N.E. Brigand Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 I don't think we've heard anything about what was discussed at yesterday's YEA board meeting, but this new reporting on another scandal perhaps sheds light on the likely state of mind of some of the participants: CBS Is Reportedly Panicking over Impending Charlie Rose Exposé. Key excerpt, with my added emphasis: "The Post is now reportedly working on a follow-up exposé about Rose, and multiple sources told 'Page Six' that CBS execs are panicking about it. Many of them are reportedly worried they’ll be accused of 'turning a blind eye' to Rose’s misconduct — and are also apparently trying to use NDAs to prohibit potential sources from talking to the Post." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: I am confused by the argument several pages back concerning the Indianapolis Star article. This text seems unambiguous to me: "Drum Corps International also is reviewing policies related to ensuring compliance with best practices and laws around reporting abuse for participating groups, Acheson said. Participating groups that fail to meet Drum Corps International's policies can lead to that group's dismissal." To me that plainly means that DCI believes that it already has the power (presumably by some vote of the DCI board or full membership) to expel a corps from DCI membership or otherwise discipline a corps if the corps doesn't meet certain standards--and we know DCI has punished corps in the past for matters of far less import than the cover-up of sexual harassment and assault (which is what Cadets may have done). It seems Acheson's review aims to spell out such consequences more plainly in advance, but is irrelevant to whether DCI has the ability right now to kick out Cadets, if it (again by some sort of vote) so chooses: it can. (Not saying it should.) Well, you read the same article I did, and came away with the same " comprehension level " that Dan A believes DCI HQ has the authority to suspend/ and or dismiss from DCI Membership any " group that fails to follow DCI policy ". Dan Acheson did not say this might/ could occur here ( of course.. its too early in the information gathering stage ) He just said how " seriously " he takes this, and he invoked the phrase " dismissal from DCI membership " as an option available to DCI HQ with a member of the national media today with his response. . Edited April 10, 2018 by BRASSO 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) I suppose we should be grateful that Hopkins didn't try to fire YEA's board. He probably thinks they should have protected him against the allegations. Edited April 10, 2018 by N.E. Brigand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingusmonk Posted April 10, 2018 Author Share Posted April 10, 2018 13 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: I am confused by the argument several pages back concerning the Indianapolis Star article. This text seems unambiguous to me: "Drum Corps International also is reviewing policies related to ensuring compliance with best practices and laws around reporting abuse for participating groups, Acheson said. Participating groups that fail to meet Drum Corps International's policies can lead to that group's dismissal." To me that plainly means that DCI believes that it already has the power (presumably by some vote of the DCI board or full membership) to expel a corps from DCI membership or otherwise discipline a corps if the corps doesn't meet certain standards--and we know DCI has punished corps in the past for matters of far less import than the cover-up of sexual harassment and assault (which is what Cadets may have done). It seems Acheson's review aims to spell out such consequences more plainly in advance, but is irrelevant to whether DCI has the ability right now to kick out Cadets, if it (again by some sort of vote) so chooses: it can. (Not saying it should.) Please Lord. No. Just when they had stopped bickering about this. No! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 Just now, BRASSO said: Well, you read the same article I did, and came away with the same "comprehension level" that Dan A. believes DCI HQ has the authority to suspend/ and or dismiss from DCI membership any "group that fails to follow DCI policy". Dan Acheson did not say this might occur here, it just said how "seriously" he takes this, and he invoked the phrase "dismissal from DCI membership" as an option available to DCI HQ. I think we're close but not quite on the same page: the article is not clear about methods, but I don't believe Acheson can decide by himself to expel a member corps. I think that would require a vote of the DCI board or full membership. And let's be clear that Acheson is not quoted as using the phrase "dismissal from DCI membership". He probably said something similar, but the article does not give that as an exact quotation. Still, our interpretations are similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, mingusmonk said: Please Lord. No. Just when they had stopped bickering about this. No! Sorry, but I do think it's a point worth understanding. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS1995 Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) I'm wondering how anyone can come to a conclusion about what DCI stands for and is able/willing to do now or before without actually seeing their elusive "DCI Code of Conduct." From the DCI Website: These are ongoing actions to ensure safety procedures throughout the entire organization as well as strict adherence to the DCI Code of Conduct. There is no hyperlink to it (was there ever?) and it doesn't come up in their own search bar. I would think STEP 1 would be to make it known to every corps member and parent. If a corps says, "Oh we've read through it... here's what you need to know," well that [obviously] is not good enough. I would want to see the unfiltered, unvarnished version. I would say this document is a pretty large component of what some of the discussions here are revolving around. If anyone has a copy, it would be beneficial to see it. Edited April 10, 2018 by JMS1995 spelling 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: Informed by whom? She doesn't mention any attempt to contact anyone at YEA or DCI about what happened, and the reporter only mentions trying to contact Hopkins. True enough, and from reports, GH lost his attorney, and was out seeking another one, and presumably he was not inclined to want talk to any more reporters now without an attorney, once this initial bombshell broke last week. Edited April 10, 2018 by BRASSO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 21 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: I doubt the paper called him Dan Acheson must feel beseiged these days now at DCI HQ. It must all seem completely out of control now to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted April 10, 2018 Share Posted April 10, 2018 15 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: He probably thinks they should have protected him against the allegations. At this point its entirely unclear that they did not try to do this very thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts