cixelsyd Posted November 22, 2019 Author Share Posted November 22, 2019 15 hours ago, garfield said: OK, 55 mm's equals two buses. Got it. Or one bus, one staff bunkhouse, one staff RV, and two equipment vehicles. Or two buses, and two equipment vehicles, no RV and no bunkhouse. I'm not sure it matters to the discussion. The point is not the number of buses, it's the number of potential volunteers. Volunteers to not necessarily go "on tour", but to staff the multitude of governance, executive, and staff positions in sufficiency so that administrative, policy, and mm safety and "quality of experience" issues can be sufficiently addressed. This also addresses your "stupid point #2". Your comment about making local corps do something for fear of touring corps obtaining enough adults is misplaced and not anything I wrote or referenced. There is an adult standard set out of this rule change: the required standard is a sufficient number to accomplish all of the admin and mm-care responsibilities demanded of a competitive org. Simply, a larger corps presents a better assurance to DCI that the org can live up to those responsibilities. Again... if the concern is how many adults they have, check THAT. Requiring more kids does not assure more adults. Pioneer was way over 55 members - did that assure them of adequate adult staffing? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted November 22, 2019 Author Share Posted November 22, 2019 15 hours ago, garfield said: PPI - Presume Positive Intent. I'm presuming that DCI learned from those two examples you list and, if the intra-season MM shortfall is deemed temporary (such as for a member illness), an adjustment to the minimum MM rule would be allowed (speculation on my part). That said, if the rule if firm and unyielding, it would naturally benefit the org to have an alternate or four available to fill the ranks in case such a situation occurred. I tried the PPI approach back in 2000-2001, when the 30 member minimum was introduced with promises much like what you describe. But then in 2002, suddenly it became an instant disqualification to show up with any less, any day. One early-season show even refused to allow under-30 corps to perform their drills; two corps intending to compete that day had to perform standstill exhibitions as a result. One of those corps argued that they had 30 members, but not all could be present that day. At DCI Championships, they were finally allowed to compete, and they did so with precisely 30 members. So presumption went out the window about 17 years ago on this issue. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 Bottom line is in some eyes, bigger is better. Doesn't always equate to actually better or financially sound. i still want to know if existing members get reviewed periodically or if they are grandfathered in until disaster strikes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, cixelsyd said: Again... if the concern is how many adults they have, check THAT. Requiring more kids does not assure more adults. Pioneer was way over 55 members - did that assure them of adequate adult staffing? This is kind of, well, silly isn't it? To the New Member: "Hey, we need and survive on volunteers. Tell your parents." To the neighbors where the corps resides, to the schools in the neighborhood, to the wider drum corps fan base at large: "Hey, come volunteer at our drum corps. We need and survive on volunteers." Which if the above has the greatest chance of getting the volunteer executive, governance, and staff bodies needed to sufficiently handle all of the requirements of running an OC drum corps, when those OC drum corps themselves are being pushed to compete in size and game with WC? (EDIT: fixed the question mark, but the answer is obvious...) Move up rank. Get more kids. More kids equals an immediate source for highly interested (albeit relatively short-term) volunteer help. Pioneer is not only an example that the 55-rule is not a guarantee, it is also not an example of how to effectively do it. There are many better examples and DCI is now mandating that every OC corps have a "Buddy" to help guide and mentor them into moving up-ranks. Edited November 22, 2019 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, cixelsyd said: I tried the PPI approach back in 2000-2001, when the 30 member minimum was introduced with promises much like what you describe. But then in 2002, suddenly it became an instant disqualification to show up with any less, any day. One early-season show even refused to allow under-30 corps to perform their drills; two corps intending to compete that day had to perform standstill exhibitions as a result. One of those corps argued that they had 30 members, but not all could be present that day. At DCI Championships, they were finally allowed to compete, and they did so with precisely 30 members. So presumption went out the window about 17 years ago on this issue. Yes, I feel your cynicism. It can overcome me, too. But reality is that it is 17 years later and, more significantly, the Pied Piper Music Man (heh!) who led those efforts as well as led the G7 (some say down the toilet) 9 years ago is no longer around. And, it's reasonable to think that the directors have learned as a group and, as a result, in their DCI voting decisions, to be more thoughtful on what is passed and implemented. Some of the precepts of the G7 "vision", packaged in a better way and in a different wrapper are worth discussing again. Edited November 22, 2019 by garfield 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poppycock Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 6 minutes ago, garfield said: Some of the precepts of the G7 "vision", packaged in a better way and in a different wrapper are worth discussing again. Agreed! Being WC doesn’t mean elite. Very few elite organizations. Evaluations equal accountability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 22, 2019 Share Posted November 22, 2019 53 minutes ago, garfield said: Yes, I feel your cynicism. It can overcome me, too. But reality is that it is 17 years later and, more significantly, the Pied Piper Music Man (heh!) who led those efforts as well as led the G7 (some say down the toilet) 9 years ago is no longer around. And, it's reasonable to think that the directors have learned as a group and, as a result, in their DCI voting decisions, to be more thoughtful on what is passed and implemented. Some of the precepts of the G7 "vision", packaged in a better way and in a different wrapper are worth discussing again. So what is written in DCI policy on when to count members and allow/not allow a corps on the field? Is anything written? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 6 hours ago, garfield said: This is kind of, well, silly isn't it? To the New Member: "Hey, we need and survive on volunteers. Tell your parents." To the neighbors where the corps resides, to the schools in the neighborhood, to the wider drum corps fan base at large: "Hey, come volunteer at our drum corps. We need and survive on volunteers." Which if the above has the greatest chance of getting the volunteer executive, governance, and staff bodies needed to sufficiently handle all of the requirements of running an OC drum corps, when those OC drum corps themselves are being pushed to compete in size and game with WC? (EDIT: fixed the question mark, but the answer is obvious...) Move up rank. Get more kids. More kids equals an immediate source for highly interested (albeit relatively short-term) volunteer help. Pioneer is not only an example that the 55-rule is not a guarantee, it is also not an example of how to effectively do it. There are many better examples and DCI is now mandating that every OC corps have a "Buddy" to help guide and mentor them into moving up-ranks. where the corps resides...you mean their address per the yearbook, or the other towns/states where they run camps and spring training? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 6 hours ago, garfield said: Yes, I feel your cynicism. It can overcome me, too. But reality is that it is 17 years later and, more significantly, the Pied Piper Music Man (heh!) who led those efforts as well as led the G7 (some say down the toilet) 9 years ago is no longer around. And, it's reasonable to think that the directors have learned as a group and, as a result, in their DCI voting decisions, to be more thoughtful on what is passed and implemented. Some of the precepts of the G7 "vision", packaged in a better way and in a different wrapper are worth discussing again. the one you mention was the public spokesperson because everyone knew he could take the heat...he got it all the time. he wasn't the man behind the curtain pulling the strings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 3 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: where the corps resides...you mean their address per the yearbook, or the other towns/states where they run camps and spring training? exactly 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.