Gary_Miller wrote:
You asked I responded. So I assume you have attended a NB clinic and taken AFA tests. I suggested this as part of continueing education.

Phil Armitage wrote: Your response was weak and had no relivence.Phil Armitage wrote: No there has been no clinics in my area yet. However, I have read all there is on the EDSS web site. I comprehend and grasp things pretty well. I feel I have a good understanding of the principle. The trim I do is really close to the principle and I have applied some shoes using the guidelines on the EDSS site. I sure I don't know it all but I know enough to make my own dicission. NB is just another tool in my tool box.Phil Armitage wrote: No, If I had you would see intials next to my name. I have however proticipated in a test as a scripe for a examiner. As well as read the material need to know what it takes to pass the test. Rest assured when I take the test I will pass it the first time around. The whole key is to test to the standard. No matter what your way of shoeing is everyday.Phil Armitage wrote: CE is up to the individual. If they want to learn the EDSS system then let them attend a clinic by EDSS. I'm sure the AFA would not object to the EDSS folks posting thier up coming clinics on the AFA clinic calander.


Gary

Ron, I was out walking the dogs earlier and found what looked to be a spine and thought I would see if it was yours. Ron. I was recently informed that you have, under the guise of journalistic ethics, or integrity, lodged a formal complaint with the AFA against Danvers Child, resulting in a gag order, with penalty, should Danvers post anything that could be perceived as anti Rick or Ron. Do you plan to lodge complaints against every AFA member who voices opposition? Is this indicative of the “Rick and Ron” leadership style? You have lost any and all credibility with me, and I pray, for the sake of the AFA, with every person who has a vote. Riddle: What does Ron K and a Disney Cartoon without Mickey have in common? Answer. No character.

Matt,



Eliminating the Mickey Mouse can you ellaborate with the actual details so the rest of us can understand your statements better ?

What did Danvers alledgedly do to have an action of any form taken against him ?

What was alledgedly done to make Ron feel any action on his part was necessary to be initiated ?

I sure would be interested in hearing both sides of the story.

I am sure Ron will explain his reasons but since you brought it up can you follow through with all the details as you have learned them ?
Being a man of integrity and a person who put so much work into the AFA magazine, I believe you, of all folks, would want both sides of this layed out for all interested parties to read.


I personally am getting to a point where I would like to see all the candidates put on boxing gloves and go toe to toe. Who ever is left standing will be elected to office.

At least the injuries would be honest and the results would be undisputable.

Being a person who strongly believes negativity begats negativity and positive begats positive, I try to encourage folks on a regular basis for making an effort to keep things moving in a positive direction.

I am not a Pollyanna, but I have a strong faith that deep down inside most folks want to accomplish things for the right reasons.
But even I have limitations.

So I suggest everyone meet in an agreeable place in the USA,and duke it out for the right to run for and be elected for an office in the AFA.
"Oh that won't work because it is apparent no one can agree to even disagree."

How can something so important turn into the Hatfields and McCoys ?

Matt Gillis wrote: First of all you should know that it was Danvers who talked Rick into staying on as a member of the AFA . . . right here on these boards. Ya see Rick was ready to throw in the towel when ol’ Danvers told him to "Suck it up." Therefore, it would be totally illogical for Danvers to say anything anti-Rick. What has happened is that Danvers has engaged in a lot of constructive arguments with Rick and Ron. If anything he has bolstered their campaign by keeping the focus on their platform and providing them with intelligent arguments and a sounding board for their ideas.

OTOH, since Danvers is also the EDITOR of Professional farrier magazine, he is ethically required to maintain journalistic neutrality. Considering the AFA’s history with the previous editor, they should be concerned that Professional Farrier Magazine not suffer AGAIN from the appearance of a lack of journalistic integrity. That concern is NOT a reflection on Danvers' character or integrity. To suggest that it is . . . well that’s just a plain ****** suggestion and one would have to be just plain ****** to believe it. However, the AFA must take precautions in order to preserve the TRUST of the membership in the wake of the difficulties with I&A.

