Newseditor44

From a professional journalist point of view... no, it wouldn't make a shred of difference. Regardless of when it is done, as long as it is done before it goes to print, if a source asks you to keep something off the record, you do it. You can;t go back and say, "sorry, you should said off the record before you told me. I'm gonna have to use it now". The whole point of sharing information off the record is to give insight into a story without officially giving away information that is not meant for public consumption. Now, if Cozy had printed the information, there would be nothing illegal about it, but I can say that he would never be invited back to another meeting again, and DCI would probably revert back to the old days where they lost trust in journalists and kept everything close to the vest. But more so, its just professional courtesy. If someone asks you to not to publish names, you don't do it, especially in this case. We are not talking about top secret white house documents, so there is no urgency to reveal the names. There were no crimes committed, no one is going to be hurt f the names aren't published.

Michael: No one ever said there is a large number of people for electronics. In fact, I think its probably just the opposite. I know I'm NOT in favor of it. And it sounds to me like 90 percent of the people are against it as well. But the BoD is under no obligation to share the results of the vote with anyone. And I think the reason is quite clear why they won't. And I, for one, won't lose any sleep over it. Cowards? I highly doubt it. I dare you to stand in Jeff Feidlers face and call hima coward (and let me know when you are going to do it so I can be there!). If you are going to wait for an explination from the directors on how and why they voted, you'll be waiting a very long time. So again I ask you: Why does it matter who voted what. The issue is dead, at least for another year. Can we please move on? Or are you going to punish a director and a corps for something that was defeted and never became reality.

The impression I am getting from the few people I hae had conversation with is that DCI has been watching conversations, like this one, and has decided not to release the information. They take the threats of people boycotting corps seriously, as any organization or business would. Probably a bit of an over reaction on DCI's part, but I can understand their logic.

tooooshay! LOL Don't tell anyone, but I think we're having a civilized discussion about a heated topic... on DCP!! Shhhhh, don't tell anyone, it might ruin our reputation... LOL

We're from O-HI-O... OH! We're from O-HI-O... IOooooooooo We don't give a #### for the whole state of.... Sorry, couldn't resist. :P

Point taken. I don't disagree with most of what you said, I just don't want to see the corps or the kids hurt by any of this. I think we have to keep our eye on the ball and remember that the reason we do this is for the kids. If this rule change means an increase in the amount of exposure the kids have to different kinds of music, instrumentation and can enhance their experience, than I think it deserves merit and an extra look. As fans we have a right to be upset (God knows I am not excited about this at all), but we have to remember its all about the kids.

Until the rule is passed, your point is moot. Not supporting a corps at this point in time could lead to some very hard financial problems for corps that rely on donations and souvi sales. While your intentions are noble, the outcome my go far beyond the results you are looking for. It is so difficult for these organizations to recover from fianacial hardship now days. that doing something like this could prove to be the final straw fpr some groups. And I would argue this... do you actually think doing this is going to change one of those ten directors votes? Honestly, I don't think it would. You can;t bully someone into make a decision Their are other, more productive ways of doing things.

I'm afraid I am going to have to go to the replay judge n this one. Its not grandstanding at all. Their participation, experience, and everything else are affected when people start refusing to support corps. Financial crisis are nearly impossible for corps to recover from, just ask any of the corps that have folded or gone inactive. Hanging a corps out to dry becuase it voted in an unpopular way is not only childish, its destructive to the activity as a whole.

Those were the days!

I didn't call you an idiot, I said the situation was getting idiotic, specifically the witch hunt against the ten corps that oted in favor of the rules change.

Hey, here's an idea: When we find out who voted for the rule, how about we tell the marching members of each corps that because their corps voted for elecronics, they should go somewhere else and march... or better yet, how about we ask them to just stay home all together. We no longer support them or thier corps and we don't want to see them on the field. Or hey, we can find out where their housing sites are and take away their food so they can't eat. We can syphon the fuel from the busses so they can't get to the next show. We can have take away their instruments and give them kazoos. In fact, why don't we just tell the kids we don't care about them one bit. What matters more, electronics (which will be aute point in ten years anyway) or robbing future marching members the opportunity to preform becuase we wanted to make a political statement about the state of the activity?

Correct Mike... also, there is a website that posts all non-profits tax returns. Its a free site, I just can;t remember the name of it.

Hmmmm, Mike, you are not crazy... but this will take some additional research. I guess that means a ###### Cat Dolls marathin for me guys... of darn! b**bs

You're kidding me, right? This is becoming idiotic.

I believe SCV sent the two in question members home when they got to Kansas City If you watch the tape from Nats, you can see two rather big holes in certain parts of the drill

Journalists, editors, writers make editorial decisions everyday. They filter the news, and have a responsibility to do so. What do you include in a report? What goes into story? If he chooses not to reveal information in a report, then he is niether right nor wrong. I have been a professional jouralist for over 15 years. and I see nothing wrong with what he is doing. However, I woudn't have announced that I had the information and decided to withold it. That only stirred the pot.

