thatguywiththehat Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 For the record, at least one of the G7 was directly responsible for bringing back The Troopers. hmm... Helping one corps 5 years ago vs not helping the rest of DCI today. How their perspective has changed. Also, there was more internally going on to rescue the troopers, including a great effort to relieve their massive tax issues, which was helped by alumni of the troopers. Granted, it took help to restructure their business operations, but it was needed, they hadn't had a stable corps director since Jim Jones. Don't mistake competitive success and stability in a corps to one organization directly helping them. There were a few, and most of the complicated money issues were taken care of by alumni volunteers and the BOD. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffe77 Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 This good news for those like myself who wanted to see drum corps this summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 The BoD thing is a bit of a tempest in a teacup. Until the MiM corporation either dissolves or breaks fully away, there is still a group of corps simultaneously running a rival circuit to DCI while still in DCI. So what's going on with that? Mike 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lead Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Yeah, I can't fathom initially whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. Both the BoD and the Executive Board are half-and-half. Maybe there was a break in the impasse? Maybe the G7 decided to try to continue their coup, and nothing was said at the meetings? Maybe it's rainbows and unicorns now, and DCI is all good for the forseeable future? I'm sad not to see a Troopers rep in there :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) Yeah, I can't fathom initially whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. Both the BoD and the Executive Board are half-and-half. I think the key is how the members work from here on in, not so much the structure of the Boards. The G7 really had no voice on the board after losing threir seats in the recall vote. Now they do. But the non G7 appear to have retained influence and power as well. Its an unholy and shaky alliance to be sure. But it appears on the surface to me that its far better than having one group deciding they should have all the power and influence and ready to walk out the door if they did not get it as a result. This buys both camps some time and if both are at the table, there is still hope that common ground can be reached that is satisfactory to both. But maybe I'm being too optimistic here, who knows. But lets see how this all plays out and whether these members on the BOD can work together or not. We'll find out soon enough. And the Board has been changed from 1-3 year staggered terms to 1 year for all. Edited January 27, 2013 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IllianaLancerContra Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 I think the key is how the members work from here on in, not so much the structure of the Boards. The G7 really had no voice on the board after losing threir seats in the recall vote. Now they do. But the non G7 appear to have retained influence and power as well. Its an unholy and shaky alliance to be sure. But it appears on the surface to me that its far better than having one group deciding they should have all the power and influence and ready to walk out the door if they did not get it as a result. This buys both camps some time and if both are at the table, there is still hope that common ground can be reached that is satisfactory to both. But maybe I'm being too optimistic here, who knows. But lets see how this all plays out and whether these members on the BOD can work together or not. We'll find out soon enough. And the Board has been changed from 1-3 year staggered terms to 1 year for all. You are correct - we will see. The more I look the relief expressed by some, the more I fear we may have the Drum Corps equivalent of the Munich 1938 treaty. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 You are correct - we will see. The more I look the relief expressed by some, the more I fear we may have the Drum Corps equivalent of the Munich 1938 treaty. Now you're just baiting corpsband. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaos001 Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Now you're just baiting corpsband. Let's not appease the aggressor here people... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 The BoD thing is a bit of a tempest in a teacup. Until the MiM corporation either dissolves or breaks fully away, there is still a group of corps simultaneously running a rival circuit to DCI while still in DCI. So what's going on with that? My speculation: The TOC (and now, MiM) continue to be an exploration of *some* of the alternatives offered by the G7. TOC = explore show format. MiM = explore different approaches to show management / operation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Now you're just baiting corpsband. lol., no. just further proof of Godwin's law. 3 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.