Jump to content

George Hopkins Charged with two Counts Sexual Assault


Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Lol... Utz babeeee...

Old plant is on the main drag to downtown Hanover and they usually kick in for a program ad for the Lancers stand still. Think they donated to the uniform fund years back.

lol corps related....

I know I pass it at least once a week heading to my bank there 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Bluzes said:

Good reaction to my post. I knew that zero tolerance did not appear in dci's 5-16-18 DCI "Board of Directors updates sweeping Code of Conduct & Ethics Guidelines" and that deserves discussions of its own. The paragraph below is where I believe there is a double standard about Fred.

"DCI acknowledges that people around the world and throughout our country have been faced with the harsh realities of bias, harassment, and incivility. While these social ills are not unique to any one industry or field, society’s former tolerance and perhaps >>>>willful ignorance of these realities are no longer acceptable; standards and expectations are changing, as must our own.<<<<< Behavior that demeans, harasses, or reflects bias against another member of our community is not acceptable, in any context."

The section arrowed in is where keeping Fred loses it for me. Also from the first paragraph "DCI’s values and expectations." That needs more definition.
It is a fact that Fred is in violation of willful ignorance on two levels, the hire, and the scrub. That willful ignorance reached all the way to the Chairmen of the DCI Board of Directors and they cleaned up their own house They wrote not too simple rules and they are allowing one man to make a mockery out of the whole thing.

The big issues to me are:

 

how far back does dci police

and Fred at least stepped down from board chair. It’s not like dci had to force change like YEA or demand change that seems to be ignored like Pioneer. Fred at least went from the board chair spot fast

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

I know I pass it at least once a week heading to my bank there 

Such a lovely drive lol....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Such a lovely drive lol....

94 or 194, choose the farms to drive by. Bonus taking the back way from york through spring grove 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread makes for an interesting read during my lunch hour....

Anyway, seems to me, there are several different versions of Hopkins.  One of them cared TOO MUCH about the Cadets.  And another one is currently trying to sue them for $600K.  This doesn't make sense.

I can't even believe I'm commenting on it.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, MikeD said:

Please make the above the final word from anybody about religion or any discussion of God or any god(s) that do not pertain to discussing drum corps and the outstanding wordly issues.

I hear you but my wife will still drag me to Church this weekend. Not even in my distorted imagination could I make such a case that I was fulfilled by the philosophy of George and don't need to go. Sometimes I come up with excuses but DCP is in the clear. Would have used the KC Chiefs game as an excuse not to attend but the game is Saturday and if they win it will probably be the late game the week after. Thanks for the concern.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

94 or 194, choose the farms to drive by. Bonus taking the back way from york through spring grove 

Yep used 194 good bit my last few years going down there. Biggest pain was Abbotstown traffic circle when the Harley’s are out cruising on 30. Granted it was early afternoon on a Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lancer79 said:

Less of bashing...

Some of us view things that have happened as being worth bashing. Even with respect to an activity we care about.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mjoakes said:

Some of us view things that have happened as being worth bashing. Even with respect to an activity we care about

Exactly correct and IMHO, I believe we've done a pretty good job at reigning in some of the back and forth that does nothing to contribute to resolving the root of the issues not only on this specific topic but the broader topic of needed change in the activity. There seem to be two prevailing opinions:

1. The things brought to light (as well as bringing some things back to light which should have never lost focus in the first place and should have stayed on DCI and DCA's radar) are the death nell for the entire activity and it should all be burned to the ground.

-OR-

2. The things brought to light are exactly what was needed to force change and bring the activity back to being what it was always supposed to be. Unfortunately, sometimes things have to hit rock bottom to allow change to occur. 

None of this...NONE OF IT...should be about religion, politics, money, forgiveness, ego etc. This should about the kids and their continued education and safety (hopefully) just as it was for us when we marched. 

Edited by Weaklefthand4ever
Forgot a few clarifying words
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Bluzes said:

The paragraph below is where I believe there is a double standard about Fred.

"DCI acknowledges that people around the world and throughout our country have been faced with the harsh realities of bias, harassment, and incivility. While these social ills are not unique to any one industry or field, society’s former tolerance and perhaps >>>>willful ignorance of these realities are no longer acceptable; standards and expectations are changing, as must our own.<<<<< Behavior that demeans, harasses, or reflects bias against another member of our community is not acceptable, in any context."

The section arrowed in is where keeping Fred loses it for me. Also from the first paragraph "DCI’s values and expectations." That needs more definition.
It is a fact that Fred is in violation of willful ignorance on two levels, the hire, and the scrub. 

Point taken.  Unfortunately:

1.  As this excerpt states, "standards are changing".  Translation - whatever happened prior to spring of 2018 without visceral public objection might get brushed off as "society's former tolerance".

2.  "No longer acceptable" sounds pretty, but it does not specify what happens if someone does what is "no longer acceptable" now.  There are wiggle words everywhere in the entire guideline except for the two DFTK rules.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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