bullethead

Might want to check out the numerous WGI groups with cymbal lines before making that sort of assumption.

As a member of Sky Ryders.....nothing. That is, we were not fed anything on multiple occasions. Having lived most of my life in TX, Crossmen's 1996 "Fajitas" are a close second. That was a tortilla with lunch meat and Pace picante sauce.

How many people are still butt-hurt because the Cadets went Co-ed in 1969? Just wondering.....

Not fishing at all, just asking for some clarification of your thoughts. There are men-only and women only soccer leagues. Victoria's Secret makes women's garments Women can't be President of a fraternity The list goes on and on....

So you are advocating that there should be separate female only and male only divisions of DCI?

In some corps, the most dependable and easiest (vulnerable) funding source is the auditionees and the members themselves. I know first-hand of a group, "sponsored" by a dot book company and required the members to purchase them at above the retail cost. I was also told to refrain from cutting "too many" auditionees during the camp season. It's all about the $.

Yeah.....this is a real big problem. A news outlet using stock pics/visuals. That almost never happens. Poor DCI.

A missing dinner at one of the corps that I once marched in hardly compares to the current accusations being brought forth (which, undoubtedly were also happening when I was a member). I guess, a missed meal here and there, or some water concerns, etc. were a more glaring problem to DCI than kids being raped......at least until now. I don't recall anyone being fired for such things or any corps being suspended for those sorts of issues. Fined? Ok. Warned/Scolded? Probably. Of course, if you march an overage member.....that's "real" trouble, and demands immediate oversight.

So let's just allow DCI to maintain the status quo due to a questionable wording in a news article....is that what you are hoping for? Does it really make any difference if a corps has been disciplined....for whatever? Does it disprove the events described in the article? Before this current barrage, had a corps been "disciplined" for things relating to staff/member - inappropriate issues of a sexual nature?

I stand corrected.

Personally, I read the article, and the way that "disciplined" was used......and I infer that the "discipline" is in regard to the issues brought up in the article. Could it have used a bit more clarification? Perhaps. Does it really change anything? Not at all. BTW, in one of your posts: "Little ole' me pointing out three errors in an article of this import should raise some eyebrows, and not because it's me. Jeff used incorrect words to make an invalid point..." I think you meant to say "important".......not that it makes a difference.

Not so certain that this is the sort of thing that any group wants to get better at as a result of more experience.

.

You never suggested consulting wikipedia, but you assumed that's what I did. I NEVER suggested that a background check wasn't warranted, however.....if you can find docs like I referenced above, I think you'd be wasting your time. Maybe you have more time than I do. The problem is that, in both of these cases, they 100% knew about it.

The problem, is that they 100% knew about it. Of course. I never suggested that a full background check wasn't necessary, that was something that was unfairly extrapolated by Jeff Ream. FWIW: https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Joel+Moody+Teacher&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Eric+Thompson+teacher&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

http://cdn.radioiowa.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Thompson-ruling.pdf Not wikipedia. I guess you'll trust a drum corps press release over a valid government document. This isn't the Warren Report. Get your head out of the sand.

If you're applying for someone who consults wikipedia as a resource on your background, you may not be applying at a promising workplace. You seem like a smart guy - you just apparently believe that nobody else can be. FACT - a simple google search reveals that there are proven, legit issues and/or charges against Joel Moody And Eric Thompson. NOT wikipedia BS. Members and parents apparently didn't even do this, as there are accounts of them being "surprised" by the news. There is blame to be placed with these organizations, who knowingly, willingly employed people like this, and there's also at least some blame to go to parents and even members, It's not that hard..... Amazing that you apparently believe that the majority of people in charge would search on wikipedia for Eric Thompson and be satisfied with he "was an English actor, television presenter and producer. He is best remembered for creating and performing the English narration for The Magic Roundabout,[1] which he adapted from the original French Le Manège Enchanté." or, if you search for Joel Moody, you get "The page "Joel moody" does not exist."......so I guess that's a great alibi. It's just really not that difficult to find some pretty important things out.....from legitimate sources. The REAL problem, is that groups KNOW of this stuff, and yet enable these people by willingly employing them, despite having that knowledge. Thanks for dumbing this down as much as possible.

Thanks for explaining that - I had no idea! Public records are generally considered to be a bit more reliable than wikipedia.

I wasn't suggesting that "formal hiring procedures" aren't critical or prudent, but a simple google search could render any need for that completely unnecessary.

A simple google search can go a long way.

Thanks for the tip! Had no idea!!!!!

I guess all the corps stayed inside for rehearsal during the maximum heat, before the time of the show.

Blue Stars look like the "Marching Homer Simpsons"

That's it. Hammer, meet nail.