Whoa There
Youh Lomi, Magister Campi
>Joyce Reynolds-Ward wrote:
>>CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT wrote:
>>>While that's not a bad idea with a horse that needs to listen more, a horse
>>>that isn't listening because he's anxious might just need boredom. It depends,
>>>and unless you've got some experience working with horses you won't find out
>>>which you need.
>>
>>Agreed. One of the reasons we lunge the rehabs and greenies at an
>>easy trot at Gregg's is (besides warming up backs), if you will, the
>>"boredom" factor. For example, my last ride on the Stomper mare, she
>>only got a couple of circles before I stopped and climbed up--by her
>>body language and quietness she showed me she had progressed past the
>>point where she needed it to settle her mind.
>>
>>*Some* horses need slow and boring to ease their anxieties. I've been
>>known to sing-song "boring, boring boooooring" to an anxious horse
>>while tacking up as a calming measure. Then again, I'm a firm
>>believer in using what *I* say to influence how I project myself to
>>the horse--and it's hard to be anything *but* calm and routine when
>>singing "boring" to the horse (and no, it has nothing to do with the
>>fact that the barn is located near the town of Boring in Oregon!).
>
>Well, here is where we disagree. I find riding a horse that has been bored into
>submission to be just one small step removed from riding a horse that has been
>beat into submission (killing the spirit).
Just how would one 'bore into submission' a creature designed
to mow lawn, play, "stand around looking stupid"[ ~TvG], sleep,
and repeat?
> I want life in my horses! I want a
>partner, I want to work together to achieve something fun. I want the horse
>*there* with me, working with me, happy to do what I suggest because it is
>equally enjoyable to the horse.
So you give them ten hectares apiece, yet group them up into
managed herds, provide freechoice forage both fresh and dried
as necessary, tested and supplemented in any ways indicated,
provide a surfeit of clean water, plain salt, mineral salt,
and supervise routine daily groomings and exercise, putting
the animal's needs ahead of your own in every way? Actions
do speak so much more loudly than words, even to those who
don't normally tend to use words at all.
> Bored horses are not (in my book) happy horses,
What's a 'bored' horse?
One who hasn't been out in enough space to stretch its legs
for days, weeks, or months at a time? One who hasn't had a
herd around it for most or all of its life? One lacking an
array of essential nutrients, driven to try to eat anything
in its vicinity? One that stands around doing nothing but
occasionally gets dragged into the service of vanity, to
be wrung out so that some human can 'have fun' showing
off? It's far more likely any or all of the above than
some cayuse going "oh this is just too dull and tedious"
and reflecting on times of greater excitement. I just
don't buy it.
I do suspect that what we're going on about here is the
bad habit of tiring horses out to force them to submit,
in the absense of more clear, direct signalling. Now
there's a looming mow of orchard grass looking to slide.
>they are resigned horses. If you like that, goody for you.
I don't see a horse doing a quiet jog along a fenceline
to be 'resigned' relative to, say, a dressage queen's
horse taking off with her as it pleases, do you?
>But I don't like
>that, and I don't teach people how to achieve that state with their horses.
>
>jc
Some jobs with horses require that they stand quietly
for as long as necessary when told to do so and until
told to do otherwise, move steadily in any gait for as
long as necessary when told to do so and until told to
do otherwise, and make transitions on the mere thought
processes of their riders from state to state.
They already know how to do this in herds, if raised
correctly, and are ready to acquire it even if not.
This is to entertain and not for those who want to be abused/harassed.
This is to encourage at most only lawful/legal and pragmatic actions.
This is to respond to/on a precedent topic not advertise commerce.
This is to expect only appropriate resource use in response.
This is to add that if you don't like that, well, tough shit.
This is Sheila Green in Freedom (as if it mattered).
John
Youh Lomi, Magister Campi <y00h...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:39156342...@news.nowonline.net...
> mag...@rahul.net wrote:
>
More of the usual flame wars that infest rec.equestrian but crossposted
into many other up till now civilised groups.
Whoever set up this crosspost trail obviously wants to either pollute the
other groups or is desperately trying to gain worldwide exposure for their
ego.
>
> This is to entertain and not for those who want to be abused/harassed.
> This is to encourage at most only lawful/legal and pragmatic actions.
> This is to respond to/on a precedent topic not advertise commerce.
> This is to expect only appropriate resource use in response.
So please do so by not crossposting into groups which have no relevance to
the content. If the rest of the world want to read you and your cronies
battering each other back and forth we would read rec.equestrian
> This is to add that if you don't like that, well, tough shit.
> This is Sheila Green in Freedom (as if it mattered).
Doesn't matter one bit - you and these crossposted threads have just
entered my killfile PLONK!
