dbc03
-
Posts
4,978 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by dbc03
-
-
13 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:
Well apparently the judge disagrees with you.
You don't have to keep saying this every time someone posts about how the org has completely changed. Yes, we know what the judge has said regarding the corps being the legal successor to the Garfield Cadets. It's still true that nobody involved with The Cadets today had any control over this situation 40 years ago despite whatever legal liability they are deemed to have. Things can be true and not legally relevant
-
1
-
-
Even if the victim is primarily motivated by money or just wants to completely take down the org that she believes enabled the assault I don't blame her, I blame the piece of #### who assaulted her 40 years ago.
Those motives are completely understandable given the circumstances even if I think it is ultimately punishing the wrong people for the crime
-
2
-
-
34 minutes ago, Richard Lesher said:
and a realization the "gangsta" like intimidation being thrown their way is merely from a group of band nerds who's lives never advanced much beyond the success of their marching days.
Project much?
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:
Except this part of the case filing, under Third Count, Punitive Damages is pretty clear:
"These acts and omissions by the Garfield Cadets and YEA constitute a wanton and willful disregard of the safety of the members of the public and the minors in the care of Garfield Cadets, including Plaintiff." But the argument is that we the past? I'd like to think the span between 2018 and now was cast enough for a sea change, activity-wide, but from my distant seat that's not what I've observed, despite incalculable efforts. I continue to welcome info that refutes this.
Case filing seems to be using Garfield Cadets, Cadets Drum and Bugle Corps, YEA, YEA!, and CAE interchangeably and intentionally based on the Factual Background: Parties section. No?
"These acts and omissions" are specifically the ones listed in the lawsuit, not any others that may have occurred. If the lawsuit was about events other than the ones that occurred in relation to the plaintiff they would have been specifically mentioned, especially since the actions of GH have been well documented at this point.
If there had never in the past 40 years been another instance of abuse related to The Cadets the text of this lawsuit would stay entirely the same.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:
I believe the Defendant is claiming the Cadets have moved beyond the culture of abuse. And looks like so far the judge has said…. Uhhhh, no. That’s why the case continues.
I don't believe this is an accurate description of the legal proceedings.
The Cadets have claimed that they are not responsible for the crimes committed because they are no longer part of the umbrella organization that the crimes happened under. It appears the judge did not accept that particular argument. Neither the judge nor the Cadets made claims regarding whether there is a current "culture of abuse" because it's completely irrelevant to the case.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, scheherazadesghost said:
I should've corrected myself to say "the plaintiff implies" as per another comment in this thread. Perhaps my understanding of our legal system is lacking, or it has been explained already... but why sue the organizations of not to implicate them in the crimes? Genuine question.
She is seeking damages for the abuse (rightfully so) and the organization is one of the few entities that has assets that could be awarded. It has nothing to do with the organization as it stands today. There's no happy outcome or justice here, either she wins and an organization that is now completely removed from the incident is punished or she loses and the victim does not get reimbursed for the damages she suffered.
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:
So, there is a central argument of whether Cadets has moved beyond the culture of abuse or not.
The plaintiff claims they have not.
The lawsuit makes no mention of anything other than the events that took place in the early 80s. There is no claim by the plaintiff that the corps has not moved beyond the culture of abuse.
If there is evidence that they haven't then I fully support that being shared and the responsible parties being held accountable, but a 40 year old case isn't it.
-
1
-
-
Had the corps been held responsible and shut down after the GH bomb dropped I would have mourned the loss but it would have been hard to argue against. The board and director and likely others at the time were all culpable for a pattern of abuse.
This is harder to come to terms with though. I aged out almost 20 years ago and this happened before I was born. It's doubtful that anyone culpable for this incident is still involved with the corps in any way. This isn't going to punish anyone other than innocents and isn't going to protect any future kids from a similar incident. There is nothing that the corps could have done in my entire lifetime to prevent this outcome.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:
So college housing and in many cases their food staff for 7 weeks saves money? Plus paying to get people in and out? Colleges are cheaper than high schools on tour?
Maybe they're cheaper than high schools + busses? No clue, just speculating
-
1 hour ago, Gantang said:
Then, they would not be viewing a donation to Cadets as a tax-deductible charitable donation. I make donations despite claiming the Standard Deduction because I know it's a gift (not under the IRS' definition. Those who do itemize and have deductions greater than the Standard do benefit by making additional donations. They usually make SIGNIFICANT donations to reduce the tax burden. Some of us are simply altruistic.
If you're giving away a dollar just to save a max of 37 cents in taxes I would argue you are bad at math. Tax benefits are not a primary reason to donate, it's just a discount towards donating
-
33 minutes ago, Gantang said:
I didn't say they were! Where did you get that idea?
cixelsyd wrote that "you can make tax-deductible donations directly." I disputed the ability to use a donation as a tax-deductible donation under the current IRS Code.
Since you chimed in, do you take the Standard Deduction or Itemize?It's not really any of your business, but for the past ~20 years I've donated the same percentage of my income to various charities. When I started I took the standard deduction, then as my circumstances changed I eventually switched to Itemized deductions. The % I donated has stayed the same regardless of tax benefits though
-
22 minutes ago, Gantang said:
The Standard Deduction of $13,850 for single filers and $27,700 for married filing separately has nearly eliminated the ability to deduct Charitable Donations. Unless those donations combined with every other Itemized Deductions amount to a greater dollar amount than the SD.
