“Cassie”, I am sorry I have not responded immediately, as I have previously stated I no longer have daily access to the internet.
As to why you were banned, it was cumulatively for several reasons listed below.
You have raised doubts as to the legitimacy of the success achieved by a particular trainer.
You then list a number of other very successful trainers who now, as you say “can’t compete” against a particular trainer and that those who are not suspicious of the performance of said trainer are in “the minority”. This is a negative connotation. You then use the result of a particular race and make a generalised statement that respected horseman and trainers that attended that meeting had “raised eyebrows” and were “shaking their head” at the result. Another negative connotation. You then tried to back yourself up with a silly story about a punter, who backed the winner, being also similarly disgusted with said horse’s performance.
You question what you determine to be “quick” results for some and that something must be up if those that were at the top of the tree for so long no longer are. What conclusions do you think people will draw about this trainer by making these statements? More negativity.
You have insulted another forum poster who rationally and diplomatically disagreed with you. You then go on to say a particular trainer’s success is hard to explain. That you believe that “spectacularly improved performance” is normally “drug related”.
Anyone who disagrees with you on your views on the success of trainers are mocked with the must have been the “out train out drive mantra”.
It is for all these reasons, accumulatively, you were banned by myself, for (a mere, I might add) 7 days to have a think about what you have written and why it has been inappropriate.
To take the cake – and by your very own admission, you have no “proof of any wrong doing”. This means you do not have a leg to stand on. You may have thought you could get around a legal loophole by either not mentioning a trainer’s name, but the scope of defamation also covers inferences and don’t be fooled, everyone on here knows what you are saying and who you are saying it about. You have no leg to stand on, as by your own admission you have no proof of wrong doing. If you have no leg to stand on, don’t say it! It’s not that hard! You have to understand, this is a forum attached to a very large and popular website run by a very well known harness racing identity who is currently receiving almost daily calls on the crap that is written on this forum.
You are lucky you can’t defame animals or the dead, and as an example (and nothing more) of one of your typical posts, but you also implied that the vet that treated Phar Lap regularly prescribed a tonic (inferred to be arsenic) and that enlarged hearts and hoof problems were a side effect of arsenic administration – and that Phar Lap showed both. Other than your first post on this forum about breeding, everything you said before your ban was negative towards a successful trainer, insulting or rebutting those who disagreed with you about said trainers and commenting on the use/alleged use of performance enhancing substances on two successful racehorses. There is so much more to harness racing than what you have currently bought to the table.
Like I have said before, nothing is personal, but if you have no proof, don’t say it. It doesn’t matter what every Tom Dick and Harry says at the races. You have a right to an opinion but you are erroneous in your belief that you have a right to say whatever you want, be it in the real world or on this forum. That is the rules here, you can either accept them or not post. And as to questioning why another poster was not banned due to the content of one of their posts, like I have said before I do not have access to the internet on a daily basis anymore and I am not aware of the incident you speak about, which I assume to mean that it has been dealt with.
