Jeff Ream Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 hour ago, BRASSO said: I don't care. You are entitled to be as misinformed as you choose, Stu. You can believe that Hopkins/ Gibbs offered permanent status for life to the Corps that chose to join their cabal, and I wouldn't bat an eye.... lol. As a matter of fact, DCI offered better written protection for DCI World Class status maintenance, then the G7 cockamamie, ill conceived plan offered the prospective 5 Corps that were duped into signing on to the Hopkins/ Gibbs scheme.... lol. It was a couple of non invited Corps at the time that found out later about the plot that specifically asked what guarantees did Hopkins ( especially ) tell them that Hopkins was giving them in writing for G7 status permanency for signing on with his ill conceived scheme. They sheepishly were forced to reply to that inquiry..... "none "...... lol!... haha!! so how do you really feel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 25 minutes ago, Stu said: But Jeff, over multiple threads, has stated two different contradictory sequences: 1) They talk to each other, notes are taken, one of them sneaks something into the PowerPoint doc as it is constructed, it gets leaked without the other six seeing the doc, the six are totally surprised by the content but publically support it. 2) They talk to each other, notes are taken that they agree on, they meet and actually see the PowerPoint in person, it gets leaked, the are surprised by the leak but not the content and then publically support it. That is the conundrum. no, as usual you're inserting things where they dont need to be Colonel Jessup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: not my hero. i thought the quote was appropriate, albeit a slightly long winded way to tell you to shut the #### up that might make others laugh If you got personal I would defend myself in response. If you broke the DCP rules the mods have a duty to curtail that. But no matter the subject, no matter the disagreement, no matter the annoyance, no matter the irritation, I would never tell you to shut the #### up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 21 minutes ago, George Dixon said: I agree the "minimum" number of 55 is insane, around 40 or below should be a "soundsport" group - say 16-22 brass, 12-22 percussion and 6-12 guard depending on how they break out their numbers. It's a "one bus" realistic corps Yes - SoundSport is effectively a "new class" (sometimes) comprised for rookie corps moving toward our current "open class" (which I redefine as "Regional Class") Yes - it doesn't matter "what the original intent" was, it is what it is. The need for an "additional class" does exist. Especially for the 25th-8th ranked corps IMO no because any of those corps could be top 8. Look at Phantom currently. Look at Crown just over a decade ago. Look at cadets teetering towards the bottom group. if this were indoor guard with hundreds of scholastic groups, i see the need for a third class. This isn't that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 2 minutes ago, Stu said: If you got personal I would defend myself in response. If you broke the DCP rules the mods have a duty to curtail that. But no matter the subject, no matter the disagreement, no matter the annoyance, no matter the irritation, I would never tell you to shut the #### up. i don't get personal. it's business. And in business when someone drones on and on and on incorrectly, you can tell them to shut the #### up. but delivery is key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said: no, as usual you're inserting things where they dont need to be Colonel Jessup. The only reason I am not placing the contradictory posts concerning two different sequences is because of a mysterious deletion when someone, not me, started this thread. I will even say that was an accidental deletion not conspiracy. But they are still gone nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: i don't get personal. it's business. And in business when someone drones on and on and on incorrectly, you can tell them to shut the #### up. but delivery is key. This is DCP; a blog; a chat room for corps idiots like us to bloviate, rant, rave, irritate, annoy, exchange niceties, click on the like button, .... If that nothing really more than a glorified sandbox to exchange opinions is 'Business' to you, well that does explaine a lot. Edited September 19, 2017 by Stu 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 hour ago, garfield said: I'll just paraphrase your comments about short responses lacking discussion efficacy. I'll just ask you to consider how a 40-member OC program would fare against the average OC membership of 110 or so. It seems incongruous to be aware of the razor's-edge on which corps such as Legends worked this year, and yet be surprised when the governing bodies tighten the requirements to play in the OC sandbox. But what you describe is not tightening the requirements to play... only the requirements for newcomers to start playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: no, as usual you're inserting things where they dont need to be Colonel Jessup. Interesting in how you phrased that!!!! Because the only thing I am inserting into this thread is that the scenerio of the six, as in where and how they found out about the content within the PowerPoint document, was told differently by you in another thread. And the only reason I cannot actually quote those other posts and put them side by side here is that they somehow got deleted around the time someone split-off items into this thread. Again I am not claiming conspiracy, they likely got accidentally deleted, but they are gone nonetheless. Edited September 19, 2017 by Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) 46 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: But what you describe is not tightening the requirements to play... only the requirements for newcomers to start playing. You might be under the mistaken presumption that, once corps are admitted to OC, they aren't reviewed again. Edited September 19, 2017 by garfield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts