MikeM

Um, Mr. Ream, wanna back me up here please?

No they wouldn't. It would been in "effect," as in, I don't think your general effect is being maximized here. And the solution offered in critique certainly would have been "amp your pit, it might help" So don't tell me you don't need amps or Bb horns to win in DCI in 2007. I wish a corps would prove me wrong.

But, keep in mind, Yanni done by Horns and Percussion sounds pretty good! :P

slope = (y2-y1) / (x2-x1) Oh, not that slope. So sorry. Move along, nothing to see here! :P

Bad ### if it were possible.

Only for his shirts! :P

Hmm...15 months old...ancient history in drum corps... lol Maybe he'll come back again.

or every time Hopkins makes a rules proposal. Hey DCP, have you guys considered getting Hoppy in for a q&a session regarding these proposals?

I'd rather they went away than allow Woodwinds in DCI. Flame away, I have nomex! :P

Man, I wanna put Hoppy's 2003 proposal and this years next to each other and ask, "Separated at birth?!?"

How the directors voted:

Thanks to an assist from Tony on RAMD, here is the amps proposal that passed in 2003 and took effect in 2004. All formatting is Hoppy's, not mine, and I have held true to his formatting, so you can see just how he is. (Also, the quote feature tends to distort...not 100% his formatting) http://web.archive.org/web/20030314162159/...es/XAmp_doc.pdf Comments?

That 2nd touchdown by Fla clearly wasn't.

Hoppy proposed it for 12 years straight before it passed. I've got a post open on RAMD....I'm sure someone will have it available. DCI has apparently purged a lot of 2003 from the site...none of the links inside posts work.

nodsnodsnodsnods

That's 2002...the version that failed.

Found this on RAMD: Funny how Fiedler wasn't happy in 2003 but uses them anyway.

Part 2: The only thing I could find about the 2003 rules was this snippet: Link: http://www.dci.org/news/news.cfm?news_id=a...fa-3f5d8d17be66

It didn't pass in 2004, it must have passed in 2003 to take effect in 2004... DCI has archives to 2003, but I couldn't find the 2003 proposals. Here's a link to 2004: http://www.dci.org/news/news.cfm?news_id=e...b7-b2cd231ba97b

You miss the point. Drum Corps being what it is....is EXACTLY the reason to keep it the way it is.

You are wise beyond your years. :) Very well put! :)

If you want to do Drum Corps, then conform to the rules. IF you don't play the instrumentation that is current, then learn how. I know many a clarinet player who play baritone because it doesn't affect their ability to play clarinet. It's not hard. You know how to play clarinet, so that assumes you can 1. read music, 2. understand HOW to play music, 3. have a concept of learning and hard work. Pick up a brass instrument, learn how to play it, then try out. Why should our activity conform to you? You, if you're interested, need to conform to the rules of Drum Corps, or don't participate. Pretty cut and dried, IMO.

I just looked at Hoppy's blog...trying to find reason behind his proposals this year. Not one post. At all. The comments had one guy go after him about it, and he basically blew him off. This is radical change for George. Come on George, we wanna know some rationale other than your usual canned answers.

irregardless is NOT a word. regardless is the proper word to be used if you're thinking about using irregardless. *dismounts soap box*