Jump to content

Weaklefthand4ever

Members
  • Posts

    1,603
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    36

Everything posted by Weaklefthand4ever

  1. I'm so glad it was the late 80's when I came around LOL. At least we had this marvelous thing called "air conditioning." You cats from 70's were tough as nails.
  2. Very good points. I always loved VK to be honest. They were entertaining which is what it's all supposed to be about. As you said, those of us who marched or have been fans for a long while connect to the uni's as an identity of the corps. I think it's easier to identify with uniform styles (especially for fans who never marched or newer fans,) than to identify with musical styles. Nobody has the same sound stylistically as they used to have to my ear anyways. And that's not a bad thing. I'm pretty sure though that if PR went back to melt your face classical, I would be one of the old farts that would probably say "Now THAT'S Phantom Regiment!"
  3. Drum Corps will definitely eliminate any "shyness" that you have.
  4. Yep. When I got my 2nd wind and started marching DCA, we did the show in Orlando. I wanna say it was 2005. Unfortunately, the unis didn't get cleaned and had sat in the uniform trailer for a few weeks after the previous show in Wintson Salem. We all know how hot it gets in Atlanta so they had been marinating for a while in the back of that trailer. To say they were a little odiferous would be an understatement.
  5. I too miss some of the traditional uniforms but I think I certainly would have preferred the more modern ones from a comfort perspective. Jeff, your comments always make me laugh because we seem to say the same things. It must be "a drummer thing" as my father used to say. Things my girlfriend said to me at DCI South this year (her first DCI show) that made me laugh: "You keep saying things like 'balls clean' and 'p**s clean.' None of those sound clean to me. Why don't all you drum people say like...'Brita Clean' or something?" "Why do they keep saying "dut, dut, dut?" (She then proceeded to say dut, dut, dut very loudly while jutting her head forward like a rooster clucking) "It's summer and all of these people are wearing jackets. Like, who wears a jacket in the summer? Wait a minute...you're wearing a jacket too! What the h**l man?!?!" (referring to corps jackets) "I found my favorite corps thingy!! They're from Denver and I'm from Denver! I'm buying all of their souvies on your debit card. I hope they win." (This is before she had even heard BK play) "They serve beer at this stadium?!?! How do I not know about this drum corps thing?" "I played clarinet in high school....this seems a little more....advanced." "So an entire corps was in the bathroom changing....." "I just noticed that all of you drum people look like your hands got run over by a truck. What's up with that?" "So many unitards.....just so many unitards..."
  6. Exactly. Some will say that you just rip off the band-aid. However, that can leave a vacuum that won't be able to be overcome. We hear the term "fair and balanced" quite a bit in today's society. The best thing that could happen would be to have a transition team already in place to manage placing the best new and remaining talent where it would best serve the vision of the organization. That usually takes and tremendous amount of time and planning though. You certainly don;t want to replace chaos with even more chaos.
  7. Excellent place to start. And the longer the wait, the more the distrust festers. We cannot have the Mel Brooks Blazing Saddles "We've got to protect our phony-baloney jobs, gentlemen!" moment.
  8. Although I agree with the first statement 100%, I don't think shutting down the entire activity is the answer. Would that somehow give any real vindication to the victims? I would think that we would instead look to somehow build the strong structure of governance and oversight that you speak of. The question is, how is that to be done? We are all understandably upset. This is an activity and community that we all love be it just fans or current / former MM's. We've all been very vocal (myself included) in pointing out the shortcomings of the past structure. There are a LOT of very smart people in this community with background and talent to bring forth suggestions on how to fix the problem. How hard would it be to do that? I think any of us who have ever managed anything in business before (and let's face it, part of this activity is a business,) would agree that bringing forth solutions is far more beneficial than simply ignoring the possible solutions. We can't change the past. DCI and all involved needs to own their deeds and misdeeds. But we can help to make DCI what it was always meant to be.
  9. That certainly could be valid, although I don't think that may be the majority of the reasoning (certainly some of it though.) I think that the culture changed (thank GOD) and that the people at the top levels of the organization, be it DCI/DCA or individual corps, never moved on. They stayed at the tops of their respective boards and committees and continued to "do things the way that things had always been done." As my girlfriend said after I lost at the US Open this year (she makes me feel old) "Baby, if you can't cut the mustard, you can always still lick the jar." It's time for the old guard to move on perhaps.
  10. I think you hit the nail on the head. The question in my mind is "why?" For years and years, companies avoided the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace for a multitude of reasons. To protect "talented" executives who were making the company money, to protect themselves from potential backlash if investors did not prescribe to the 'ole boy "circle the wagons mentality, and to keep one type of investigation to leading to other investigations. Hell, they're still doing it today in some ways with a large percentage of employees signing forced arbitration agreements at the point of hire (and probably most not knowing what that even means for them.) Granted, I was only a MM, but I can't see any of that being pertinent in DCI or DCA. There are no huge sponsors contributing millions to individual corps. Perhaps there is an "Ole Boy" network type of mentality and I've simply tuned it out. But regardless of all of that, an individual corps would more to lose than they would to gain from covering up abuses. I truly don't get it. smh
