JimF-LowBari Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: 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! Rant deleted : misunderstanding to recap: Garfield used the word “punishment” and I said the only punishment DCI can do is not allow corps to be in DCI events Edited November 1, 2018 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 I love you guys and all, but, c'mon. You simply cannot hide behind process. The excuse of - you need to understand, our bylaws don't empower me to act - just doesn't fly today. My point: even if not specifically empowered by the DCI structure, processes in place, bylaws, whatever you want to call it, action should have been taken. When in charge, take charge. Maybe the corps or person would have thumbed their nose at Dan and said, you can't do that. Who knows. Absent that, the optics today are that DCI will not act unless exposed in a public way, by someone outside the organization. This is a very bad look. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouooga Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 I'm just catching up with the discussion on this. Is it confirmed that DCI is not working with a crisis communications firm on this? I thought DCI had been working for several years with a small PR firm somewhere in the Midwest, but I can't seem to find the name of that on Google now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slingerland Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: I love you guys and all, but, c'mon. You simply cannot hide behind process. The excuse of - you need to understand, our bylaws don't empower me to act - just doesn't fly today. My point: even if not specifically empowered by the DCI structure, processes in place, bylaws, whatever you want to call it, action should have been taken. When in charge, take charge. Maybe the corps or person would have thumbed their nose at Dan and said, you can't do that. Who knows. Absent that, the optics today are that DCI will not act unless exposed in a public way, by someone outside the organization. This is a very bad look. The structure of DCI is as a co-op, and the ability of the CEO of DCI to be a commissioner like in the NFL is not built into the structure. Rules and policies voted on by the member corps can't be changed just because "I say so." The fault for all of this having gone on this long is because the member corps allowed it to go on and agreed to let the perpetrators continue working in the activity - not because of Dan Acheson or anyone else at DCI. Edited November 1, 2018 by Slingerland 2 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 2 minutes ago, garfield said: It's a miscommunication if anything at all, Jim. I wasn't making any reference in particular except to reinforce that actual "punishment" is mostly limited to excluding a corps from a show. Ok thanks... will remove you from the rant lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 14 minutes ago, Slingerland said: The structure of DCI is as a co-op, and the ability of the CEO of DCI to be a commissioner like in the NFL is not built into the structure. Rules and policies voted on by the member corps can't be changed just because "I say so." The fault for all of this having gone on this long is because the member corps allowed it to go on and agreed to let the perpetrators continue working in the activity - not because of Dan Acheson or anyone else at DCI. If the corps wasn't going to act, then Dan should have. Just my opinion. The buck stops at Dan, for better or worse. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: If the corps wasn't going to act, then Dan should have. Just my opinion. The buck stops at Dan, for better or worse. Which brings up the question of how does Dan get a corps to act if they don’t want to. Thinking Pioneer telling members not to call the DCI hot line. Not picking a fight just brainstroming Edited November 1, 2018 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 29 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: I love you guys and all, but, c'mon. You simply cannot hide behind process. The excuse of - you need to understand, our bylaws don't empower me to act - just doesn't fly today. My point: even if not specifically empowered by the DCI structure, processes in place, bylaws, whatever you want to call it, action should have been taken. When in charge, take charge. Maybe the corps or person would have thumbed their nose at Dan and said, you can't do that. Who knows. Absent that, the optics today are that DCI will not act unless exposed in a public way, by someone outside the organization. This is a very bad look. I imagine it seems that way because DCI only finds out about something when it is "exposed" by "someone outside the organization". Short of establishing a DCI chaperone pool so that every corps bus, gym and practice field has a pair of DCI eyes/ears present at all times, this is not going to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 7 minutes ago, Slingerland said: because the member corps allowed it to go on and agreed to let the perpetrators continue working in the activity - not because of Dan Acheson or anyone else at DCI. If DCI bears no oversight responsibility, then why have a DCI code of conduct? Why does DCI require background checks? Those are rhetorical questions. Yes, DCI is the governing agency for their member corps. Hiding behind poorly worded and enforced policies won't work. Hiding behind "it's up to the corps to police themselves by our guidelines" won't work, either, obviously. That's the whole point. DCI as a governing agency needs comprehensive restructuring, and explicit and transparent bylaws that are consistently enforced from without as well as within each corps. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesmusic Posted November 1, 2018 Share Posted November 1, 2018 So Dan's response from DCI in April took too long, and people take issue with things. This time he makes a statement regarding a new investigation before the reporter has it published, and now it's too early. What do we want? The reporter tweets that she wishes he hasn't, and people are up in arms and defending her. This is almost as bad as politics in the US. Not that I'm defending Dan in the least, but seems like regardless of how he handles any situation people are upset. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.