Jeff Ream Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 They are entitled to ask more of DCI. If they get it, fine. If they don't then DCI may no longer be a sufficient organization that us inline with their future, fine. Both parties will do what is in their best interest. If DCI is worried that loosing 7 corps will disrupt their bottom line and mission too much then they will have to offer compromise or begin talks with G7 to find level ground. if that's the case then maybe G7 do deserve to be listened to. But, If DCI feels they can take the blow then G7 will decide to either follow through or not with their plans to not be a part of DCI. So far nearly everything we know about G7 has been leaked information. Who's to say other information, more detailed information hasn't been passed around? I feel that DCI deserves polished, not leaked, complete, clear, functioning ideas from the G7 about what they plan to do with their extra votes. And I think that just because it wasn't given in that Leaked email doesn't mean it won't ever be given. The ONLY thing that the G7 want as of now is a voice. They clearly feel that their needs aren't being addressed. If that's true, or if that's an exaggeration, or whatever doesn't really matter. I would like to see DCI hear the G7 out Completly without the hyberbole of DCP posts screwing up the conversation. Listening and Understand both sides is the first step in resolving this. A leaked proposal and a leaked letter is all people know about G7 and I'm atleast skeptical enough to know that there is more to this if both sides were given adequate fair voices. And I hope G7 would make a public announcement about their alliance to atleast get something first hand instead of second hand. Because their reputation on DCP proceeds them... now they don't want A voice....the way to be THE voice. and making the power rest in the hands of the people with digital recorders in their hands is one of the dumber decisions DCI could go for, and DCI has a history of dumb decisions. if their needs aren't being addressed, then maybe they need to look in the mirror...because the ringleaders had a HUGE hand in getting DCi to where it is now, yet accept no responsibility for that. Worse, they admit in their letter they don't have the answers. Now, I don't know what your real world business experience is, but in mine, if someone comes in barking they want all the power, but have screwed things up in the past, and then admit they have no solutions for the future, any organization that says ok and hands them the keys is doomed to failure. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 It doesn't matter what the email asked. The proposal 2 years ago asked for more... Did they get it? No. It's part of the negotiation process and nothing more. For me the G7 are entitled to demand anything they want and they can make whatever threat they want. It's just words on paper. When they actually begin discussing orally is when the rubber meets the road and it won't matter what was said in a #### letter. DCI controls DCI and no amount of letter writing will change that on the G7 part. They will present an argument and DCI will like, reject, or compromise a solution. I would like for G7 to make a public statement and I would like for them to present the entirety of their case publically. I will not suggest that G7 is acting out of line because they are not. They clearly want to change the by-laws using the DCI by-laws however that means. I don't care how often people disagree with me her on DCP and post their "gotch ya" posts. This situation had been handled very poorly from a PR perspective. The people who instantly vilify the G7 for their ideas are reactionary. Every radical proposal does not require people to assume "G7 is taking our Corps away!" ... No their not. Abd even if the G7 said explicitly "We want to be the only WC corps in DCI" good for them! Let them battle it out in DCI they can state (or misstate) anything they like and I won't hate them for it. Again, this leaked information leaves a lot to be desired from me interns of questions. But we cannot expect 2 leaked sources to give all the information we would like and all to answer all our questions. If you all want to over react with the process that you believe is unfolding have it... I won't jump on the crazy train with you until I have the whole picture from G7 and DCI. Your turn! First snappy response gets a green thingy! let's be real here ok Charlie? Look at what they asked for...7 of 12 votes. That means they vote together, they win. So they get that power, all vote together, and voila all the crap from 2010 starts getting proposed....and without enough votes to be stopped they win. It's genius is it's simplicity. They get the power, the deck is stacked, no one can stop them. Really, it's not hard to see through the ######## and see where it's headed. When it comes to playing crafty politics, they can only go so deep without being totally transparent. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I see it as the reactionary people running straight off a cliff. yeah, I count 7 of them 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 what we need is a director with cajones to propose an entirely new governance structure for DCI that involves fewer directors and gives Dan more power. people that spend 1/4 of the year competing against each other are supposed to be friends and work together the rest of the year...really? Given how much ego there can be in that room? Until these directors realize they are more of the problem than they are the solution, they're screwed. 2 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.