Helpful Hand
>...obviously wants to either pollute the
>other groups or is desperately trying to gain worldwide exposure for their
>ego... have just
>entered my ...
But enough about you, you are only the
subject in your own self-centered world.
Had you anything to say about horses?
They're the subject, which you'd know
were you to read the headers for the
names of the newsgroups to which you
happen to be posting.
Irrelevancies aside, self-centered folks
need to disabuse themselves of that act
before they can be any good for any
horses at all.
This is to entertain and not for those who want to be abused/harassed.
This is to encourage at most only lawful/legal and pragmatic actions.
This is to respond to/on a precedent topic not advertise commerce.
This is to expect only appropriate resource use in response.
Inquisitive Scrutiny
>... flame wars ...
There was nothing of the sort in the post to
which you followed up with your abuse of the
newsgroups, offtopic and inane as it was.
Why are you so afraid of honest discourse
that you'd scream fire in the newsgroups
(when your own neurons don't even seem
to be sparking)?
To correct this for you, I ask you if you
have ever overconfined a horse and then
attempted to accuse it of being bored.
Or have you ever even been near a horse?
mag...@rahul.net wrote:
James Johnson
not hide behind false e-mail addresses (apart from the sporger).
We do not want your crossposts, we are not interested in your petty
rivalries, we just want a newsgroup where we can share information, advice
and friendship. SO GET THE F*** OUT OF UK.REC.EQUESTRIAN.
John
James Johnson <Ja...@jgj.flyer.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8f40cf$drb$1...@supernews.com...
Thank you James
For the record I just added two more rec.eq names to my killfile
lisa smith
"Inquisitive Scrutiny" <ont...@all.times.yet> wrote in message
news:391574ad...@news.nowonline.net...
Youh Lomi, Magister Campi
"John" <jo...@ASboilerdoc.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Thank you James
Don't thank him, he had nothing to offer you.
Don't worry, though, I have horse-related information
in every article I post, though, so you could use that
as an example of how to post ontopic on newsgroups.
Hint: it's expected, rather like your interaction with
horses being based on social contexts that they can read.
>For the record I just added two more rec.eq names to my killfile
You figure somebody gives a rat's ass what you do here,
beyond wishing you had any ontopic information to offer?
Now that's the kind of conceit that makes no horse sense.
Youh Lomi, Magister Campi
>you started to come in
O MY GOD! YOU MEAN NEW PEOPLE POST TO NEWSGROUPS!?! HOW DARE THEY!!!!!
<snort>
Which is worse, 'lisa', me posting about horses to
horse newsgroups, or you putting leg chains on horses
and forcing them to work in the resultant pain?
>"Inquisitive Scrutiny" [wrote:]
James/John's New Best Friend
fallacy "James Johnson" <Ja...@jgj.flyer.co.uk> wrote:
>John is absolutely ...
Irrelevant. If you read your newusers information to
ascertain the meaning of "ontopic", your [sockpuppet]
'buddy' doesn't qualify, nor does your unqualified
opinion of him or anyone else.
Irrelevancies aside, the subject here is horses. They
do not deserved to be overconfined, then accused of the
indulgence in the bad habit of boredom only pertinent
to a few inappropriately-taught humans.
>right. UK.rec.equestrian is a friendly NG where people do
The subject isn't a newsgroup, either. What a shame
you have no fundamental comprehension of newsgroups,
else you'd understand why you should be on topic.
Further irrelevancies aside, the subject is horses.
They're those animals who deserve better than to be
stuck, in stalls, tiny pens, even muck, especially
if those thus sticking them later try to accuse
them of being 'lazy' in their work.
>not hide behind false e-mail addresses (apart from the sporger).
Inaccurate/inapplicable; fallacious regardless,
your misapprehensions of proponents aren't even
valid discourse much less ontopic or appropriate.
>We do not want
I don't have to give a shit what you or any of the
individual parasites infesting you may want, Pilgrim.
If you don't care enough about it to manage it on
your own, for yourself, without the dishonest attempt
to pretend that you speak for others [are you the
Queen, using that royal 'we'?], don't imagine I
should take over attempting to manage it for
you, because no one owes you that at all.
Yet more of your irrelevancies aside, the subject is
still horses. Perhaps you simply can't care enough
about them to post articles about them, because you
don't even care enough about yourself to manage
yourself with any semblance of decency/decorum.
Your proclivity to piss on newsgroups as if
you could claim them for territory would be
more appropriate on a 'dog' newsgroup, eh?
>your crossposts, we are not
I don't have to give a shit what you or any of the
individual parasites infesting you may be, Pilgrim.
