A Message from DCI CEO Dan Acheson

[garfield]

15 minutes ago, phd-student-TTU said:

They don’t have to be doxxed. Gotta cut the head off the snake so it doesn’t come around again to its old habits. 

I think you should rethink how you define the snake before you take actions that might do more damage than you intend.

[cixelsyd]

17 minutes ago, garfield said:

Largely, this is the point that needs to be impressed - in the opposite.  It's only since the spring of 2018 that DCI - the central organization - adopted a proactive position as a "governing" body.  There have always been fiscal tests and admission to the club policies and categories like WC and OC, etc.  But the power to apply these policies, and under what circumstances, was always largely directed by the voting decisions of the Board.  But just this year has the power to proactively establish central policies and, importantly, mete out punishment for failure to comply (and careful about what that might be) been given to the executive offices.  I'm no Dan A apologist - he sure doesn't need me to defend him - but I will say that he's been very vocal over the years to be EXACTLY what his Board tasks him to be.

Finally, a voice of reason.  Thank you.

As part of your reminder, let me add that DCI can only govern DCI.  They cannot stop marching arts organizations from making questionable hires.  Ultimately, they can only stop those orgs from participating in DCI.  

Quote

I understand that this misconception would easily color the opinion of those less aware of the facts.  But, in thinking purely of the health and potential for the activity, I'll put forward that a better course to consider might be to empower Dan with the tools, funding, staffing, trust, support, and expectation of a properly-operating Governance system of Board/Exec/staff and, instead, refocus attention on the proper development of appropriate policies and procedures for his office to develop, implement, and continue to operate.

Yes.  There is significant work needed there, now.  Guidelines need to be made more specific.  Voice of reason again.

Quote

Throwing Dan, specifically, under the bus might be premature considering there has been no complaint or disappointment in his office or staff performance as it regards to the responsibilities.

But going full-Watergate and exclaiming "what did he know, and when did he know it" is all the rage today.  (Emphasis on "rage".)

[garfield]

51 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

<snip>

They cannot stop marching arts organizations from making questionable hires.  Ultimately, they can only stop those orgs from participating in DCI.  

<snip>

SCMW time.  Sounds crazy, might work.

Imagine an activity where staff are chosen by the corps but the background check is done by DCI, and contracts are only signed after DCI signs off.  (DCI is now LIABLE for the hire, not the corps, in this example.)

Or, imagine an activity where, oh, for instance, ALL staff are put into a bling pool AT DCI and randomly chosen and assigned to each corps.  Every year.  Or, how about drum corps BID for their talent and the excess over the minimum is put into DCI operations in some way.

SCMW and it might change the whole dynamic of the activity.  Why not?  GH blew it up and it has no real identity now so, as in architecture and painting, if you can't hide it, use it to your advantage!

The point is, drum corps, the activity, is hopefully smart enough to recognize that this time it is different.  It's going to change significantly and in profound ways.  The corps are being asked to get used to that fact and adapt and still be great.  I think we, as fans, owe the same duty.

Give the thing time to play out and don't sharpen the pitchfork tines, yet.  Let's see where new leadership takes the Mother Ship and its fleet of little money-makers.

 

Edited November 1, 2018 by garfield

[George Dixon]

maybe it's time to take minors out of the touring model and only allow 18 and above in the touring corps - changing the age of participation to, say, 18-25

yes, that would mean the end of "youth activity" and change the model to "young adult" activity

I'm not advocating for this change, just encouraging discussions of possible solutions and changes needed

[garfield]

6 minutes ago, George Dixon said:

maybe it's time to take minors out of the touring model and only allow 18 and above in the touring corps - changing the age of participation to, say, 18-25

yes, that would mean the end of "youth activity" and change the model to "young adult" activity

I'm not advocating for this change, just encouraging discussions of possible solutions and changes needed

First thing that comes to mind is you lose the Moms and Dads...

 

[momrod2000]

5 minutes ago, George Dixon said:

maybe it's time to take minors out of the touring model and only allow 18 and above in the touring corps - changing the age of participation to, say, 18-25

yes, that would mean the end of "youth activity" and change the model to "young adult" activity

I'm not advocating for this change, just encouraging discussions of possible solutions and changes needed

How would this prevent sexual predators or sexual assault?  It wouldn't.  It would only mean that if anything happened, the victim would be an adult instead of a minor.

[Slingerland]

34 minutes ago, George Dixon said:

maybe it's time to take minors out of the touring model and only allow 18 and above in the touring corps - changing the age of participation to, say, 18-25

yes, that would mean the end of "youth activity" and change the model to "young adult" activity

I'm not advocating for this change, just encouraging discussions of possible solutions and changes needed

Some of the alleged cases I'm guessing the reporters will cover will involve adult marching members being targeted by staff members. That still counts as harassment, even if the victims themselves are adults.

While taking actual minors out of the activity removes questions of illegality as it pertains to sex crimes out of the mix, it doesn't fix the culture of adult staff members, some of whom are middle aged guys, from hitting on "barely legal" targets. DCI's policies that forbid those relationships now has to go further to make it impossible for those people to stay in the activity simply by switching corps, and for those who've hired those individuals (and those corps KNOW who these guys are) to cut ties immediately.

Edited November 1, 2018 by Slingerland

[JimF-LowBari]

27 minutes ago, momrod2000 said:

How would this prevent sexual predators or sexual assault?  It wouldn't.  It would only mean that if anything happened, the victim would be an adult instead of a minor.

Beat me to it. And earlier Garfield mentioned punishment for failure to comply with the new rules. What punishment is there except for not letting a corps play in DCIs pool?

[Jeff Ream]

5 hours ago, garfield said:

I don't know how many times it needs reminding (as you did here) that DCI is/was insulated by the very fact that their structure did/does not make them specifically liable beyond their own office staff.  The irony is that it is its insular structure that might save the org and the activity for those who remain.

 

depending on what it may be, some heads may roll. I'm not sure they can escape liability in todays climate, but a corps would probably be in more danger than DCI itself. 

[garfield]

22 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Beat me to it. And earlier Garfield mentioned punishment for failure to comply with the new rules. What punishment is there except for not letting a corps play in DCIs pool?

I would caution that development of punishment when the infraction is still fresh but widely known is likely not the best time to develop appropriate "punishment".  And, really, what more "ultimate punishment" can DCI give out that's greater than alerting authorities and denying them admission to the "big dance"?

Now, it might be different...