N.E. Brigand Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 9 minutes ago, MikeRapp said: Technically, as crazy as this may sound, GE actually has absolutely nothing to do with crowd reaction. As it was recently explained to me here, a corps GE score should be identical in an empty stadium as it is on finals night. It is what it is, apparently. Well, "audience engagement" is literally on the sheets, but it is a little bit like a democratic republic as opposed to a direct democracy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 2 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said: Well, "audience engagement" is literally on the sheets, but it is a little bit like a democratic republic as opposed to a direct democracy. But DCI is neither system. While the audience can, I suppose, sort of 'vote' through buying or not buying a ticket, they have no direct say in scoring and no direct representation on the adjudicating panel. In that sense DCI adjudication recognizing 'audience engagement' is more like a Banana Republic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 On 8/3/2017 at 7:35 AM, MikeD said: But deciding that the spot deserved a tick was a subjective decision...plus in a group tick, how MANY tenths to assign was also subjective. This is so silly but I’ll play So in the same situation, how do you know how much it will effect the build up? Both systems are flawed, both are subjective and both are still used together as a tic will down rate a build up. I just don’t get why the anti-tic zealots are so sure their system is prefect when both systems have the same human factor of subjectivity, they act as if build up made everything accurate and fair. Wrong ! Going away from tic was that start of massive, musical watering and getting away from music in favor of visual and no, I'm not saying bring back the tic, just be real 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c mor Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 4 hours ago, cowtown said: This is so silly but I’ll play So in the same situation, how do you know how much it will effect the build up? Both systems are flawed, both are subjective and both are still used together as a tic will down rate a build up. I just don’t get why the anti-tic zealots are so sure their system is prefect when both systems have the same human factor of subjectivity, they act as if build up made everything accurate and fair. Wrong ! Going away from tic was that start of massive, musical watering and getting away from music in favor of visual and no, I'm not saying bring back the tic, just be real I'm for that. How do we get there? I would love for there to be no cloud of doubt over the results. Can someone who hasn't been a corps member really "know" what is demanding and/or challenging with respect to performing a skill? How do you mitigate bias toward the organization of which you were a member? Or, their rival? Can the fans rise up and boycott until an independent "judging association" of some form or another is tasked with rendering rates & ranks without fear of retribution??? Just asking questions... ...and judges note errors, "That flam passage lacked clarity". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schnitzel Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 21 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said: Well, "audience engagement" is literally on the sheets, but it is a little bit like a democratic republic as opposed to a direct democracy. Actually, that's pretty dead-on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 16 minutes ago, Schnitzel said: Actually, that's pretty dead-on. Actually not even close. To even be a democratic-republic type system those on the panel representing the audience engagement would have to be placed on the panel by the audience. As it stands, DCI (which is the member corps) place them on the panel then have them evaluate what they deem to be audience engagement. Like I said before, that is like a Banana Republic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schnitzel Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 35 minutes ago, Stu said: Actually not even close. To even be a democratic-republic type system those on the panel representing the audience engagement would have to be placed on the panel by the audience. As it stands, DCI (which is the member corps) place them on the panel then have them evaluate what they deem to be audience engagement. Like I said before, that is like a Banana Republic. Okay - I defer to your superior intellect and experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 (edited) 57 minutes ago, Schnitzel said: Okay - I defer to your superior intellect and experience. Has nothing to do with me, my intellect, nor my experience. It is just a fact that the DCI audience does not place a person on the DCI panel to represent them and their engagement, but DCI itself, which is the member corps, designates a person on the panel secured by DCI to evaluate and represent the audience engagement. Edited August 5, 2017 by Stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted August 5, 2017 Share Posted August 5, 2017 9 hours ago, cowtown said: This is so silly but I’ll play So in the same situation, how do you know how much it will effect the build up? Both systems are flawed, both are subjective and both are still used together as a tic will down rate a build up. I just don’t get why the anti-tic zealots are so sure their system is prefect when both systems have the same human factor of subjectivity, they act as if build up made everything accurate and fair. Wrong ! Going away from tic was that start of massive, musical watering and getting away from music in favor of visual and no, I'm not saying bring back the tic, just be real You said "To an extent it was objective..." which triggered my response. No, it was not objective at all. Today's system is subjective, of course. Going away from the tic led to more demanding shows, not less. It was quite common for corps to take out the garden hose back in the tick days to eliminate errors. Eliminating tics led to more horizontal brass arranging and less vertical lining up of the parts (which made it easier to clean attacks and releases). Much more interesting music, IMO. And no, it did not cause any movement to visual and away from music. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 On 8/4/2017 at 7:42 PM, MikeD said: You said "To an extent it was objective..." which triggered my response. No, it was not objective at all. Today's system is subjective, of course. Going away from the tic led to more demanding shows, not less. It was quite common for corps to take out the garden hose back in the tick days to eliminate errors. Eliminating tics led to more horizontal brass arranging and less vertical lining up of the parts (which made it easier to clean attacks and releases). Much more interesting music, IMO. And no, it did not cause any movement to visual and away from music. yes it did, look at the wimpy drum books Cadets started using as they started moving their drumline around and then their switch to mellos, they watered stuff before it hit the field so they could pull off their visuals 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.