If you don't care enough about it to manage it on
your own, for yourself, without the dishonest attempt
to pretend that you speak for others [are you the
Queen, using that royal 'we'?], don't imagine I
should take over attempting to manage it for
you, because no one owes you that at all.
Yet more of your irrelevancies aside, the subject is
still horses. I have mentioned that it is illusory
to tell oneself that others would be waiting to take
on any horses you should manage to make the mistake
of damaging beyond useability. Are you emotionally
invested in that belief, that you'd be so bothered?
>interested in your petty
>rivalries, we just want
I don't have to give a shit what you or any of the
individual parasites infesting you may want, Pilgrim.
If you don't care enough about it to manage it on
your own, for yourself, without the dishonest attempt
to pretend that you speak for others [are you the
Queen, using that royal 'we'?], don't imagine I
should take over attempting to manage it for
you, because no one owes you that at all.
Yet more of your irrelevancies aside, the subject is
still horses. I've been posting about experiences in
studying equestrian instruction systems. Does that
bother you so very much that you'd imagine you should
post to all the world about your offtopic distress?
I suspect you mayn't have sufficient equanimy and
self-assurance to work well around horses, thus.
>a newsgroup where we can share information, advice
You don't seem to offer any of either in the posts
of yours that I've read so far.
>and friendship.
You're so desperate for friends that you'd imagine
you'd need to fight for them on usenet? How sad.
I think you need to work on your herd dynamics,
understanding that this is one where others can
come and go without your permission, so that
you can someday sense those of horses.
>SO GET THE F*** OUT OF UK.REC.EQUESTRIAN.
Did you mean FUCK? is that something else you're
so desperate to find in newsgroups that you just
can't even recall what they're really all about?
Have any idea what horses are really all about?
Failing that, why can't you and your comember
in your mutual admiration society just go find
yourselves a room and have at it, as long as
you obviously couldn't spook the horses?
The Suehelda Grudge Correction Task Force
>Be ready to add lots of names to your killfile.
What a surprise <gasp> not everyone will want to
read everything which is posted to newsgroups.
Some erroneously imagine that their reading habits
and/or lack of responsible management thereof would
somehow be of grandeureous import to others.
Did Sue get some help figuring all that out? Can
she now get some help figuring out how to post
ontopic, honest information, rather than her
typical misinformed fallacious blather?
Will she ever take proper care of any
horses, rather than neglect them?
> Sheila Green in Freedom, Pa.
>is a well-known (and insane)
Sue's blather aside, the fact remains that
no one who has actually met me has ever tried
to claim I were insane, and I know some fully
qualified medical practitioners who like me
just fine as I am. (I've been steadily and
productively employed by others, to their
documented approval, for decades solid,
while Sue isn't able to hold a job, or
even manage her own health properly,
confusing candy and alcohol for good
food and water)
The only ones who have tried to make such a
claim are those who have =not= met me, in
fact, and who have also shown an inability
to read what I write for actual comprehension.
Can't you tell just what that indicates?
>troll who has infested various groups for years.
Sue either doesn't understand the meanings of
the words she tries to use, or else she makes
her false claims out of some spiteful form of
compulsion to try to harm others.
>Sadly mentally ill, she goes in posting frenzies, mutating into a wild variety
I use pen names and their fields editorially.
This is but one of many concepts which eludes
Sue Bishop, but then again she can't even tell
that used aquarium water isn't appropriate for
watering horses without any other option.
>of aliases. Just bounce her posts back to her ISP. Most of the ISPs in the
>US have kicked her off at least once...
>Sue
This statement is a lie. I have =never= been
'kicked off' any ISP whatsoever, although Sue
Bishop has repeatedly tried to censor my voice.
Why is she so defensive? I don't call her nuts,
but her horses have foot disease from deep mud,
no exercise whatsoever, no purpose to serve any
interest beyond Sue's selfishness, and terrible
conditions of confinement and neglect, without
basic things such as proper water to drink.
She tries to call me crazy, but my horses
are healthy, serve the public, and live
in conditions tremendously cleaner and
better than Sue's ever see. A horse
would take my mentality over hers
any time it were given the option.
So some say I'm crazy. Besides the fact
that the ones doing so are pretending to
be qualified to assess medical conditions
and make diagnoses, while unqualified (a
type of behavior one might be hard pressed
to designate as sane or honest itself), I
needn't merely consider the source(s).
If insanity be unwillingness to overlook,
much less condone, willful infliction of
needless pain on those vulnerable and
unable to escape it, I'll choose it.
If being nuts were an eagerness to expose
inadequate paradigms and substitute those
of greater benefit to horses, I'll be
squirrel-fodder with the best of them.
If lunacy were what causes me to do things
like stepping between a horse-whipping loser
and his equine victim, or pointing out that
harsh bitting is no less abusive, then I'll
gladly live with being labeled as such.