Matt, It seems that you have a HUIGE problem with the idea that AFA should require the editor of THEIR Professional Farrier magazine to maintain a position of neutrality regarding candidates for election. Weren’t you the one that refused to give Dave Ferguson a chance to read and respond to Duckett’s letter to Professional Farrier last year until AFTER it was already published? Wasn’t that action the reason that I&A was given a policy from the AFA that all letters to the magazine would in the future be published in the same issue alongside a response to that letter? Wasn’t it I&A’s REFUSAL to comply with that policy the reason that Danvers is now the editor of Professional Farrier? Maybe it is YOUR credibility, ethics, character, and spine we should be calling into question.


Someone please pass the popcorn . . .

Good morning and merry Christmas to all. The issue here is the methods by which Ron K. conducts his campaign, and the resulting gag order placed against Danvers Child by the executive committee in response to Ron’s formal complaint. I will, however allow myself to be led down this, somewhat off the subject, path for the sake of history or background. Great posts Bruce and Tom, I expected nothing less. Perhaps if my dog were as big as that thing that’s got you pinned on the couch Tom, we would have drug the spine home. Wow, what a big tangled mess! I will tell you that I don’t mind having my integrity questioned one bit. People can only make judgments based on the information that’s given them. My stint as a “journalist” is still new and I am still learning. I sleep good at night and my motivation for everything I write is love of this trade, the horse, and the American Farriers Association. I am confident that if you were to read every page produced for the Professional Farrier magazine during my 18 months as co editor,( as you know, my wife Laura is the real “editor”) you would find nothing I wrote to be questionable, in its bias, when it comes to politics. There were occasions, I believe 4, or 5, in which members of the AFA submitted letters to the editor that were opinion pieces. It was the letters to the editor that led Dave Ferguson to take action against the AFA’s, at the time, FREE “slick rag”. We only wished to protect and provide members of the AFA with a place to voice their concerns, HONEST! This all started because, in my humble opinion, Dave F. needed a place to hide when the heat got turned up and he found his back against the wall of accountability. The letters to the editor were far more scathing and antagonistic during Mr. Trnka’s administration. Craig chose to face his detractors while Dave on the other hand scrambled for the back door, and a place to hide. If the previous editor of the mag, me and Laura, were the problem, why is Scott Davidson the one who has been targeted? Scott Davidson’s legendary, in your face demeanor made him an easy target to demonize for an AFA office under fire. A convenient distraction, and now a campaign issue to demagogue for two individuals with a limited platform.
Ron’s last straw; my introduction to Ron was in an article written and submitted by R.T. and Bunny Goodrich following the Katrina disaster. “The Louisiana Horse rescue” The article was laced with criticism of Ron’s leadership, shoeing skills, integrity and motivation. I fought hard to persuade Bunny and R.T. to provide an article that excluded their harsh criticism of Ron’s behavior and personality. I wanted a story about the heroic efforts made to help people and horses made by Farriers. In the end neither Bunny nor R.T. was happy with the finished article. I was trying my best to apply some journalistic ethics. Perhaps if people were allowed to see the real Ron back then we would not be faced with the possibility of having such a dishonest and politically motivated individual at the helm of the association that has meant so much to so many in the equine community. Since then I have had numerous conversations with Ron, he has twisted nearly everything I have said for political advantage. Ron’s misleading time line is my primary example. Ron can point to “doc-uments” all he wants, but a skillful demagogue can twist and manipulate anything to his advantage. Evil men have used Holy Scripture for personal gain for centuries, so Ron’s perversion of some Emails to bolster his campaign does not impress me. I have been very quiet about all this for a long time, so it may take some time to recount with due justice. Later, Merry Christmas

