Jump to content

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

well here's another part of the problem. DCI checks a corps books once to let them in, and then to move to World Class, then again only if a serious issue pops up. There needs to be periodic audits

IMHO, there needs to be a 'Corps Management' section added to the official DCI rules (aka the 'Blue Book') that lays out (1) specifically what passes muster & what does not; &, a specific set of consequences for not passing muster, up to, and including, disqualification.  Just like DCI did to spell out the exact age requirements & penalties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Galen said:

And this is why I'm keeping my distance from wanting to get involved. I have no desire to be doxxed.

I have no idea what "doxxed" means, but I'm sure it can't be good...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Curious - who selects 'interim' board members?  

in this case? well....

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Liahona said:

I have no idea what "doxxed" means, but I'm sure it can't be good...

having personal information released publicly

Doxing or doxxing is the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting private or identifiable information about an individual or organization. The methods employed to acquire this information include searching publicly available databases and social media websites, hacking, and social engineering.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said:

having personal information released publicly

Doxing or doxxing is the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting private or identifiable information about an individual or organization. The methods employed to acquire this information include searching publicly available databases and social media websites, hacking, and social engineering.

 

More to the point, it's releasing such information with the malicous intent to embarras or cause harm to a person's reputation. There's a very gray line over how ethical this practice is , as the information released technically is publicly available and/or obtainable with minimal effort. That's basically the view that the alum in question who published this, along with a couple of their supporters, are taking: "Dude's info and history are publicly listed online and anyone, including anyone connected with Pioneer who bothered to do a background check, so it's fair game". They're taking a particular view, which Im not sure I agree with, that they're doing the corps a favor by dragging up old skeletons about criminal charges that appear to have been dismissed or expunged, and over on Reddit, they're being particularly vindictive about it.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said:

in this case? well....

And as the release states no legal changes can be made without approval of the previous BoD. As per #1

Edited by JimF-LowBari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Galen said:

More to the point, it's releasing such information with the malicous intent to embarras or cause harm to a person's reputation. There's a very gray line over how ethical this practice is , as the information released technically is publicly available and/or obtainable with minimal effort. That's basically the view that the alum in question who published this, along with a couple of their supporters, are taking: "Dude's info and history are publicly listed online and anyone, including anyone connected with Pioneer who bothered to do a background check, so it's fair game". They're taking a particular view, which Im not sure I agree with, that they're doing the corps a favor by dragging up old skeletons about criminal charges that appear to have been dismissed or expunged, and over on Reddit, they're being particularly vindictive about it.

 

 

I agree with you and definitely don't condone the practice.  But aren't some of us at DCP being a little bit judgmental here?  Did DCP not "out" Scott Atchison awhile back in the same regard?  ...dredging up his old court case that was "expunged"...I am not making excuses for him and don't even know the guy...I'm glad that guy is gone...just don't think we should be judging the behavior of other posters...

Edited by Liahona
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

And as the release states no legal changes can be made without approval of the previous BoD. As per #1

If you parse the words carefully, it mentions changes by the interim board. That seems to point at a shorter period of time while all of this shakes out. 

Still, not sure that is good

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MikeD said:

If you parse the words carefully, it mentions changes by the interim board. That seems to point at a shorter period of time while all of this shakes out. 

Still, not sure that is good

Yeah it’s a catch 22. Changes by interim board to improve problems caused by people who ran things for years. Yet the changes need to be approved by the people who ran things for years. Personally I can’t see anything will be approved if it cuts down the power of the previous (still current?) board. Changes that might improve things yes, but nothing to decrease power. 

Just have the idea RB still thinks he can bull his way thru this like before.

Edited by JimF-LowBari
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...