garfield Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 1 hour ago, cixelsyd said: Sorry. Did not realize fair play was one of the "privileges" reserved for members only. If "fair" means dividing the time and energies of the DCI ED and staff away from the directives of their member corps, then yes, "fair" would seem unfair to the OC. It's really not an issue of fair or not fair, it's understanding that it's a dance that requires an invitation based on a demonstration of competence to compete again those that are actually doing it. Those who are doing it and winning at it don't want it to look like it's easy to do! WC should NOT be "easy" to get into and neither should Open Class. Drum corps is hard. Get better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 28 minutes ago, garfield said: Those who are doing it and winning at it don't want it to look like it's easy to do! WC should NOT be "easy" to get into and neither should Open Class. For those who subscribe to that belief system - careful what you wish for. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, garfield said: If "fair" means dividing the time and energies of the DCI ED and staff away from the directives of their member corps, then yes, "fair" would seem unfair to the OC. Is DCI for the member corps or is it for the Junior corps activity itself. Mission statement uses “participating organizations”. Edited January 2, 2020 by JimF-LowBari 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 13 hours ago, MikeRapp said: Okay but if 55 isn’t the line, what is? You have to draw a line somewhere. 55 is a single full bus. If you can’t fill one bus, can you honestly make it on a tour? Seems like the more important question is, did someone make a mistake by approving them to move up from Soundsport? It looks like they missed some pretty important factors in their evaluation. Raiders last year had about 40 members. There have been corps over the past decade who made Open Class Finals with no more than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 15 hours ago, garfield said: From the Encorps post: "...we finally received confirmation and written documentation in a direct email from a corps director that stated as follows: “The Membership Affairs Committee just ratified by the Membership that the minimum is now 55 members. The policy is 216 - Participant Levels – and is housed in the Policy and Procedures folder under Corporate documents in Backstage." Does it strike anyone else as odd that Encorps got confirmation that the rule would be in effect for 2020 from another corps rather than from DCI leadership? 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 7 hours ago, cybersnyder said: You're determined that there is a vast conspiracy. Encorps went from 60 something to 30 something members between 2018 and 2019. There are internal issues going on, not the evil all-powerful iron fist of DCI member corps, but it sound scarier that way. Eh, it seems much less like a vast conspiracy than (if what Encorps' board says is true) just some unfortunate miscommunication. "There's no point acting all surprised about it... if you can't be bothered to take an interest... I have no sympathy at all." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 1 hour ago, N.E. Brigand said: Does it strike anyone else as odd that Encorps got confirmation that the rule would be in effect for 2020 from another corps rather than from DCI leadership? Other directors and, in fact, posters on this very forum found the announcement in the DCI participant package in DCI.org. Does it strike anyone else as odd that Encorps apparently thought they were entitled to a phone call or special communication in order to get that information? This is that whole "presumption" thing about Encorps' "place in the universe". If they were working so hard to get communications from DCI (How many unanswered emails does one send before one picks up the phone and calls the OC coordinator directly? It's not as though Dave Eddleman is an unknown in the world of budding drum corps. DCI has had this system in place for a LONG time but, somehow, we're to believe that they conspired to block participation by small units in their shows by quietly releasing a key rule change before a formal vote was taken and then confusing potential "participant" units with careless (or intentional) editing mistakes and lack of information about the consequences if minimum MM requirements are not met. I believe that stretches credulity beyond belief. 55/110 is not new and there almost no way possible that Encorps didn't know it was coming. A phone usually rings on both ends. An unanswered email should not be followed by a second email. Proactivity is required by those requesting review for participation; DCI is not required to seek out and pull potential participants through the process. If a responsible party can't figure out the participant website information that, admittedly, other directors were able to get, that fact raises one additional red flag about their ability to follow rules to get kids down the road safely. The OC coordinator, in conjunction with committees of member corps and a vote of the entire membership, decided to proactively notify Encorps that their tour ended in Allentown, but we're to believe there was no communication whatsoever about the 55/110 change? A review by DCI prompted them to inform Encorps of their decision, so a review was