Kamarag Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 (edited) Why stop there. Why not the entire galaxy?? Yes, but much like the Emperor's Death Star, oldschooldbc's efforts will be bombastic, over-engineered, and vulnerable to the smallest of weapons...in this case a "logic torpedo". Edited January 24, 2010 by Kamarag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimba47 Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 And you want us to accept your opinions as credible when you haven't even attempted to master the art of conversation.Yeah, uh-huh. I'm sorry. Did my opinion personally offend you in some way? I ask because that ^ is a little ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschooldbc Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 (edited) Naturally, these 3 voted for the increase in the age limits: Blue Devils, Cadets and Carolina Crown voted for the measure. They have the most to benefit. If you are 23-year-old age-out, who would you rather march for? One of these corps, or an OC corps? Or some WC corps that didn't make semis last year? Of course, you will pick CC or BD or Cadets. Naturally, these 3 voted to expand their own talent pool. I don't know why the Cascades would have voted along. Maybe an apologist for this organization can explain. Thankfully, the other 18 members realized this would not expand their talent pool, and would therefore put them at a steeper disadvantage. They voted no. I would like to think that they voted out of altruism, "with the best interests of the activity in mind". But I am not naive. ========================================== But the sound engineer rule passed. Which, of course, I find attrocious. Now struggling OC and WC corps will need to find money in their budgets for a sound engineer. Good luck. All this rule change will do, is to further the chasm between the haves and have-nots, within the activity. How much will a professional sound engineer cost, for a summer's work? Perhaps $10,000 to $20,000? Where is a financially-strapped corps supposed to come up with this cash? Many of these outfits were struggling to feed their members, at the end of the last tour. Now you expect them to come up with the budget, for a sound engineer, too? What are they supposed to do - cut more money out of the food budget? No peanut butter for this year's tour? Feed the kids breakfast cereal for every meal? Food or sound engineer..... sound engineer or food..... What would you pick? (Some senior citizens have to pick between food and medicine, because they can't afford both. Now some corps directors will face a similar choice - but regardless of which choice they make, they lose.) Edited January 24, 2010 by oldschooldbc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euponitone Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Naturally, these 3 voted for the increase in the age limits: Blue Devils, Cadets and Carolina Crown voted for the measure. They have the most to benefit. If you are 23-year-old age-out, who would you rather march for? One of these corps, or an OC corps? Or some WC corps that didn't make semis last year? Of course, you will pick CC or BD or Cadets. Naturally, these 3 voted to expand their own talent pool. I don't know why the Cascades would have voted along. Maybe an apologist for this organization can explain. Thankfully, the other 18 members realized this would not expand their talent pool, and would therefore put them at a steeper disadvantage. They voted no. I would like to think that they voted out of altruism, "with the best interests of the activity in mind". But I am not naive. ========================================== But the sound engineer rule passed. Which, of course, I find attrocious. Now struggling OC and WC corps will need to find money in their budgets for a sound engineer. Good luck. All this rule change will do, is to further the chasm between the haves and have-nots, within the activity. How much will a professional sound engineer cost, for a summer's work? Perhaps $10,000 to $20,000? Where is a financially-strapped corps supposed to come up with this cash? Many of these outfits were struggling to feed their members, at the end of the last tour. Now you expect them to come up with the budget, for a sound engineer, too? What are they supposed to do - cut more money out of the food budget? No peanut butter for this year's tour? Feed the kids breakfast cereal for every meal? Food or sound engineer..... sound engineer or food..... What would you pick? Not to make light of the situation, but I'm guessing most of them will just take somebody already on staff and put them in the box for shows with a walkie talkie. Most drum corps do that now with the guy running the board downstairs, I doubt they'll change that now. Even my fairly 'wealthy' corps just used a guy with some techie experience who was already on the vis staff. Not exactly at 10-20 grand prospect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 But the sound engineer rule passed. Which, of course, I find attrocious. Now struggling OC and WC corps will need to find money in their budgets for a sound engineer. Good luck. All this rule change will do, is to further the chasm between the haves and have-nots, within the activity. Newsflash: Sound engineers have been legal and in use by corps for several years now. All the procedure change does is allow the engineer to place his sound board and associated equipment off the performance field, as directed by the individual contest directors based on show site accessibility. Additionally, it codifies allowance of communication with other staff members (like near the box) which was already done, as it wasn't expressly forbidden by previous rule. As for who the sound engineer is, I can only speak for the corps I work for. We have several trained sound engineers already on staff in various captions, so it's not an additional cost issue. I will say that any corps that sticks a vis staffer with techie experience (that doesnt have training and an understanding of live sound support) behind a sound board deserves exactly what they get :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschooldbc Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Newsflash: Sound engineers have been legal and in use by corps for several years now. All the procedure change does is allow the engineer to place his sound board and associated equipment off the performance field, as directed by the individual contest directors based on show site accessibility. Additionally, it codifies allowance of communication with other staff members (like near the box) which was already done, as it wasn't expressly forbidden by previous rule.As for who the sound engineer is, I can only speak for the corps I work for. We have several trained sound engineers already on staff in various captions, so it's not an additional cost issue. I will say that any corps that sticks a vis staffer with techie experience (that doesnt have training and an understanding of live sound support) behind a sound board deserves exactly what they get :) Or......... We can ban electronics in drum corps, as I have previously advocated. Then we won't need sound engineers, period. Then their training and expense would become irrelevant. Then contests will be won by the performers on the field, not the sound engineer in the box. And vis staffers can concentrate on what they should be doing - teaching the kids how to march. Do I see circumstances where a contest could be decided by a sound engineer? Of course. If they add even a tenth of a point, to the brass or percussion scores of a particular corps, then that could be the margin of victory. That's outagreous. A drum corps needs a sound engineer like a fish needs bicycle. If the performers in this activity were playing instruments that need amplification - such as electric guitars - then I could see the need for a sound engineer. But these musicians are plaing brass and percussion instruments, that do not need amplication. In that case, a sound engineer should be extraneous. Kamarag, we have polar-opposite opinions, on the direction of this activity. I seriously doubt if I will change your mind on this topic - and I know you are not going to change mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Both "I could care less" and "I couldn't care less" are perfectly grammatical and mean the same thing. It's not a question of grammar, it's one of semantics. They don't mean the same thing. Just like "I could care more" and "I couldn't care more" don't mean the same thing. But, since they're figures of speech with the same implied meaning, they've become interchangeable. For all intensive purposes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hrothgar15 Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 It's not a question of grammar, it's one of semantics. They don't mean the same thing. Just like "I could care more" and "I couldn't care more" don't mean the same thing. But, since they're figures of speech with the same implied meaning, they've become interchangeable. For all intensive purposes. They actually do mean the same thing semantically, since the nature of "less" being associated with a negative polarity item leads to covert negation of the modal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 They actually do mean the same thing semantically, since the nature of "less" being associated with a negative polarity item leads to covert negation of the modal. No, they don't. lol. Neither do "I couldn't laugh at you more" and "I could laugh at you more." But, I'm not teaching today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 But, since they're figures of speech with the same implied meaning, they've become interchangeable. For all intensive purposes. Their certainly is some logic in they're somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.