George Dixon Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Silly Brasso. I never said it includes only the guard and hornline. Please quote the message where I made that assertion. Your definition would lead the reader to believe that the caption is JUST about marching. This is NOT a valid definition as it includes ALL the visual contributions that ALL the moving performers contribute to the program. But you keep it up with the insults and misrepresentations -- we LOVE your style BRASSO is one of our best contributors. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 BRASSO is one of our best contributors. Thanks Mom ( haha!... just kidding... I'll take the compliment ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) LOL! You are hilarious Brasso :-) Readers can indeed see that leaving out (a) most of the criteria and (b) 1/3rd of the performers might lead objective readers to conclude your definintion was woefully incomplete. And I'm STILL waiting for you to show me the message where I said that this caption is restritcted to the brass and guard. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE enlighten me oh great can of metal polish! Oh Context.. and proper chronology, my friend. It was you that initially brought up in chronological order above that I was misleading readers that only Brass was being judged in this caption ( I said no such thing. I even " liked " above the poster than reminded us that Guard was being judged in this caption). So then, in order, you jumped in and said that " more importantly Guard is judged" ( I knew that ). So I then, and only then, reminded you that YOU left out that Percussion was also being judged in this Vis. Prof. caption ( saying that " 2 can play your game " tonite ). So... thats the context. The proper chronology of the comments is there above for all to see ( if interested in this silly back and forth ) Not to allow you to deflect this now, I did request you to tell us which of the skill sets I listed above that you told us were prevalent in " 1980 " but no longer are being judged here in 2015. You came up empty. The ones I listed above are all skill sets the Vis. Prof. judges are all currently evaluating in this subcaption today ( not just as you said above in " 1980 " ). So you couldn't list which ones were not accurate, ( there arn't any ) so you were left to go in a different tack, and try to deflect the fact you could not list where I was in error, and so you went into a lame, screaming caps biz of my reply above to the OP as being ( your assessment alone ) as " WOEFULLY INCOMPLETE".... and now you are attempting to ask me something else on " the Percussion Judge " biz, but even here the context and the chronology of this doesn't work for you in the least from a simple read of the chronological sequence of our comments from above. So thats that, Corpsband . ( lol!) Edited August 3, 2015 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) Oh Context.. and proper chronology, my friend. It was you that initially brought up in chronological order above that I was misleading readers that only Brass was being judged in this caption ( I said no such thing. I even " liked " above the poster than reminded us that Guard was being judged in this caption). So then, in order, you jumped in and said that " more importantly Guard is judged" ( I knew that ). So I then, and only then, reminded you that YOU left out that Percussion was also being judged in this Vis. Prof. caption ( saying that " 2 can play your game " tonite ). So... thats the context. The proper chronology of the comments is there above for all to see ( if interested in this silly back and forth ) Not to allow you to deflect this now, I did request you to tell us which of the skill sets I listed above that you told us were prevalent in " 1980 " but no longer are being judged here in 2015. You came up empty. The ones I listed above are all skill sets the Vis. Prof. judges are all currently evaluating in this subcaption ( among other skill sets.. which I said above as well ). So you couldn't list which ones were not accurate, ( there arn't any ) so you were left to go in a different tack, and try to deflect the fact you could not list where I was in error, and so you went into a lame, screaming caps biz of my reply above to the OP as being ( your assessment alone ) as " WOEFULLY INCOMPLETE".... and now you are attempting to ask me something else on " the Percussion Judge " biz, but even here the context and the chronology of this doesn't work for you in the least. So thats that, Corpsband . ( lol!) LOL. No Brasso I'm not deflecting. I NEVER said that your definiition was WRONG. I said it was INCOMPLETE. So of course your request for a list of items that were wrong is moot. I never said they were wrong. So how I could I possibly list the wrong ones? Your man of straw is burning to the ground and your convoluted logic has failed you yet again (it's as reliable as ever). It's so interesting that you choose characterize my posts in your own words when it suits you but can never quite come up with the direct quotes to substantiate your claims. IOW -- you just make stuff up! And when you're called on it, you just ignore all your previous accusations as if they never happened. So again. I'm waiting for the post where I said percussion was not included in the Vis Prof caption. That fact that for 3 messages now you've refused to cite this phantom message would seem to indicate maybe I never said it! As for this being just ME observing this behavior, there's a long list of posters who have pointed out this kind vaporous logic chopping before. Anyway... Here's your message in full to help you remember what you said: I never stated that Visual Proficiency caption is restricted to just the Brass. But if you want to play that game, 2 can play. Its not restricted to just the Brass, and " the Guard " either, YOU failed to add that " more importantly " it also includes the Percussion section as well. Edited August 3, 2015 by corpsband Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) So again. I'm waiting for the post where I said percussion was not included in the Vis Prof caption. That fact that for 3 messages now you've refused to cite this phantom message would seem to indicate maybe I never said it! Ok.... here's the chronology: 8: 58 pm... Corpsband... : " The caption encompasses quite a bit more . More importantly , it includes Guard" Notice the time frame here by you.... ( 8: 58 pm ). This was after my detailed list of skill sets above. Later you said these were for ( your own time frame above)... " 1980 ". You are wrong, and I pointed that out to you. These are still skill sets used today. The fact that my listing was ( your words in caps) " woefully incomplete " is for others to decide. I believe them to be detailed enough, and never meant them to be all inclusive, nor a fully complete list of the skill sets that are judged today in this subcaption. I used the words above " the major " things the judge in this subcaption is evaluating. Moving on... after you admonished me for my " woefully incomplete " definition that it also includes " the Guard " ( at 8; 58 PM ), I replied to your :8:58 comment at 9:59 pm with " I never said Vis. Prof was just about the Brass" 2 can play this game. It also includes the Percussion section as well ". Also, for context, it was after my reply to the OP, it was YOU that jumped in with the initial snarky, and swarmy reply that my skill sets were for...... your words..... " 1980 ".. But they are not. They are for today as well. But you did not know this... otherwise you would not have said that my skill sets was for " 1980 ". So then you naturally got embarrassed with this, got huffy and went with the caps, and the notion that my reply to the OP's question was ( in your caps ) '' WOEFULLY INCOMPLETE ". I can't be responsible when you jump in here with a crack that my definition of the skill sets was for... " 1980 ", and then you find out that these were all skill sets utilized by the Vis. Prof. today as well. Once you found out your initial criticisms of my skill sets was NOT just for 1980, but for today as well, it all unraveled for you, so you attempted to deflect all that with the percussion judge biz, and that my reply was " woefully incomplete " and all that lameness. But it was the classic epic fail for you as it did not turn out the way you hoped it would when you first jumped in that my listing of the skill sets was for just " 1980 ". So thats where you FIRST began to twist yourself into knots tonite there Corpsband, and then you almost suffocated yourself in those twistings after that (lol!) Edited August 3, 2015 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) I'll try one more time Brasso. "Skill set for 1980" means "not adequate to describe the caption today". I listed the content and achievement bullets for the caption IN THE PRESENT DAY. It's immediately obvious that your definiition was incomplete. You only described a small set of the criteria in actual use today. I'm sorry if you fail to understand that. You made a whole series of intentionally wrong interpretations of my posts. You alleged points I never made. And instead of actually responding to any of the questions I posed, you fabricated some silly inquiry about claims I never made. And then crowed in victory when I pointed that fact out. See? Simple clear english sentences in direct response to your questions. Your contributions to the entertainment value of DCP are UNPARALLELED. Carry on oh great fount of DCP Silliness! Edited August 3, 2015 by corpsband Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Ugh. So close yet so far.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky Pyro Posted August 3, 2015 Author Share Posted August 3, 2015 OK men easy, now I think I've got the question answered thank you all for your replies it's just crown looks so clean everywhere, I can't understand how free walking in free forms get a higher mark that's all. And crowns hornline feet and leg work are stellar. They have set a visual standard and you can see other Corps grabbing onto it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) I'll try one more time Brasso. "Skill set for 1980" means "not adequate to describe the caption today". I listed the content and achievement bullets for the caption IN THE PRESENT DAY. It's immediately obvious that your definiition was incomplete. You only described a small set of the criteria in actual use today. I'm sorry if you fail to understand that. My explanation of the MM's skills being judged in the Vis. Prof in my comments above are speciific and detailed, imo.... far more detailed in the specific examples being judged than in your generalized brief cut and paste of the submittance of your broad outlines, imo. My list of specific examples of real world skills the judges in this caption are judging were never meant to me all inclusive ( despite my lengthy examples ) and furthermore, my comments ended by saying that these were only SOME of the major skill sets being evaluated. For context, it was YOU that screamed out in italics that my extensive examples of skills mentioned were ( your words ) " woefully incomplete" . We'll let the readers decide who gave more specific examples above of some of the specific skills sets being judged in the VIs. Prof. both " 1980 " as well as today, and who's explanation and assistance to the OP in their comments above was " woefully inadequate " or not. Finally, for the record, it was not I that said that your explanation of the skills being judged to the OP's question were " woefully incomplete ". You attempted to put me on the defensive with that criticism, but it completely backfired, then it quickly all went downhill for you from there. So thats that. Theres really nothing more to add on this, imo. We move on, and like I said, readers can determine for themselves whose comments above regarding the things that are being judged in this caption were more helpful, and skill specific, and whose broad outline provided was in fact by contrast " woefully incomplete ". Edited August 3, 2015 by BRASSO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgg80 Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Wow -- quite a back and forth, mostly analyzing who said what, and who mischaracterized what. Wading through it all, I learned a lot about Vis Prof from Brasso's post. I think those kind of details are what show up on the judges tapes. It also helps me appreciate some of the razor thin differences between the top 4 in this caption. I particular, as fast as the Cadets move, I'm seeing a lot of that "rolling into" directional changes. Given their velocity, seems very difficult to clean. Battling physics. 1 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.