tbloomer wrote:

I doubt there's an admin log in the statistic / logs menu in the administrator control panel. This is a mystery that we will never know the answers to!

My money is on Baron. I don't think he ever go over me and my uncle taking that chick with the aviators overseas for the weekend.

tbloomer wrote:So what? It is a venue for learning, for the exchange of ideas, for networking and if that is not good enough for you then that's just the way it is. And, considering your stated low opinion of the farrier profession and those who populate it, I really would not have expected any other response from you.

Eric Russell wrote:According to Steve, Baron is the only other person with censorship authority. It would be unusual for him to do something like that without an explanation, but the situation is very suspicious.

Rick Burten in gray

So what? It [The Hoofcare Summit] is a venue for learning, for the exchange of ideas, for networking and if that is not good enough for you then that's just the way it is.

If somebody tells a lie when they're supposed to be telling the truth, it don't make a damn if it's in a classroom or a barroom, their credibility is kaput. This ain't about NB, Duckett, Chapman or Lungwitz, it's about the premeditated DECEPTION inherent to doctoring a photo.

And, considering your stated low opinion of the farrier profession and those who populate it, I really would not have expected any other response from you.

I have the utmost respect for farriers - but, with a few exceptions, I ain't too high on owners, trainers or veterinarians.

Tom Stovall, CJF wrote:
What about farriers at the bar?

Rick Burten wrote:
Yabut, the part about doctoring photos. That just begs to lead to discussions like this. Be it fraud or fibbing or flubbing, the situation looks bad and has opened an avenue for attack.
This is a prime opportunity to self regulate ELPO and the Summit and bring a higher standard. This example may cause a few other power point files to be edited.
I don't have a horse in this race. I don't care about NB as a religion as some do (present corespondent not included), I know Gene and have studied and drank with him, I don't buy his products and I was shoeing horses like that before I ever heard of NB. He is a nice guy and it would be nice to see him rehabilitate himself.
I think it's a good time to use this as a benchmark to improve the whole industry, whichever denomination one adheres to.

Eric Russell in gray

What about farriers at the bar?

Farriers lie about lots of things that have no impact on how others shoe horses; however, whatever the venue, I wouldn't trust the word of a farrier who lied to me about a case history in order to pimp a protocol: Would you?

Farriers,

IMO some have missed the point.
Character is what should be in question here, not the offence.

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.

Now we have a second instance of question and again an admission and "explaination". Where I am from, this denotes a pattern of behavior.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

Respectfully,

reillyshoe wrote:
If as rick b points out no criminal offence has been made it wont go to the government courts. Frank Lessiter has obviously decided that the offence does not prevent him from booking the speaker again and in a free market frank can book whomever he wants. So I guess the matter will have to be judged by the "court of public opinion".

I wish the slide had not been altered but I know Gene and Cody personally and its my opinion that no harm was intended. So I consider the matter over. others do not and Gene and Cody have therefore done damage to their reputation and also to their point of view which is a big consequence that should serve to deter others from altering slides with tools such as photoshop. An apology and explanation was provided and I consider the matter closed.

Dances with Hooves wrote:I tried to get that to happen here by posting a poll. But SOMEBODY decided to censor the public opinion and erase the poll . . . and erase the only post in this thread that referenced the poll.

Brian Purrington wrote: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?Judge not lest ye be judged..............
Have you personally read and reviewed the the ruling and settlement?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.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.No, I can't. Present company included. At stake with whom? Certainly not the horse owners. And that's just one group of potentially/probably, many.Personally, I think that boat sailed long ago.Credibility with whom and for what reason(s)? Individually, as it affects our livelyhood, I agree.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?

Rick Burten wrote:The most important ones.

.

Gene's particular case aside, this brings up a potential stumbling block for ay of us who might use graphic representations in our presentations...

When you use diagrams or drawings (or as I often do, scaled mechanical drawings based on recorded or calculated measurements, then "sketchified" for appearance), everyone knows you're presenting an illustration. An image created to better convey the idea you were trying to get across.

Photographs have always been thought-of as documentation. Proof that something was the way you said it was. "Pictures don't lie", they used to say.

Then came Forrest Gump, and the line got seriously blurred. Now we can easily manipulate photographs to show whatever we want them to... And it's only natural that we'd use this ability to generate photo-based illustrations to reinforce what we're trying to say... Which can create a real problem if what we intended as an illustration is perceived as false documentation because it started out as a photo rather than pencil lead.

It's something we're going to have to be very careful about going forward.

.

We will not get to excited over here about it:confused:

Rick, I know where you are going with this. Do you really want to hash this out again? I have no reason to, nor did I alter, misrepresent or or mis state what happened on the day in virginia you reference. It was an unfortunate circumstance but it is what it is, was what it was.

In hind sight, a public forum was not the place to have that discussion. I am sorry for making that mistake in judgment and wish that the resulting loss of friendship had not happened. I consider you a good man, a good farrier and I considered you a good friend.

I have privy to the documentation.

I wasnt at the lecture, all I have to go on is the reports of others. That being said where there is smoke there is usually fire.

Agreed, everyone makes mistakes. Again Im not focusing on the offence.

Flattery won't get you anywhere with me.....

At stake with ourselves. The profession will destroy itself, the profession IS destroying itself.

I often wonder the same.

Credibilty as professionals among professionals across the board.

You are probably right.

This partuclar situation I cannot say but situations like it are going on every day in this profession. I think its time to make a stand.

Regards,