Good afternoon Rick. Your response makes me smile because it is quintessential Burten and, I would be sad had you not responded with such bulldog like fervor. Say it’s not so Rick, do you mean to tell me that all anyone had to do to quiet you was write something you regarded as contemptible? I’ll need to see it before I believe it. In regard to my comments being baseless, they are not. The basis for my inference is that had public awareness of Ron’s poor character been raised earlier, perhaps someone of good character would have stepped up to prevent, or at least hinder his efforts to run for office. Perhaps I should have done so when Ron informed me, at the mid year meeting, that he would sue the AFA if they did not allow him to run for office when faced with the CJF requirement. Now I think that a candidate who threatens to sue the organization he proclaims to want to help lead, because he is unqualified, is truly contemptible! Rick, I never said Ron misquoted me. I said that Ron has routinely twisted things I have told him to gain political advantage. I will provide details as time permits. As to my demagoguery, I am not running for office, I have nothing to gain and nothing to lose. The issue at hand is the fact that Ron chose to file a complaint against Danvers, rather than to simply debate him. While it is true that Danvers is helping get the AFA’s Pro Farrier magazine completed, he is first and foremost an AFA member with considerable experience and knowledge in regards to the issues that affect the AFA and its membership. Ron is simply incapable of honest debate and has, as a result, resorted to cowering behind journalistic integrity. Ron used the timeline to present himself as being a champion of truth and a defender of the AFA, much as he is using the issue of journalistic integrity to avoid honest debate and again present himself as a moral authority. Maybe the transparency is working, because I see right through him. Had this been the bidding of “my master” I would gladly comply, as it would be my pleasure to do so, however, he is, as of now, unaware of these conversations. The attempt to discredit me using guilt by association has been duly noted, but you can’t blame this on Scott. Fact is, your junkyard dog like defense is on behalf of a man who is not suitable in any way, shape, or form, to act as a leader in any capacity; and, I hope that my posts will, for the benefit of farriers everywhere, illuminate this FACT!

Matt, first off welcome to the forum and thank you for stepping up and saying what I believe to be the truth. I met you once in RI at the precert. clinic and found you to be a very decent person and honest. My gut tells me your being honest and feel that you feel this is important enough to be said.

I can't think of a better location to post this than right here on this thread titled Transparency. What happened to Transparency Ron? Since Rick has decided to attach his candidacy to yours I also ask Rick what the hell happened to Transparency?

I think it is ridiculous to put a gag order on Danvers. Ron has dug up all kinds of information includeing private communications and posted it on this forum for all to see. However it seems he does not like haveing the same exposure done to him. What have you to say about this Ron? I am sure we are all ears.

Thanks Matt, your a good man. The dog finding the spine, now that is funny.

Tom B. did you read and comprehend what Matt said? Didnt appear that you did. Maybe you can plug that into a formula and figure it out.

You need to help me out Tom, where did Matt say Danvers should remain neutral? Didnt he say Ron requested the Gag order on Danvers? You know how I have a hard time understanding things, maybe you can sort it out for me.

Okay, I will go get some popcorn also.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!!!!

It looks as if the GOBN has found someone else to stir the pot since Danvers can no longer participate in the politics due to his responsabilty as editor.

I only wish that those running for office would step up to the plate and state their postions and proposals to the various topics that are being discussed. Instead of staying silent and sending others to work a smear campain for them. Which by the way is failing due to the lack of evidence and support in their statements.

Rick the only chokeing I am doing is from the hard laughter. Neutral or gag order who cares it stifle open communications. Your too funny.

Hi Gary. Its beginning to look a lot like Christmas, at least for me. Pass the spoon, I guess at age 45 I can now qualify as a good old boy. Regardless of Danvers position, I’m sure that if he wished to do any “pot stirring”, he would be able to do so on his own accord. Hey I thought the GOBN was comprised of the folks in power? Do I still get to be a member of the club, even if I let my AFA membership lapse for a time?
Phil. Thanks for the welcome! I remember the clinic in RI well, great time, no BS just people who want to shoe horses the best they can.

