2020

[ouooga]

31 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

I had to go look that up.  Now I regret doing that... after discovering it only drew 557 paid attendees.

Evidently, the 2009 event had no judges, and used fan favorite voting.  The open-class Velvet Knights beat Bluecoats to finish 2nd behind Blue Devils.

How about we agree that the 2009 event was neither a legitimate contest, nor a valid indicator of the potential fan draw for a DCI sanctioned contest in the area?

I think that's been agreed upon already in this thread, but sure, why not.

[Stu]

14 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

I had to go look that up.  Now I regret doing that... after discovering it only drew 557 paid attendees.

Evidently, the 2009 event had no judges, and used fan favorite voting.  The open-class Velvet Knights beat Bluecoats to finish 2nd behind Blue Devils.

How about we agree that the 2009 event was neither a legitimate contest, nor a valid indicator of the potential fan draw for a DCI sanctioned contest in the area?

It was not a DCI event, and it was not marketed well (funny in that it was promoted by BD as a possible precursor of the Cirque du Soleil G7 idea), therefore that show might not indicate a potential DCI fan base draw; that is true.  But since it was not a DCI sanctioned event, and the DCI adjudicators and scoring sheets were not utilized, the voting criteria was absolutely ‘legitimate’ based on the scoring guidelines set forth in the non-DCI sanctioned show.  In fact, to call the voting system ‘illegitimate’ is a condescending slap at the fans that were in attendance and voted according to the voting criteria set forth within that non-DCI show.  The only way it would not have been a 'legitimate contest' would have been if the scores and placements for that show were officially folded into the other official DCI scores.

Edited April 6, 2017 by Stu

[aLittleBird]

11 hours ago, Stu said:

It was not a DCI event, and it was not marketed well (funny in that it was promoted by BD as a possible precursor of the Cirque du Soleil G7 idea), therefore that show might not indicate a potential DCI fan base draw; that is true.  But since it was not a DCI sanctioned event, and the DCI adjudicators and scoring sheets were not utilized, the voting criteria was absolutely ‘legitimate’ based on the scoring guidelines set forth in the non-DCI sanctioned show.  In fact, to call the voting system ‘illegitimate’ is a condescending slap at the fans that were in attendance and voted according to the voting criteria set forth within that non-DCI show.  The only way it would not have been a 'legitimate contest' would have been if the scores and placements for that show were officially folded into the other official DCI scores.

"A condescending slap at the fans" might be a little bit of a harsh rebuttal to the point he's trying to make-- which evidently is that the scoring on that night might not have awarded credit where credit is due, seeing as, I assume, very few people in that audiences are agitators for marching events... or arts events. I would be surprised if more than 1/5 of them even had any sort of scholarly background in music.

[cixelsyd]

14 hours ago, Stu said:

It was not a DCI event, and it was not marketed well (funny in that it was promoted by BD as a possible precursor of the Cirque du Soleil G7 idea), therefore that show might not indicate a potential DCI fan base draw; that is true.  But since it was not a DCI sanctioned event, and the DCI adjudicators and scoring sheets were not utilized, the voting criteria was absolutely ‘legitimate’ based on the scoring guidelines set forth in the non-DCI sanctioned show.  In fact, to call the voting system ‘illegitimate’ is a condescending slap at the fans that were in attendance and voted according to the voting criteria set forth within that non-DCI show.  The only way it would not have been a 'legitimate contest' would have been if the scores and placements for that show were officially folded into the other official DCI scores.

I concede that, depending on which definition you use, "legitimate" may not be the appropriate choice of word.  And a popularity contest is still a "contest".  But it is not a conventional field contest, where a pre-defined judging system aims to ensure that results reflect the performances given on that field and nothing else.

So change "legitimate contest" to "conventional field contest".  Carry on.

[Stu]

3 hours ago, aLittleBird said:

"A condescending slap at the fans" might be a little bit of a harsh rebuttal to the point he's trying to make-- which evidently is that the scoring on that night might not have awarded credit where credit is due, seeing as, I assume, very few people in that audiences are agitators for marching events... or arts events. I would be surprised if more than 1/5 of them even had any sort of scholarly background in music.

But…… the scoring on that night actually ’was’ awarded as credit where credit was due.  Why?  Because the voting system was not designed for people that are agitators of the arts nor had any sort of scholarly background in music.  The voting system was designed for anyone, again anyone in the audience who was Entertained by a particular performance.  This is why the elite in DCI are so afraid of allowing the audience to have any input in scoring; because the audience is likely to be Entertained by Jersey Surf’s tribute to the Bridgemen far more than the Blue Devils abstract demonstration of Cabaret Voltaire.   And by the way, thanks for inadvertently proving my point concerning the academic elitism with condescending underpinnings defining what is considered ‘legitimate’.

[Stu]

58 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

I concede that, depending on which definition you use, "legitimate" may not be the appropriate choice of word.  And a popularity contest is still a "contest".  But it is not a conventional field contest, where a pre-defined judging system aims to ensure that results reflect the performances given on that field and nothing else.

So change "legitimate contest" to "conventional field contest".  Carry on.

Thank you! That change in description takes away the condescending underpinnings!