MikeD Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 sorry, don't see it that way. the petitioners were not causing disruptions and were following the First Amendment. First amendment has nothing to do with it. That applies to the government, not a private organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 ok. they still were not causing any disruptions, and in a few cases, DCI folks were quite rude in how they handled it. Did the people with the petitions get permission from DCI to collect signatures at the show? If not, they were indeed disrupting the event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 I wasn't there. I remember some street performers in NYC who "had a CD out" (which they were trying to sell) getting upset with people who dared video what they were doing. They told people they weren't allowed to record them, and many people obeyed. Of course, the street performers didn't have a leg to stand on. I think there's relevance in there somewhere. If the petitioners didn't want to leave, they didn't have to if they were on public property. If it was on property that was part of what DCI was renting, that's a different story I think. But I"m not a laywer. Obviously. in the stadium, i would agree. in the lot, not so much...since DCI didn't rent the park in Allentown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 Did the people with the petitions get permission from DCI to collect signatures at the show? If not, they were indeed disrupting the event. no because the park in Allentown wasn't rented by DCI, so they had no need Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 (edited) Mike D is right about one thing...the amplification rule did not allow any new instruments. The electronics rule, however, did. Two different rules passed several years apart. The amplification rule might not have allowed new instruments by rule, but it did allow some never before used but previously legal instruments to be used rather effectively for the first time. Edited March 25, 2010 by Kamarag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 Mike D is right about one thing...the amplification rule did not allow any new instruments. The electronics rule, however, did. Two different rules passed several years apart.The amplification rule might not have allowed new instruments by rule, but it did allow some never before used but previously legal instruments to be used rather effectively for the first time. Exactly right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 the gateway rule...can't jhave one without the other. Mike D is right about one thing...the amplification rule did not allow any new instruments. The electronics rule, however, did. Two different rules passed several years apart.The amplification rule might not have allowed new instruments by rule, but it did allow some never before used but previously legal instruments to be used rather effectively for the first time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 the gateway rule...can't jhave one without the other. Sure you can. In fact, that is what happened. There were amps permitted in drum corps well before there were electronic instruments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickhaltsforlife Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 Mike... do you just argue for the sake of arguing??? I have shook my head after almost every one of your posts... for numerous reasons. I do not mean this as a personal insult... I'm just wondering... I always love a good Mike/Jeff pissing match... And for the people who say DCP isn't the majority of DCI fans... well that is very true... but the majority opinion I would bet A LOT on is almost exactly the same. Walk around a show... listen to people talk.... and you will hear the exact same gripes and complaints as you hear on here. And I'm sure DCI realizes that the opinions on DCP really are somewhat reflective of the majority of DCI fans. I basically agree with everything that Jeff has said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamarag Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 And I'm sure DCI realizes that the opinions on DCP really are somewhat reflective of the majority of DCI fans. Well, I don't believe that's even remotely true. I think the majority of drum corps fans don't care either way. I think DCI realizes that people that actively post on DCP are a very vocal MINORITY of fans, and are a group with a very wide degrees of opinions, all of which are valid to some degree or another. Thinking for one second that DCP posters represent a majority of fans would be grossly inaccurate. 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.