DCA Mini Corps Championships

[rayfallon]

I just went back and read through a few days of this thread and Strutta, I humbly apologize - no matter how goofy you and Liz get, you're infinitely more interesting than the conversation that gave way to all this folderal...

btw what does it mean to say "some corps in this state and some corps in that state" for a resume or signature?

Who's embarrassed, the poster? or the corps?

Maybe as part of their separation agreement they asked not to be mentioned in his threads?

Just wondering....

I guess I'll go back to ignioring this thread. John - PM me if Liz backhands you or anything interesting...

[Jeff Ream]

My guess is that Liz said something about hating something small about YOU and you thought she was talking about your corps...

(my guess is that it wasn't your ego...)

[Shadow_7]

And, BTW, last time I checked, there are currently 0 DCA-sanctioned shows in California. And yet that hasn't stopped Renegades, Dream, RCR back when, and now Freelancers and eventually Kingsmen and En Garde from being going concerns.

Minicorps == MCA. While an event does coincide with the DCA weekend, the MCA "championships" are actually AFTER DCA weekend. And realize that the Austin Stars corps is 2/3rds colorguard. To do minicorps, we in essence have to alienate 2/3rds of the corps who remain without an equal or better performance opportunity.

I'm not asking DCA to do anything more for us than they do for any other corps. A score. At a DCA show where said corps is at, where said DCA judges are at. Already AT. If I were a show sponser, would have to hire three INDEPENDENT judging panels to handle the needs of our participants? I suppose we could get by with just a DCI panel since they also do DCA sheets. I'm not sure if the reverse is true. But still one panel 6 judges, for DCA, one panel, 4 judges for DCI, one panel 3 judges (small corps - color guard / percussion / brass). Seems like a waste to me since DCA used to give scores for smaller corps. And suddenly that's too much to ask. I'm not talking time slots at the big show (yet). Just the basics. You know a score. Perhaps a lined field would be nice too. Video, Audio, and Pictures that exist and don't suck, but that's probably a pipe dream.

I guess I could stick with just the facts. The existence of the 35 rule has cost this local corps at least 10 members per season every season since it's inception. They want to be competitive and wont settle for anything less. At $300 a head, that's nearly $10K in equipment we don't have because of this rule. We've paid entrance fees, we've paid for an evaluation, and what has DCA "delivered" to date? We got to meet someone who's actually been to DCA. Sort of? We've performed at no less than 5 DCA santioned shows over the past two years. On our penny AFAIK. We got tapes and papers, but no scores. (we would have gotten socres if it was still pre 2007).

What's the solution? 3 judging panels per show sponsor per show per classification represented? Form our own circuit, called C-WOAH aka Corps with out a home. I fail to see how any of this benefits DCA? More facts I guess. Austin Stars, 34 members 1st drill camp March 2008. Austin Stars 32 members 1st drill camp 2009. We're not THAT different from ya'all. And yet because of the LACK of opportunity presented to us that any other corps gets, at best we can hope to field 1/3rd of the people who want to be a part of this corps at any one event / venue. Your rules, not ours.

[Toby]

I guess I could stick with just the facts. The existence of the 35 rule has cost this local corps at least 10 members per season every season since it's inception.

So some people flaked. Most corps have this problem. I can't tell you how much turnover we've had this season (a good bit), but, we recruited, and filled most of those holes. Using the lack of members is a cop-out. Always contact those that dropped earlier. Maybe their situation has changed and they might return. Be persistent.

You talked about having to axe a good 2/3 of the corps (guard) to do mini-corps. How can removing them from the hornline for performing be a bad thing when there is a color guard portion to I/E? They do well, and you have another thing to plug when you recruit. You can make the trek as a unit and still get a hell of an experience just on Friday night alone. If the mini-corps does well enough, you get an extra performance AT FINALS night!

Or, allow members under 18 with parental and corps management consent. But that's an argument for another point.

[AustinStarsPAA]

Or, allow members under 18 with parental and corps management consent. But that's an argument for another point.

Thanks, we do that.

Can I please request that from now on you ALL LEAVE AUSTIN STARS out of your arguments? Please? We did not start this discussion and have nothing to do with it.

I'm asking nicely.

Thank you.

edited for emphasis

Edited June 29, 2009 by StarsRecruiter

[MoonHill]

Minicorps == MCA. While an event does coincide with the DCA weekend, the MCA "championships" are actually AFTER DCA weekend. And realize that the Austin Stars corps is 2/3rds colorguard. To do minicorps, we in essence have to alienate 2/3rds of the corps who remain without an equal or better performance opportunity.

The comment was in response to your comment about DCA shows in Texas, but feel free to use that as a jumping off point for a totally different topic, sure.

That being said, welcome to the club. Somehow many a group manage to meet the Minicorps maximum limit without "alienating" 2/3 of their corps. Dream, it might be noted, is pretty heavily guard-built as well, yet we're somehow managing to not anger and aggravate the largest section of the corps by only doing minicorps at DCA this year. But then, we're not carrying a chip on our shoulder, either.

I'm not asking DCA to do anything more for us than they do for any other corps. A score

And DCA isn't asking you to do anything more than what they ask of every corps that wishes to compete at DCA Championships: meet the membership minimum voted on by the Associates. (and pass the eval and so on and so forth). There's no huge hardship being placed on your group that is not part and parcel of what every other group routinely gets over.

