rpbobcat Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 (edited) 13 hours ago, garfield said: You take a pretty dim view of the motivations of the people who actually make decisions and do the work in our activity. I wonder how anyone operating under the motivations you describe would have anywhere near the longevity in the activity as the average director does today. It makes no logical sense, and I would go as far as to say you're significantly misreading the great majority of decision-makers in the activity. I'm not saying that corps don't have good intentions. What I am saying is that Drum Corps is not an altruistic endeavor. It is a business. If the corps do have motivations that are in line with your thinking,I would think they would embrace having an outside consultant look at the whole Drum Corps activity,top to bottom. That would provide an objective analysis of what's right and wrong . I also feel that,to be effective,that consultant must have the authority to implement changes, even if that means taking organizational control of the activity away from corps directors. Absent that authority,I don't see corps directors ever agreeing to give up their control. Edited August 27, 2018 by rpbobcat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 5 minutes ago, rpbobcat said: I'm not saying that corps don't have good intentions. What I am saying is that Drum Corps is not an altruistic endeavor. It is a business. If the corps do have motivations that are in line with your thinking,I would think they would embrace having an outside consultant look at the whole Drum Corps activity,top to bottom. That would provide an objective analysis of what's right and wrong . I also feel that,to be effective,that consultant must have the authority to implement changes, even if that means taking organizational control of the activity away from corps directors. Absent that authority,I don't see corps directors ever agreeing to give up their control. I can understand your hesitance because our history-bias suggests that you will be more accurate. It's the safe play, for sure. However, I'm not the only one here who has said there is a sea-change happening among the directors, and is being led significantly by the directors at the top of the activity, to do exactly what you wish to see them do in your post. "There are some things one can only achieve by a deliberate leap in the opposite direction." - Franz Kafka, writer I know it's hard to believe it might occur, but my confidence that it will is quite high. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 7 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: I must be missing something. Why would anyone get sued for conducting an investigation? I'm talking about an investigation, and potentially monitoring, not sanctions. It's not in the investigation, it's in the allowable answers to the questions. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 11 minutes ago, garfield said: It's not in the investigation, it's in the allowable answers to the questions. And accusations without facts to back them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 8 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: That's not what the article said. It said he was planning to work the 2018 season too, until Pioneer was forced pressured to drop him. agree. but the call to release him was made in 17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 8 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: I must be missing something. Why would anyone get sued for conducting an investigation? I'm talking about an investigation, and potentially monitoring, not sanctions. happens a lot because if just going on rumor, it could be viewed as slander/libel. In an investigation of any kind, people that get questioned leak. Word gets out. Boom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 8 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: They were convicted of endangering children, not perjury. the perjury is what got them on the stand. The DA chose to go for the charges they could get them on. I live 10 minutes from the court house. The story has been and still is headline news daily here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 8 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: I just don't see any way that the member corps would not be the ones ultimately calling the shots. That's how these kinds of organizations are run. The members of the organization elect the board and the board hires the executives. They should do more to empower the Executive Director, but there is no way in hell that they are going to elect a bunch of outsiders to the board. Nor should they. That isn't how these things work. you'd be surprised what some people inside are calling for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 8 hours ago, jasgre2000 said: What's the alternative? Ignore credible reports? is everything you see on social media credible? No. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said: is everything you see on social media credible? No. hmmm I would say most isn't..lol.. As I said there is no room for error, especially on this subject.. That goes for all sides Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts