Stu

What is it about context do you not understand? For example: What if there was a question out there like, "Do you support the rights of kids?" Sounds simple, correct? However, if the context is not presented, and you answer Yes, the author of the question can claim that you support 7-year olds to smoke, drink, and drive cars. That is why context is vital to the questions you are posing. Got it?

Under the G7 proposal: SCV Cadets, BDB, and the Colt Cadets would be moved into the same classification as all of the non-G7 World Class corps'. This would put all other Open Class corps' that do not have ties to World Class corps' hanging out there with no overall organizational support. That is why Dan Acheson referenced the portion of the DCI Mission Statement concerning the responsibility DCI units have to "all" corps' involved with DCI.

Check your Caps there old Yoda

In context: Prop 4: Two of the "G7" corps. Prop 5: Non G7 corps receiving less money, and Open Class corps none Prop 6: Again, Open Class Corps receiving Nada.

Which is why I mentioned earlier that these proposals need to be presented in proper context.

The proposals you have listed only have true meaning when put into the proper context: Prop 1. The G7 want this weekend extravaganza to be exclusive to the G7. Prop 2. Member Corps do not include Open Class, in which the G7 want to pull support. Prop 3. The G7 want to implement Woodwinds as a way to marry drum corps to scholastic music.

From the DCP Community Guidelines: Posting Guidelines: Members shall not post -- --emails, private messages, instant messages and anything not written by the person doing the actual posting

Thanks Elmo! Honestly, when I began to engage discussion with Howdy, I had no preconceived notions concerning his views. But now, like Joe Pesci said in the movie My Cousin Vinny to a witness that just got whipped into embarrassment, “I’m done with this guy”.

A older university baseball batting coach helps a rising university student star batter; the team does well, and the batter has the ninth best batting average in the nation. The university player, while still in university, decides that he is now well versed in baseball and goes off to become the Head Coach and Administrator of a brand new professional baseball team which is going to compete in the MLB. He asks his university batting coach to come work for him on the professional team under his leadership. The older coach a) councils the young lad by guiding him into understanding that there is way more for him to learn before jumping into being a Head Coach and Administrator for a MLB organization; that without more experience on the administrative level, it will more than likely fail; or b) the older gentleman says, yep, I will be your batting coach. Which of these two demonstrates wiser council and discernment from the sage?

If you read through the thread, a Madison Scout confirmed that he was not an age-out which places him younger than 22, and the people he placed on the web site as staff that have been posting here are recent HS grads which places him between 18 - 20.

Discriminate: 1 : to make a distinction, to use good judgment (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). That is the definition properly used in this situation. In DCI, the staff discriminates in this manner through auditions, the judges discriminate by determining who plays and marches better, the audience discriminates by who they support. If we do not discriminate between good and bad investments we will go broke, if we do not discriminate between good and bad milk we can die. So the word "discriminate" is a positive when applied in the correct context. In this case, we certainly can make a distinction, to use good judgment, concerning if an 18 – 19 year old has the skills, knowledge, and wisdom to be placed in the position of looking out for the welfare of 200 lives and a multi-million dollar organization.

Ok, then could the proposal be the Grand-7 from the previous year's finals placement, allowing the 7 to change year-by-year. Which is why they would want to impliment this starting in 2011. If that is the case, then I see no real problem because the G-7 would change each year based on the previous year's finals placement.

So says the DCI member surveys that Papa Smurf referenced [concerning up to %50 of those in the G-7 have lower corps experience], and so says the staff roster bios of most of the lower corps [concerning many lower corps seeking out G-7 people for their staff].

Then why do most lower corps mainly seek out staff with G-7 experience on their resumes? Why do many of the youth dream of marching with one of the G-7 and up to %40 - %50 of all G-7 corps field members with lower corps experience?

I would like to see a new survey to find out if the 42 -35 age drop trend kept going toward the youth.

But the youth who idolize them “will” support them; at least until the novelty wears thin. Youth idolize winners and hype, plain and simple. Youth flock to the lollapalooza concerts in droves, and they will flock to see the G-7 in the same manner. It is rather arrogant of us adults to think that “we” are the reason shows are constructed and that “we” are the target audience. The G-7, if true, will be targeting those with magic in their eyes and cash in their pockets; not us oldsters that wax poetic about Back in the Day. They might lose us oldsters as an audience, but they will retain the wide-eyed hype seeking youth and more of them are born everyday.

If the G-7 is anywhere close to being true, I agree that the overall DCI activity will suffer; but not the G-7 especially under a Tour of Champions type format (at least for a few years). The G-7 would be a novelty, and a novelty sells until the novelty wears off; then the G-7 would have to go tour Japan to survive leaving in it's wake a rather jumbled DCI framework.

There are two scenarios I can see: a) This was just a Board meeting with power playing going on; or b) This was an entire Member meeting with power playing going on. We really do not know what that power play was (is) until the DCW article is published; but if DCW says there actually was a Power Play with major change implications, something is certainly afoot.

Phantom used to be a close knit family. They trained a Regiment, once a Regiment always a Regiment, and Regiment age-outs moved into staff. Of course Dr. Dan Richardson and Dan Farrell are still part of the organization; but with the addition of Tony Hall (Cadets) and Rick Valenzuela (SCV) other ideas and influences crept into the organization. For example, Nick Scotella, a Regiment alum, was the drill designer for the 2008 show and they finished first; Nick was also the drill designer for the 2009 show and they canned him after the season to hire Myron Rosander (SCV). I am not saying that was bad, nor am I saying it was good. What I am saying that if this was the Regiment of the eighties they would have kept Nick, or brought in another Regiment person, and I would be surprised if they would have agreed to a G-7; but with the Regiment of the new millennium, I would not be surprised if they are a part of this (if "this” is really true).

Sort of a "Blast" concept out on the field with the G-7. I would not be interested because I also like competition. However, if they break away from the current DCI WC division, this might work for the non-traditional audience.

So Howdy, in your opinion, once a person reaches the age of 18 that person becomes an adult; and because we should not discriminate, we have to therefore trust that the 18-year old has the wisdom and experience to be put in charge of the health, welfare, and care of 150 - 200 people, and has the education and knowledge to run a multi-million dollar corporation as Director. Nice.

Howdy, so by this response I can take it that you did put your trust in Chris to become the Director and oversee a multi-million dollar organization?

Has anyone thought of this as a possible angle that they are looking at doing: The G-7, if true, does a national tour together but they do not compete; they create a traveling non-competitive show like the framework of that Show of Champions out in CA after finals a few years ago. They would move the G-7 show from city to city drawing for starting times at each venue so that no single corps was seen as better than another. That, to me, makes the most sense if they are contemplating an elite system.

Howdy, I do not know you, nor can I pass any judgements based on what has been thrown about in this discussion. And I am sure that you have high respect for the playing ability of Chris. However, I do have a question for you (and this is not a slam at Chris, I sort of feel sorry for him). In your message here to Chris you used the word 'we"; am I understanding correctly that you were putting your trust in this very young lad who has no business or finance experience in the adult world to actually become the Director of a $1.6 million organization as listed on the Eclipse website?

Just out of curiosity, how was the DCW teaser being cautious? It caused all of this speculation frenzy, did it not?