Is anyone reading this using Itemized versus Standard Deductions and could lend some insight on this??Most people aren't donating exclusively to lower their taxes
-
1
-
-
I'll donate once more information about the plan going forward comes out. I did the bulk of my donation for the year before the season, but depending on the plan I'll probably donate more before the end of the year.
I'll give directly through cadets.org though, not give Go Fund Me part of the money
-
3
-
-
-
17 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:
question, and not asked to be snarky....how many of those running the Cadets actually live in the Erie area?
I had assumed the corps "moving to Erie" meant an office with people working in it, but looking at the staff profiles it seems that's not the case. Not sure what they're plan is with regard to community engagement if nobody is there to do it🤷♂️
-
1 minute ago, HockeyDad said:
Cool. So the best people to solve the problems are the ones who can’t get their corps out on tour? I thought I’d give you another chance to answer the question if you care to.
The best? Probably not, the best people are expensive. They are more qualified than you or me though
-
I still think leaning in to the core competencies of the organizations is a potential way to come up with additional revenue and increase community engagement.
The Cadets used to do "Music is Cool" clinics at various stops along the tour which were just 1 day clinics for high schoolers, but since corps now have fewer shows and are more likely to stay in one place for more than 1 night what if that was expanded to multiday clinics for area kids that included putting together a very small show instead of just doing 8 on a hand and some stand still songs. A mini drum corps experience for anyone who wants it.
For corps that do spring training near their home towns it would be the perfect time to do one that increases community engagement and helps grow local talent.
Maybe corps could organize some kind of local concert band events as well during the off season. Erie Area Honor Band, hosted by The Cadets, or a concert festival, or an I&E equivalent. Even if these things aren't huge moneymakers in and of themselves they give the corps something to point at when they are courting local sponsors, branch out beyond a luxury activity for rich kids.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, HockeyDad said:
So the best people to solve the problems are the ones who can’t get their corps out on tour? Super.
If you don't want feedback about your ideas just don't post them on a discussion forum.
Throwing out ideas is good, some will be good, some will be bad, but if you want to an actual discussion about "real ideas for sustainability & revenue" everyone's ideas have to be open to scrutiny. Your ideas aren't above criticism just because you had them.
-
8 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:
given the many rumors swirling and watching the debacle thats been SCV, i'd expect more.
I expect more too but I'm willing to give them a little time to get their feet back under them after losing the CEO as part of this debacle.
I want them to get it right, not to rush out information just for the sake of people who are impatient.
The decision not to tour has been made, that's the most important thing to get out quickly because it affects the kids and staff. They can't really expect a lot of new donations without providing more information and a solid plan, but expenses are also a LOT lower without doing a tour so immediately raising money isn't as urgent.
-
2
-
-
10 hours ago, HockeyDad said:
I love the handwringing. Apparently there is no solution. Ya’ll certainly haven’t offered up anything other than to shoot down any idea. Oh, bother.
If the problem was going to be solved by armchair corps directors on DCP it would have been solved years ago. We shouldn't accept an idea without scrutiny just for the sake of doing something, especially when that idea is worse than the status quo. Bad ideas are extremely easy to come up with.
Here's an idea, every corps pools together all their money to buy lottery tickets the next time the jackpot gets high, if they win they all split the money and don't have to worry about expenses ever again.
I will not be accepting any criticism of this idea.
-
36 minutes ago, dbc03 said:
If you restrict corps to local recruitment you're gonna have like 3 corps total that top out at 30 people max.
It would kill drum corps quicker than national tour expenses
"Sir, you have a lot of plaque build up in your heart, if you don't make some lifestyle changes it's going to kill you"
"OK doc, let's just remove the heart!"
-
If you restrict corps to local recruitment you're gonna have like 3 corps total that top out at 30 people max.
It would kill drum corps quicker than national tour expenses
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:
Am I caught in a bait-and -switch scheme here? I want to discuss what is going on that Cadets can’t leave the driveway in 2024. That’s far from a nothing burger. And I don’t believe it’s because some unexpected bills came in late and…Oops! There is more to it.
Yet everyone seems to want to instead talk about how angry they are that Richard L. piled on about the PA registration. If that’s a nothing burger (and I agree that it is) then WHY can’t you stop talking about it ?!? RL has not even posted to this thread!The thread for discussing the former was closed because of the latter
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:
I edited my statement. The $1000 per violation and $100 per day is regarding professional solicitors. My bad.
I'd prefer what you say is true honestly. But that still doesn't address the donor trust problem I brought up. I wouldn't risk my np on those odds, especially when compliance is np 101.
The issue should be fixed if they aren't in compliance and they should figure out who dropped the ball, but come on, is this what DCP has become? Digging through state bureaucracy to find any little gotcha we can?
-
4
-
1
-
The Cadets are being sued by a former member for alleged sexual abuse in the 80s
in DCI World Class Corps Discussions
Posted
I doubt corps as old as these don't have something buried in their closet. This incident was more than 40 years ago, corps might have their act together now but that doesn't make them immune to this kind of thing