Drain The Swamp, Dan

[garfield]

1 hour ago, E3D said:

Wondering why Garfield has not set up a thread much like his financial thread with respect to these actual issues.

 

 

Others will likely hate on you for tempting me, but I'd like to know what you're envisioning.  Isn't confusing financial reality with emotional stability and support a triggering event?

 

Edited August 25, 2018 by garfield

[E3D]

5 minutes ago, garfield said:

Others will likely hate on you for tempting me, but I'd like to know what you're envisioning.  Isn't confusing financial reality with emotional stability and support a triggering event?

 

so in the past you broke down the finance,,,  the tax / Non profit info. Not that you should do this but there should be a moral thread etc. 

there is much room to explore on the topic. Just look around at where we are now. 

[MikeD]

1 hour ago, karuna said:

Again I said if after investigating such rumors, finding misconduct, and reporting it to the directors who then take no action,  as CEO he does have a responsibility to resign.   In any case,  the point I'm making is he was not "helpless", "unable to act", or any other silly thing.  You ALWAYS have a choice you can make.  His choice was to do nothing until the entire thing blew up in the press.  He might have felt like he was acting in the best interests of the activity but he was certainly not acting the best interest of the members.  Sorry -- he does not get a pass.

Actually you never said anything about Dan investigating anything. You asked a question and then went on about his ethical duty, giving two options/ choices that I personally disagree with. If he comes actoss verifiable illegal activity his duty is to inform the authorities. If there is verifiable safety issues, as with Pio, then they did the right thing, from reading.

[BRASSO]

 The chronology and timing is of course in dispute and also in dispute is whether or not DCI HQ acted swiftly enough in its investigations with the 2 Corps it put on Probation and Suspension the last 6 months. What we all can agree on here it seems to me is that nobody disagrees that DCI HQ acted swiftly to impose Probation or Suspension notices to the 2 Corps after these stories became public thru the national press. DCI HQ acted as swiftly as TV Judge Judy does in her daily court rulings once this hit the national media.

Edited August 25, 2018 by BRASSO

[IllianaLancerContra]

42 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

They started an investigation before San Antonio. They put a system of checking up on pioneer in place to get thru the season. Then more came to light after finals.

 

this has been spelled here for you before multiple times. Read. Retain. Then pontificate.

trust me I’ve caused dci more headaches than the lot of you recent crusaders in the last 15 years. In the process I’ve learned how things work, and put it out here. And I’m more than willing to chuck dan under the bus when he deserves it. But you need to realize dci is THE CORPS. Not just dan in his office firing out missives. 

OK, so if THE CORPS are guilty, how about performance fees cut by 50% to pay for a robust standards enforcement system?

[garfield]

3 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

A lot of bunker mentality going around here. Parsing sentences, proclaiming there was nothing Dan could do until April 2018. Well, no one in the public cares. No one will buy any "there's nothing we could do, you see the corps directors have all the power, you have to read the bylaws". Dan should have acted, EVEN IF he didn't know whether he had the authority to act. To the public he is the person in charge at DCI. Nothing is going to change that, whether we agree with it or not. Perception IS reality, and right now the perception is that the leader of DCI stood by and allowed all this crap to happen, and did not take action until pressure was applied by the press. No one cares about some - "but you don't understand, he didn't have the power to act" excuse.  Because that's what it is, to everyone but a few insiders. Excuses justifying enabling these abusers. 

I would contend that, aside from one's personal or professional opinion of Dan, or one's understanding of how the activity is or isn't tied together, the public views the activity as a single amoeba run and administered by this single cell animal called "DCI".

No matter how hard the corps attempt to insulate themselves from the scrutiny via their separate entities, the public, and I'd say a vast majority of the public, believes that DCI is a single, competitive activity governed and run by the "Governing Body", even if they have no idea what that is.

It's time for the activity to actually become what the common sense of the majority of the general public think it is.

In other words, live up to the expectations of your paying and adoring public and govern yourselves like a modern-day $12million corporation.

[garfield]

27 minutes ago, E3D said:

so in the past you broke down the finance,,,  the tax / Non profit info. Not that you should do this but there should be a moral thread etc. 

there is much room to explore on the topic. Just look around at where we are now. 

I am not qualified to calculate the moral value of anyone besides myself.

My glass house windows are clean and transparent, and not everyone likes what they see.

 

[rpbobcat]

1 hour ago, jasgre2000 said:

They don't have to give up control.  Simply impose a set of eligibility rules that every sensible person would agree on.  Require background checks of all corps staff and volunteers.  Impose penalties (miss a show, suspension, probation, etc) for corps that are abusing MMs.  These are the kinds of policies that could have and should have been implemented a decade ago.  This kind of oversight is not new.  If you can't get a majority of the corps to agree to that, then the whole thing needs to be burned to the ground.

I disagree that the current board doesn't have to give up "control".

I think the DCI  administration,board ,etc. has demonstrated an inability to "govern" the activity.

I don't know if its due to a lack of expertise,objectivity or a combination of the two..

From what I've read here,there have been a number of "rumored issues" about problems with corps for a number of 

years.

Yet, DCI didn't feel the need to put in any type of "whistle blower" mechanism until the you know what hit the fan with GH.

Also,given the state of drum corps,I don't see the current BoD willing to make decisions that feel may not affect them positively.

 

[garfield]

29 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

OK, so if THE CORPS are guilty, how about performance fees cut by 50% to pay for a robust standards enforcement system?

Three corps have been found to be "guilty" of violations that warrant DCI's intervention.

I'm just guessing, but I think when one understands the relatively small amount of performance fees, one would see that the cost of an enforcement program that many expect goes way beyond a 50% pay cut to Pio, or even Cadets.

All of the corps are going to have to agree to fund policy and surveillance/enforcement from the general gate/show income generated throughout the season.

Or, they can find some experienced business people to run the board and not expect directors to establish and maintain anything other than their own corps.  A qualified BoD with a robust advisory committee could get an astonishing amount done if the directors believed their interests are served and the people on the BoD are competent.

IMHO 

Edited August 25, 2018 by garfield

[jasgre2000]

6 minutes ago, rpbobcat said:

I disagree that the current board doesn't have to give up "control".

I think the DCI  administration,board ,etc. has demonstrated an inability to "govern" the activity.

I don't know if its due to a lack of expertise,objectivity or a combination of the two..

From what I've read here,there have been a number of "rumored issues" about problems with corps for a number of 

years.

Yet, DCI didn't feel the need to put in any type of "whistle blower" mechanism until the you know what hit the fan with GH.

Also,given the state of drum corps,I don't see the current BoD willing to make decisions that feel may not affect them positively.

 

I agree that it might be a good idea to change the way DCI is governed (giving control to an independent board that isn't governed by the corps themselves).  My point is only that it isn't necessary and those that keep saying that the way DCI is structured is somehow tying their hands and preventing them from acting are wrong.  The problem isn't with the way DCI is structured ... it is with the PEOPLE that are controlling that structure.  It is the people that are to blame--whether it is the corps directors themselves, the DCI board, or Dan Acheson--not the structure.

Edited August 25, 2018 by jasgre2000