  11. Unfortunately, I can't zoom in on the article and have it be readable. EDIT: Figured it out. I'm challenged today apparently.
  12. I can't argue with the first sentence. I don't believe terminating anyone for the good of the "optics" is ever a good practice. Does it happen? Of course it does...every day...in politics. Perception is very hard to argue. This shouldn't be about politics though. Now the remainder of the statement, I can see an argument with. That argument is dependent on what DA (and the BoD) knew, when he/they knew it and what (if any) actions were taken whether legally obligated to do so or not. There have been so many of these threads in the last few months that I've completely lost track of the actual facts. I would like to see a summary of them NOT posted in some snarky ### way. As far as replacement of "talent," it is understood that transitioning a new group would be extremely difficult. Talent should never be ignored. That being said, I've been part of a similar transition before with the great baby-blue devil known as AT&T (*barf*) We had a very prominent figure and his staff who were completely complicit in some rather unsavory deals in the early 2000's. The biggest problem is...they were dullards, you know...morons. They thought that as long as they didn't report the illegal deals they were being offered, they couldn't possibly be guilty of anything. At the end of the day, that entire group had to resign. But because they held the keys to a certain castle (the purchase of SBC / Yahoo,) they were allowed to transition a new team (which I was part of) in before their departure. In return they were offered some fairly significant severance / incentives and fresh, new talent carried the baton to the finish line. Now I'm not saying that's what should happen here since I simply don't know the facts. But talent simply cannot be put above safety of the kids. And let's face it, perception is reality even if the perception is clouded or flat out wrong (and I'm not saying it is.)
  13. I would certainly agree if they were aware of allegations and did not take action to protect those who were in harms way. To me, that's where my line is drawn. Most of us who are reasonable human beings would stop someone who we witnessed being abused with...let's just say fervor. If I saw it happening, I'm fairly certain that the abuser wouldn't be the only one taking a ride in the back of government vehicle.
  14. I would agree whole-heatedly. Most businesses are leaning towards this type of policy as well. I know at my work, it's now been expressly forbidden. In 2017, you had to simply report it to your manager and the subordinate could not report directly to you.
  15. LOL. I worked in AT&T's corporate office for 20 years with CALL CENTERS!! Scaring me away isn't going to happen LOL.
  16. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I respect you and your posts are generally well thought out and logical, but (I hate that word...,) I think this one is more reactionary than anything. Your comparisons in this case would be like saying that since the state authorities knew about lead in the water in Flint, MI., then anyone who voted for those individuals allowed them into office and are therefore also liable. It's like the 7 degrees of Kevin Bacon. IF (and I don't know first hand,) people were aware of an issue that put MM's in harms way and did not report it, then how is that not wrong at least from a moral standpoint? I understand both sides. I truly do. But if we have an obligation to protect these kids and that wasn't done because it wasn't someones job legally to do so, then there is a real problem.
  17. You're 100% correct and I hope my statement of "throwing the baby out with the bath water" wasn't unintentionally misinterpreted. I made that statement regarding the cries of some to shut down DCI forever. That's not the answer. I agree in my heart of hearts that it's time for DA to go. Even if there isn't a legal reason (and I'm not saying there isn't,) to do so, there could easily be a moral obligation. It's been said before. DA is not DCI. Change is needed at the top and whatever he specifically knew or did / didn't do, he's where the cut needs to start. I understand the statements of some that he has valuable knowledge regarding running a tour etc., but that's simply not something that can be allowed at this point. The good of the activity needs to stand above any individual.
  18. I would hope not. My HOPE is that this is the beginning of Drum Corps as it should have always been. A performing youth organization dedicated to give kids a great performance and education experience and with the responsibility and power to protect them at every step.
  19. It does indeed. I feel sorry not only for those who were abused but for the MM's, unknowing staff and volunteers of corps which are suddenly in a spotlight they never expected to be under. That being said, it's what has to be done to protect the actual human beings who make up the organization. If that means that it has to be burned to the ground and rebuilt in a way that lives the core values and mission statement, then so be it. We do it all the time in the corporate world and we all know that to be fact. If you know something you should report it. This is an activity of young people. They deserve to be safe and have a great experience. This should not be and, indeed, should never have BEEN about legality. I truly believe when we stray our focus away from the PEOPLE and shift it towards an organization (be it a "governing body" or individual corps,) we lose sight of what is most important.
×
×
  • Create New...