actually done, Encorps' "status" was still as an OC applicant, and they were granted permission to participate in shows contingent upon them meeting membership minimums. If they didn't meet those minimums, Encorps is not entitled to special consideration or exemption from the minimum because they demonstrated logistical ability, or attracted 80 members, in prior years. While cute, I don't conflate the demise of a small performing unit with the destruction of Earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said: "There's no point acting all surprised about it... if you can't be bothered to take an interest... I have no sympathy at all." Have a Pangalactic Gargle Blaster and Don’t Panic. Lol just gave the dvd of this as a Christmas present to a family member. Edited January 2, 2020 by JimF-LowBari 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 2 hours ago, garfield said: Other directors and, in fact, posters on this very forum found the announcement in the DCI participant package in DCI.org. Does it strike anyone else as odd that Encorps apparently thought they were entitled to a phone call or special communication in order to get that information? This is that whole "presumption" thing about Encorps' "place in the universe". If they were working so hard to get communications from DCI (How many unanswered emails does one send before one picks up the phone and calls the OC coordinator directly? It's not as though Dave Eddleman is an unknown in the world of budding drum corps. DCI has had this system in place for a LONG time but, somehow, we're to believe that they conspired to block participation by small units in their shows by quietly releasing a key rule change before a formal vote was taken and then confusing potential "participant" units with careless (or intentional) editing mistakes and lack of information about the consequences if minimum MM requirements are not met. I believe that stretches credulity beyond belief. 55/110 is not new and there almost no way possible that Encorps didn't know it was coming. A phone usually rings on both ends. An unanswered email should not be followed by a second email. Proactivity is required by those requesting review for participation; DCI is not required to seek out and pull potential participants through the process. If a responsible party can't figure out the participant website information that, admittedly, other directors were able to get, that fact raises one additional red flag about their ability to follow rules to get kids down the road safely. The OC coordinator, in conjunction with committees of member corps and a vote of the entire membership, decided to proactively notify Encorps that their tour ended in Allentown, but we're to believe there was no communication whatsoever about the 55/110 change? A review by DCI prompted them to inform Encorps of their decision, so a review was actually done, Encorps' "status" was still as an OC applicant, and they were granted permission to participate in shows contingent upon them meeting membership minimums. If they didn't meet those minimums, Encorps is not entitled to special consideration or exemption from the minimum because they demonstrated logistical ability, or attracted 80 members, in prior years. While cute, I don't conflate the demise of a small performing unit with the destruction of Earth. Nor do I. Since no one seems to be reading my posts, let me repeat - I do not defend Encorps specifically, and I do not understand their chosen course of action. At the same time, I cannot defend or understand the DCI actions you are trying so hard to justify. 1. When DCI approved Encorps for open-class in 2019, they said it was only for 2019, and that there would be "further evaluation" regarding participation after that. But instead, their 2020 tour limitations were set without any "further evaluation". Is it too much to ask of DCI to do what they say they are going to do? 2. I think the uncertainty of the 55-member thing has been adequately detailed. The change, still to this day, is as clear as mud. The Policies and Procedures Manual still has both 30 and 55 as minimums, depending on which page you read. The Rules Manual has not been changed. The rule change process has not even taken place, so we do not "know" that it will pass, much less whether it will take immediate effect. For some DCI committee without jurisdiction over rules to claim they can change this rule in October is already debatable, not to mention arbitrary and capricious. 3. "Special consideration"? Most of us are merely asking that DCI provide non-member corps with the same basic degree of professionalism that they would provide anyone else they do business with. You seem to be contending that DCI should treat non-member corps like crap, purposely, as a formal part of the qualification process for advancing toward membership... as per the philosophy "what does not kill them makes them stronger". If that is such a great idea, then we should strengthen the member corps via the same method. Otherwise, non-members would be getting special treatment. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 16 hours ago, cixelsyd said: Sorry. Did not realize fair play was one of the "privileges" reserved for members only. not to defend DCI membership but....it's their club. fair play to those outside their club doesn't have to be their concern. 1 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.