Lessee here..
sun up... check
preacher.... check
munchies... check
rope.... check
comfy chair... check
wooden box (reinforced for extra weight) .. check
hole dug.... check
fresh batch of crow pie for last meal... check

Uh-hem...
Oh Rick?
Would you like to confess anything before the (you know what) hits the fan?
You know... like any last words... anything like that?
Ron?
How about you?
You know that old addage... give 'em enough rope, etc, etc...
Your feet are goonna be about mmm... 3 inches is my guess... off the ground when that thing snaps tight.

Not really a soothsayer here... or even a Shaman... heck, I can't even read a clock real well, but...
gawd it's gotta be awful to have your death (figuratively speaking of course) knell foretold by someone with such little credibility as me.
Kinda makes me feel like the National Enquirer... you know... release credible information through in incredible source... (although I have been described as incredible before... female persuasion-wise).

Maybe one last conjugal visit?
You're goin' DOWN Baby... like the cheap w-h- ore you really are.
I can see your future as easy as I can see that nasty too on your red neck.

Well boys and girls, looks like we need another candidate.... but go ahead and keep tryin'... the deck chairs on your Titanic need rearranged anyway.

Merry Christmas to all;

Matt said a "gag order was placed against Danvers. (quote)

The issue here is the methods by which Ron K. conducts his campaign, and the resulting gag order placed against Danvers Child by the executive committee in response to Ron’s formal complaint.

Rick said, It was presented to the folks in power and it was agreed with by the folks in power, but a gag order had not (at this time) been placed on Danvers. (quote)

All that was requested was that Danvers remain politically neutral so long as he was editor of the PFM. And guess what? The EC and the ED agreed with him.

Do you folks realize the quandry this puts folks in. You have the McCoys on one side saying: my people don't fib or mislead.

You have the Hatfields on the other side of the fence saying: my people don't fib or mislead.

Mike Nolan, this is where you or someone on the EC or ED needs to step up and clarify on what was requested, how it was requested, and the action or responce of the EC/ED.

Either Matt is correct or Rick is correct.

Don't let this new problem blossum into another mud slinging event.


You can save lots of posts and misunderstandings by clearing this up.

Given the season and the day I am quite saddened that Mr. Gillis chose Christmas Eve and day to launch yet another of the on going attacks that all have the same theme. I am a bad man, I am unqualified, etc… This is supposed to be a season of charity and peace, but obviously the forces aligned against my candidacy have no charity and do not want anyone to have peace.

For the record I believe that who ever it was that informed Mr. Gillis of confidential personnel matters pending before or heard by the AFA EC is completely and totally void of all ethics and completely morally bankrupt. The reason that the law requires that those matters be handled privately is to insure the privacy of both the employee and the employer. Anyone calling for those laws to be violated for any reason is just as unethical or morally bankrupt.

In this case it is my opinion that someone has unscrupulously released information to Mr. Gillis because they knew him to have few ethics in this subject area and they wanted to start yet another scandal. I am sure whoever it is was aiming him at me, but unfortunately I fear that they are also going to be creating a larger problem for the AFA’s EC and BoD. After all the AFA is liable for the confidential handling of the matter and Mr. Child now has a legitimate claim against the AFA for this violation of his confidentiality. The thing that bothers me most in this is that Mr. Gillis, and his informant via him, claim so loudly to love the AFA and yet they work so hard to tear it apart with their apparently illegal and unethical behavior.

I have always held that personnel matters were subject to strict confidentiality and continue to do so. In that regard this is the last statement I will make on anything that may or may not have occurred regarding Mr. Child. I publicly state that I am sorry for Mr. Child that this matter was inappropriately shared with Mr. Gillis, he was owed confidentiality and he did not get it. Shame on those who did this, there is no credit in this disreputable act.

For the record I believe that Mr. Child is a gifted and talented writer and editor. I felt that loosing him 18 months ago was a loss to PFM and I feel today that his stepping back into his role as managing editor could be a great boon to PFM’s content. My personal feelings aside however, I also feel that anyone that enjoys employment by the AFA in any capacity has also by their choice to accept that employment made a choice to give up their right to try to affect the AFA via political speech. As a member I expect and in fact demand that our employees not involve themselves in the political matters of the AFA, their doing so is a slippery sloop that can only lead to more and more turmoil and damage to our association’s credibility. The conflict of interests that are caused in this area are large and dangerous. The political neutrality of the AFA’s staff, regular or contract, is something that must become an absolute.

