?
A court of law has already ruled that Mr Ovnicek claimed information and intellectual property as his own when in fact it was not. Through his own admission. This means he commited an intellectual theft. This theft initially resulted in the financial and perceptual elevation of Gene and his company at the indirect cost of offended.
That ruling is public and in effect yet no one seems to think it is pertainant.
Yes, it is a civil matter and of no importance to most but the ruling clearly shows the CHARACTER of the offender. Ultimately the character of the man.
Judge not lest ye be judged..............
Have you personally read and reviewed the the ruling and settlement?
Now we have a second instance of question and again an admission and "explaination". Where I am from, this denotes a pattern of behavior.
Since there is no clear evidence that Gene did not attempt to inform the Summit participants regarding the alteration to the photograph and why, and since there is testimony form individuals who were present at that lecture that he did indeed make an attempt to notify the lecture attendees of the altered photo and why it was done, there does not seem to be a [alleged] pattern of behavior evident.
This fact alone inherently casts a shadow on the Mr Ovnicek who also presents himself as a professional, an educator, a certifying body head, a farrier, a collegue, a brother in the trade. Someone whom many may chose to use as a model for direction in thier profession.
Though your premise is (IMO, fatally)flawed, your conclusion does have some merit. Gene shot himself in the foot and though I don't believe the wound is anywhere near fatal, it will take him/perhaps has taken him some time and effort to recover.
As farriers we pride ourselves (or at least many say they do) in the friendship, brotherhood and kinship that this last free, unregulated trade has. (or should have) I personally can't think of a friend, a brother or kinsman I would want who would be dishonest or deceptive with me. Can you?
No, I can't. Present company included.

We have a huge responsibility to choose wisely the members, leaders, educators and experts of our profession. At the very least, those who we associate with and hold in high regard should be trustworthy and not of questionable character. Our professional future and the future of our profession is at stake.
At stake with whom? Certainly not the horse owners. And that's just one group of potentially/probably, many.
We are at a crucial juncture. Choices we make, educators and figureheads which we directly or indirectly chose will ultimately create both public and professional perception of farriers as a whole.
Personally, I think that boat sailed long ago.
Credibility is directly connected to character and ethics, without soild character and professional ethics we are all reduced to the lowest common denominator. I do believe we all want to have credibility.
Credibility with whom and for what reason(s)? Individually, as it affects our livelyhood, I agree.
I would hope that Mr Lessiter can see the position he is in and the power that he holds to make a difference for us all, furthermore I would encourage both he and Mr Ovnicek to participate in this discussion and present their own side of this situation.
I doubt that either gentleman will choose this venue to engage in such a discussion.
Just as a point of interest, what percentage of the estimated 30,000 +/- full and/or part time farriers in the United States or for that mattere, globally, do you think even know about this dust up and more importantly, even care?