corpsband Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 These rules are not enforced in general (see the show threads filled with copyrighted non-self-authored tweets which are not removed). And this kind of message is not what the rules are meant to apply to in any case. Actually the last time a G7 email was posted, it was deleted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 (edited) Drum Corps Planet Community Guidelines (Updated: December 2009) . Posting Guidelines: Members shall not post -- --emails, private messages, instant messages and anything not written by the person doing the actual posting -- Fine. Can you paraphrase? I think we all can sum it up: 1. Inelegant take over attempt of the DCI BOD by the G7 in 2010, which ended in all the G7 children taking their balls and bats and going home, resigning from the board. 2. Simmer 3 years. DCI board members, let's call them the "adults" in this scenario, actually take the extraordinary action of allowing the G7 children 6 of their very own private contests in 2013. 3. Another take over attempt today by the children, who now identify themselves as the "7", laughingly disguised as a noble gesture to have a "do over" and return to the concept of the top 12 being the BOD members. Does that about cover it? Edited January 10, 2013 by HockeyDad 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 If you want to express your feelings to the non-G7 corps, here's a list of their listed-on-dci.org contact email addresses: mark@arizonaacademy.org, bknights@bknights.org, brad@bluestars.org, info@crusaders.com, execdirector@seattlecascades.org, colts@colts.org, fredmorrison@crossmen.org, tom@glassmen.org, bob@jerseysurf.org, dci@madisonscouts.org, remar747@aol.com, director@oregoncrusaders.org, pompel@pacific-crest.org, dbcpmilw@execpc.com, tsnead@spiritdrumcorps.org, info@troopersdrumcorps.org If you want to express your feelings on this to the G7 corps, here's a list of *their* contact emails: admin@bluedevils.org, dglasgow@bluecoats.com, hopkins@yea.org, info@carolinacrown.org, director@cavaliers.org, prinfo@regiment.org, a-corps@scvanguard.org 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 Maybe. But it wasn't addressed to just the other dci directors. Go back and take another look. It was addressed to the membership of drum corps international. Whatever that means.... Does not matter who the email was addressed to... Was it an Email? Yes Was it written by the Poster? No The DCP rule... Members shall not post ---emails, private messages, instant messages and anything not written by the person doing the actual posting 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 (edited) Actually the last time a G7 email was posted, it was deleted. A private email between individuals expecting privacy is what the policy is meant to address, so that deletion was proper. This is essentially an open letter, not addressed to individuals, written as a public statement, with no prior expectation of privacy from the recipients. Edited January 10, 2013 by skywhopper 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post corpsband Posted January 10, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted January 10, 2013 Anyway .... Why does finishing in the top 12 on the field qualify you for membership on the board? Makes no sense at all if you think about it. The judges get to decide the board membership? Sorry that's just plain stupid. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 Anyway .... Why does finishing in the top 12 on the field qualify you for membership on the board? Makes no sense at all if you think about it. The judges get to decide the board membership? Sorry that's just plain stupid. Seriously? The idea here is for the "7" to gain control of the board, by establishing a 12 member board. They'll then have the majority. 7 votes versus 5 votes. This is just their latest attempt of packaging the thing. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 A private email between individuals expecting privacy is what the policy is meant to address, so that deletion was proper. This is essentially an open letter, not addressed to individuals, written as a public statement, with no prior expectation of privacy from the recipients. I'll bet that email was addressed to individuals. The poster just deleted the email headers. Open letters generally are posted in a public place like a newspaper or a website. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 (edited) Anyway .... Why does finishing in the top 12 on the field qualify you for membership on the board? Makes no sense at all if you think about it. The judges get to decide the board membership? Sorry that's just plain stupid. The logic of the proposal is not the point. The point is the G7 wants control of DCI. A "top 12" board would give them control. That's the only reason. Appealing to a past structure is just political cover along with the hope that they can get the non-G7 top 12 to go along with the proposal. But if Boston or BK or Madison or Spirit or Crossmen votes for this proposal, they'll be signing their own death warrant. Once the G7 controls the board, the other five members will have zero power. Edited January 10, 2013 by skywhopper 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 (edited) I'll bet that email was addressed to individuals. The poster just deleted the email headers. Open letters generally are posted in a public place like a newspaper or a website. My point is that those recipients did not agree to get a private message. Further, the content of the email is the key point: it's written as a public statement. Also, regardless of the email headers, the message was *not* addressed to individuals, it was addressed to the DCI membership. Edited January 10, 2013 by skywhopper 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.