As the Managing Editor of PFM Mr. Child is the de facto voice of the AFA. Just as the White House Press Secretary speaks with the voice of the President, Mr. Child now speaks with the voice of the AFA. As long as he is speaking with that voice it is my opinion that that voice must remain absolutely neutral in any matter affecting the AFA or its internal workings political or otherwise.

In the recent past we have seen first hand the kind of damaging speech can be undertaken by an editor and publish of our magazine when they do not believe that they have any ethical requirements on how they use our magazine to affect how the membership sees the issues that it faces. I&A’s handling of the Duckett/Ferguson controversy alone provides rich and ample example of how using a outside writer to attack someone that they do not approve of can be used effectively. Regardless of the facts at hand in the matter, Mr. Ferguson was damaged by their actions. That they keep trotting out their tried and true excuses and some people still accept them is a sad statement on the ethics of those that do.

In my opinion to under line how underhanded and unethical the prior publisher and his staff behaved in this regard was I must tell you of the exchange that I had with Mr. Gillis from April through September of this year. Mr. Gillis called me to solicit a letter to the editor decrying Mr. Ferguson’s now famous behavior and calling for his resignation or ouster. He told me that he liked the way I wrote about this matter here on horseshoes.com and wanted me to write something similar and as powerful. For my part I suggested strongly that Mr. Gillis write an article on the issue and that there was already sufficient information available in the public domain to actually do a very good and relevant investigative report. I also suggested to him that he interview Rick as a part of his investigation and I know that the two of them talked about the subject. While I did in fact write a letter to the editor, I withdrew it from publication because I just did not feel it was the right thing to do. Part of what upset me was that I&A was actively working to generate dirt on Mr. Ferguson, but that they did not have the courage or principles to develop the story on their own hook.

It was in fact I&A’s manipulative and unethical handling of the Duckett/Ferguson matter that lead the EC to establish a written editorial policy that would prevent I&A from ever again perverting their privilege of being the AFA’s voice into a tool to be used for the destruction of anyone’s character. That Mr. Gillis has chosen to come up on these forums and continue the attacks on my character just underlines the fact that he and “his master” will stop at nothing in their attempts silence anyone that might actually call them on their behavior and do so with actual facts. The facts listed in the I&A timeline speak for themselves. You may each draw your own conclusion on the issue. Obviously my opinion is there for all to see.

It is my opinion that when people slip the boundaries of ethics and are willing to do or say anything to damage anyone it is time for everyone to stand back and take notice. Have we as a profession and as an association become so self centered and morally bankrupt that anyone with a accusation or a bone to pick is given instant credibility? Are we now so morally imperiled that good deeds of the past are a shield against the bad deeds in the present? Are we no so myopic in our view of this association that any act claiming to be for the good of the association regardless of how spurious, unethical or illegal it may be is acceptable? Are we now so mixed up that because someone makes a statement about what should be a confidential matter that we are going to ignore our legal and ethical obligations to all of the parties and publish that information because someone is trying to gen up yet another destructive and unnecessary conflagration?

I certainly hope not and I hope that those of you that are tired of AFA politics as usual will finally step up and express your disgust for those that no long appear to know how to win without destroying the thing they claim to love and want to protect.

Ronald you can ignore me if you like and get a gag order on AFA employees. If your elected you will become an employee of the AFA and therefore fall under the same rules that you just preached about. That tells me you lack total commen sense. Transparency is great as long as if favors you and Rick, if it does not then everyone employed by the AFA needs to clam up or will you change the rules of the game to suit your self. The rules of the game will change so that you will always win. Take your ball and go home son, I am done playing your game and by your ****** ass rules.