It's not the 35 rule that has cost you membership; it's your complete and total unwillingness to get the job done and overcome the hurdles the universe throws at you. If you're two people short of the minimum to compete, then the solution that would occur to the vast, overwhelming majority of people is to grab two more people to be members. If you have the membership necessary for the minimum, but are $3000 short of the expenses getting to Rochester would entail, then the logical solution is to hold a fundraiser/sale/whatever the hell to raise $3k. If that's absolutely not possible in any way at all ever, then guess what? You're SOL. Perhaps you can get a voting member to spot you some (cash)/(rule change)/(change in the laws of the universe). Or maybe just be angry on a message board, that might do it.

Hell, man, you're selling off horns in order to afford camera equipment. You're overcoming a hurdle to meet a need. Why aren't you emailing the camera retailers with demands about how their horrible intransigence on the issue of requiring you to meet a certain financial threshold in order to make use of their equipment to satisfy your intense need to have a recording of your performance is destroying everything? Don't they realize that this horrible "price" rule they've put in place is costing you the membership of all the people that won't settle for less than a HD recording of themselves playing a horn? Maybe if you negotiated with someone who might have it within their power to alter the price, but no, no, that's useless. Best to just be belligerent towards the desk clerk.

Or does that sound a little nuts?

Edited June 29, 2009 by MoonHill

[Storkysr]

Thanks, we do that.

Can I please request that from now on you ALL LEAVE AUSTIN STARS out of your arguments? Please? We did not start this discussion and have nothing to do with it.

I'm asking nicely.

Thank you.

edited for emphasis

As long as the Shadow continues to make the connection with his juvenile rant you won't hear the end of it. Just sayin

[Shadow_7]

Hell, man, you're selling off horns in order to afford camera equipment. You're overcoming a hurdle to meet a need. Why aren't you emailing the camera retailers with demands about how their horrible intransigence on the issue of requiring you to meet a certain financial threshold in order to make use of their equipment to satisfy your intense need to have a recording of your performance is destroying everything? Don't they realize that this horrible "price" rule they've put in place is costing you the membership of all the people that won't settle for less than a HD recording of themselves playing a horn? Maybe if you negotiated with someone who might have it within their power to alter the price, but no, no, that's useless. Best to just be belligerent towards the desk clerk.

Financial thresholds are not set in stone like the 35 rule. For the 35 rule, you have to have 35 members at ALL DCA shows. Or you get fined. According to the rules. Financially you can buy grey market items online for 2/3rds or less than the MSRP. Sometimes even before they're released. Or just wait six months and the price drops. Since the tech advances so fast. And most of the time, the price I paid for the gear I buy, is LESS than I pay in drumcorps dues PER SEASON. The main difference being that at seasons end the GEAR has some value left and can be sold (for better gear). And if you bought the gear used, you might break even or make a small profit.

My appologies mike. I should distance myself from a specific corps. I really haven't played a horn since August of last year. Why bother I get the same score whether I play like bill clinton or Miles Davis. I'm fighting for all corps < 35 members. Who USED to have a place with DCA. This is still a volunteer activity isn't it? Sorry dude, we can't take you if you didn't bring 34 friends. I know you're "volunteering" and all, but those are the rules.

Sure I could bring 34 friends. Or I could relocate to where that's not an issue. Or I could play in some other ballpark, it's not like there's a dozen or more brass bands within 50 miles of me. Lord knows I don't "need" DCA, anymore than they need me. The choice to not do anything is an easy one. And DCA makes it easier everyday. I just ask that they look at the bigger picture. 2006 pre 35, 19 OPEN class corps. 2009 ??????? (I wouldn't know, why bother tracking what everyone ELSE gets to do)

[Jeff Ream]

Shadow,

The problem is you want DCA to do everything for you......and it can't. It has to do whats good for the majority, and sometimes, even with what...25 corps coming.....someone may get left out.

when it comes to mini corps, you can cry up that river all you want, but you still dont get it...DCA doesnt have to do a ###### thing for mini corps. it ALLOWS them to compete at I&E, an event DCA makes NO profit off of.

Do what you need to do get the 35 rule changes, tell your people to quit crying if they cant do mini corps and recruit people.

really....the more you argue, the more credibility you lose. if you worked as hard on doing the things so many of us have suggested, your issues would probably be gone.

[LegalEagle50]

Thanks, we do that.

Can I please request that from now on you ALL LEAVE AUSTIN STARS out of your arguments? Please? We did not start this discussion and have nothing to do with it.

I'm asking nicely.

Thank you.

edited for emphasis

Sorry ~ I understand your request BUT until you stop being the reference point of Shadow's complaints with DCA, it won't happen. He refers to the corps, people respond in kind. You may not have started the discussion, but the way Shadow reflects everything about the 35 & over rule on Stars, you do have EVERYTHING to do with it unfortunately.

So the choices become: 1) Let Shadow keep talking to himself and the world endlessly without responding at all; 2) Ignore everything about Austin Stars when responding to him which would lead to halfassed responses; and 3) Keep responding in hopes that one day those of us who have attempted to reason with him and make suggestions to help both him and the corps through this particular issue make headway.

OR 4) If you think Austin Stars is being hurt by his postings use the same rules that many, if not most, corps have. You can't say anything disparaging about the corps either in person or on line that could hurt the corps reputation and/or imagine without being asked to leave. It's not a gag rule that says one cannot post. It does mean people have to think before they speak because what they say does reflect on the corps.