James & John Mutual Admiration Society Nonmember And Proud Of It
"John" <jo...@ASboilerdoc.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Thank you James
Don't thank him, he had nothing to offer you.
Don't worry, though, I have horse-related information
in every article I post, though, so you could use that
as an example of how to post ontopic on newsgroups.
Hint: it's expected, rather like your interaction with
horses being based on social contexts that they can read.
>For the record I just added two more rec.eq names to my killfile
You figure somebody gives a rat's ass what you do here,
beyond wishing you had any ontopic information to offer?
Now that's the kind of conceit that makes no horse sense.
"John" <jo...@ASboilerdoc.karoo.co.uk> wrote:
>... flame wars ...
mag...@rahul.net wrote:
Jet City
offtopic and confused, usenet abuser R Bishop wrote:
> >Be ready to add lots of names to your killfile.
> Some erroneously imagine that their reading habits
> and/or lack of responsible management thereof would
> somehow be of grandeureous import to others.
Imagine that!
Some would call that a form of insanity in and of itself.
> Did Sue get some help figuring all that out?
No doubt, since she can't figure out the simplest of things on her own.
She especially can't figure out that newbies shouldn't raise foals, let
alone out of the crippled nag mares that Sue keeps trying to pawn off on
them.
> Sue's blather aside, the fact remains that
> no one who has actually met me has ever tried
> to claim I were insane
People who've met you in person deem you 'sane' (and friendly,
knowledgeable... etc) yet these uneducated/unqualified "experts" figure they
can diagnose you? Over the 'net at that?
Some would call that a form of insanity in and of itself.
> while Sue isn't able to hold a job
with her attitude is it any wonder?
> I use pen names and their fields editorially.
Adding yet another dimension to your posts.
On a board that I've frequented for a few years, I sign all my posts
Jet(something clever, on-topic and perhaps referring to the person I'm
replying to here)City... I've only done that a few times on the NG's,
though.. too many others have been seen doing it, and I'd not want to be
called a "copycat"
> This is but one of many concepts which eludes
> Sue Bishop,
Small minds and all that.....
> but then again she can't even tell
> that used aquarium water isn't appropriate for
> watering horses without any other option.
I'd like to see her drink it, instead of foisting it off on her poor
crippled equines.
> >of aliases. Just bounce her posts back to her ISP. Most of the ISPs in
the
> >US have kicked her off at least once...
> This statement is a lie. I have =never= been
> 'kicked off' any ISP whatsoever, although Sue
> Bishop has repeatedly tried to censor my voice.
I'd imagine your ISP gets a good laugh out of her ignorance.
> So some say I'm crazy.
Funny that it's the abusers who say that..
> Besides the fact
> that the ones doing so are pretending to
> be qualified to assess medical conditions
> and make diagnoses, while unqualified
Over the internet, no less.
Youh Lomi, Magister Campi
MELIND...@webtv.net (MELINDA) cliquishly bleated:
>HI JOHN
This is the Usenet, not private email. Apparently
"MELINDA", in addition to being unable to find out
how to type without using all capitals, is unable
to discern just where she is or what she should
really be doing. This type of disorientation
and inability to function correctly in light
of ambient conditions doesn't bode well for
any horses subject to her 'influence', but
the good news is there may not be any.
>... I ...
>ILL ...
>...MAYBE LATTER [sic]...MELINDA
Get well soon.
Perhaps then you will be able to care enough
about horses to actually post about them where
they are the topic.
Irrelevancies aside, it is the assured, knowing,
confident hostler who inspires reliable obedient
boldness in horses.
Youh Lomi, Magister Campi
instant, "Justine Young" <Justin...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>Sheila,
This is a usenet forum, not a place for a message to any
one person. Please read your newusers information, and
mind that learning what to do first is very important
with actual horses, too (hint: they're the subject).
>or whatever you are calling yourself
What proponents may or may not call themselves wouldn't
matter to you if you were as honest as any horse.
>- you need to get out more.
I'm not 'out there' enough for you,
even though I'm out more than you?
Did you run into a glorious sunrise
in a huge meadow with horses this
morning (as I did)?
Will you ride two to four horses out
in the fresh air today (as I will)?
You were saying?
>John is absolutely ...
>We do not want
>and friendship.
lisa smith
"Jet City" <jetcit...@winning.com> wrote in message
news:jYMR4.859$tb6.1...@news.uswest.net...
Youh Lomi, Magister Campi
>she is violating the TOS of this one ...
Nah, I'm ontopic, pointing out that you must
really hate horses to abuse them with leg
chains, while you violate your ISPs TOS
with your offtopic blather.