A Message from DCI CEO Dan Acheson

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, garfield said:

They need to come to light only if the victims choose to.  Nobody wants to be doxed, even victims.

some incidents, are actually mentioned in a book popular in our activity. Granted they are decades old, but out there

[MusicManNJ]

10 hours ago, flugelswerebugels said:

Much as I hate it, DCI should really be working with communications professionals on this. No matter the circumstance, refusing to talk to the reporter on a story like this looks really really really really really bad. Someone who knows how to deal with the media would also know how to respond to the possibilities you've mentioned. Acheson's response seems entirely reactive, and DCI needs to be proactive both in directly addressing all the problems coming to light, and in their communications strategy about these issues. Its not clear they are accomplishing either of these goals with the current stonewalling and CYA'ing.

Could not agree with this more!

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, cixelsyd said:

 

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

Agree. on my Facebook page, someone linked the Stuart Rice article from back in the spring when he appeared out of nowhere. The person who posted it had knowledge of Stuart or his behaviors, and totally overlooked the fact that when we called Dan 15 years ago, he had no hard evidence, just rumor and innuendo. I'm sure Dan would have acted if presented with hard proof. But given Stuart had little credibility in the activity due to many of his online and offline actions, what was Dan to do? he did exactly what he should have. Asked for more information and moved on until such a time he may have gotten some. 

[JimF-LowBari]

9 minutes ago, garfield said:

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...

 

Maybe a miscommunication here. I am just asking what can DCI legally do as “punishment”? To me the new policy just sets in writing the only thing that can be done which is not allowing a corps in DCI events.

And I don’t consider alerting authorities “punishment” as it’s what should be done anyway. Saw a hit and run once in front of my house. Didn’t think I was punishing the person who did it when I called the cops.

Edited November 1, 2018 by JimF-LowBari

[JimF-LowBari]

Nice timing as reading a document from the new Admiral on facing future challenges and changes. Some nice buzz words and phrases that apply.

evaluate key processes and ask hard questions : iow keep looking at what is done and realize things might need to change (thinking the new policies here)

challenge our people : refers to keep them informed and doing what is required (thinking what corps need to do here)

and

audit provides transparency our leaders need to increase the public trust in our process (yowsa)

Edited November 1, 2018 by JimF-LowBari

[N.E. Brigand]

2 hours ago, garfield said:

And so Dan was expected to stage his own mini-coupe, take control and, despite his Board's direction, develop and implement policies to both expose all he knows from 35 years in the activity, name names, banish them singularly from the activity and force command and control measures on their organizations, right?

[Jeff Ream]

31 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Maybe a miscommunication here. I am just asking what can DCI legally do as “punishment”? To me the new policy just sets in writing the only thing that can be done which is not allowing a corps in DCI events.

And I don’t consider alerting authorities “punishment” as it’s what should be done anyway. Saw a hit and run once in front of my house. Didn’t think I was punishing the person who did it when I called the cops.

very easy. DCI can say the corps can't play in their yard anymore. They can create a list of those accused/charged and say "uh no, you can't have them involved".

 

What else do you need? A corps exists to compete. And you think if DCI suspends/bans someone, DCA or WGI will want them to come in?Hell no!

Look at someone you and I both know.....who was tied to YEA but did nothing wrong. All but blacklisted just because he was there, and he had no ###### idea of any of the stuff that came out. His sin is he worked there and who his daughter was dating. So you think DCi suspending/banning a corps or a person isn't enough? It's everything.

[garfield]

8 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Pfft.  LOL!  Caught and corrected.

[garfield]

13 minutes ago, garfield said:

Pfft.  LOL!  Caught and corrected.

Have to admit that it took a few minutes to figure out what my friend N.E. was pointing me to.  His creativity is hilariously apt.

 

[84BDsop]

21 hours ago, FTNK said:

 but it's fine, we're all fine, everything's fine...here....how are you?"

It was a boring conversation anyway....DAN, WE'RE GONNA HAVE COMPANY!