We are in the process of reevaluating our policy about when a horse is subject to critique and wanted to know what everyone thinks makes the most sense.
Initially our policy was that only a horse's owner could post its picture and ask others' thoughts. However, experience has proven that members often want to discuss potential buys, share things they find interesting about horses other than their own, etc. These seem to be legitimate reasons for posting pictures of horses other than one's own and requesting comments.
At the same time, though, we'd like to protect horse owners who post pictures or videos of their horses merely for the purpose of sharing them with friends, family, their forum, etc. Typically such casual posters do not anticipate receiving a scathing critique just for sharing a horse they love or are proud of.
What type of policy regarding when a horse/picture can be critiqued do you think makes sense and why? Below is the draft we have so far, but of course it is subject to change.
Horses that are posted on the Internet for the purposes of sale or breeding, or explicitly ask for critique, are fair game for critique. In those cases, the poster effectively holds their horse out to the world, so the world is entitled to comment.
On the other hand, where a horse is posted merely for the purpose of sharing with friends, apprising others of progress, etc., and does not invite critique, members should not lambast the poster or her horse with criticism.
What do you think so far? It seems to make sense that anyone who purports to be a professional trainer should also be subject to critique. Less clear is the issue of YouTube videos where people post videos of themselves and their horses, often with very little context.
We look forward to hearing your thoughts so that we can make our policy as informed, reasonable, and fair as possible.
Mike on behalf of the Horse Forum Team