Actually, with the sponsorship deals most of these corps get, it would be very easy fr them to turn around and sell the equipment, which most get at a discounted price (in exchange for their endorsement) and at least break even. its done every year with percussion and brass instruments. And no , its not a fallacy. You can amend a rule, rescind a rule change, or do whatever the heck you want. If the BoD passes a rule that later turns out to be a huge mistake, they have to have the balls to say "hey, we screwed up, we are going to go back to the way things were." I am not trying to be an apologist, but I do think that good ideas, and bad ones, deserve the chance to be played out, tried out, given a chance, whatever you want to call it. If you are so close minded to think that something like this would never work, then you are more the problem then the people that are trying to better the activity. At least they are trying, what are you doing? Sitting at home, b****ing about it on your computer, threatening to stop supporting the corps that voted for it. Change is a very hard pill to swallow. But the benifits might be more bountiful than any of us could ever expect. But we'll never know unless we try it first.

Your logic makes no sense at all. The people who are being forced to vote in the direction of DCI are DCI! They are the BoD, the corps directors. So in a sense, they are putting a gun to their own heads. **edited, just because...**

You are right... I meant DCI

LOL

Still falls under the catagory of speculation and assumption

Adam - a few words, first, don't call Stef out; you're not in her league. She'll chew you up and spit you out in 2 seconds, I have seen it before, and it isn’t pretty. Just back away while you can. She's good and you're nowhere close. Secondly, you are assuming that the same directors that voted for amplified voice are the ones who voted for this rule as well. Have you ever heard the phrase "assuming makes an a** out of you and me"? It just isn't right to make assumptions based on theory rather than fact. What's worse is to accuse someone of something with nothing but speculation to back up your claims. Very weak. Third... Yes, it’s a difficult issue, one that has us all up in arms. But what are we going to do with this information, organize a witch-hunt? "Burn them at the cross I say!!!" Get real folks. The current BOD is a majority of the same people responsible for the resurgence of this activity over the past 10 or so years. Had it not been for their dedication and hard work, God only knows if DCI would still be around. Its partially because of them that you have this message board and an activity to talk about. I am as old school as they come. I hate electronics, I hate b-flat instruments, I hate the fact that so much tradition has been swept away over the past 10 years, but these are the facts of life. Things change, people change, organizations change. But in their defense, people who run this show have many more years of experience managing non-profit organizations than you or I combined. I trust that they know what they are doing, and will make the best decision in the best interest of the activity. They love drum corps as much as you and I, and in some cases, more than any of us. They eat, sleep, dream about, and breath drum corps 24 hours a day. They are not only director, but almost all of them are vets as well. Jeff Fielder, for example, just gave up his career as a teacher to work with the Cavi's fulltime. He was the Cavi's drum major, and has guided the corps to an unprecedented run over the past ten years. He is 110% dedicated to this activity and the young men that become a part of the Cavalier family. Can you honestly tell me that he, or any of the other BoD's, are going make any decision that would knowingly harm the activity? Tell me why you believe they wouldn't give a tremendous amount of thought and insight into the issue before making such a vote. In Jeff's case, he has hundreds, if not thousands of people to answer to... alumni, parents, the Cavaliers BoD, the membership. Imagine that kind of pressure, that kind of responsibility... know tell me why he would make a decision to vote on a controversial issue that, in all fairness, he knows will not be the popular vote? The only logical answer I can come up with is that he, and the other board members (corps directors) see this has a critical decision that will advance the activity in years to come and create a stable, more competitive organization, along with a more creative palate for the corps and the designers. Do I like the idea... no. Do I support it? Not now. Do I have an open mind? Yes. Do I trust the current people in charge of running the activity? Heck yeah! And by the way, if the rule gets passed and a few years later we find out that it really was a bad idea... we can always rescind it.

So, you are willing to kill the activity all together? Becuase in a sense, that is what you are saying. You are wiling to sacrifice ten corps, in an already dismal field, in order to voice your opinion? You would actually want these groups to NOT succeed? You would actually want to promote the death of the activity? I'm just curious.

And again I ask the question.... Why does it matter?

I have to disagree and say its not so much the recording equipment, as it isimpact moments in shows, and the bugles vs horns argument. The sheer volume of drum corps was one of the things that made the activity stand out. There was power in hornlines back in the 70's 80's and 90's, and that power went away in 2001 when the first influx of B-flat horns were intorduced (Yes, I know the horns made their apperance in 2000, but that was only two corps). Yes the G bugles had inntonation problems, but tuning your horms and working harder to get good tone quality were just a few of things that mae those hrons more challenging to play.