rjohn76 Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 23 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: There is no such "rule". Pioneer was voted out. Pioneer was voted out, but not until they had already been suspended indefinitely by the DCI Executive Director per authority established in DCI Policy 321 - Compliance Enforcement. The vote to revoke their DCI membership came after the organization failed to meet terms necessary to have the suspension lifted, which is logical since there's no reason to maintain membership status if a corps is barred from participating in DCI activities. So one could argue that the Executive Director should be taking action per Policy 321 in this case, as well as some of the other cases that have come to light since the Pioneer suspension in 2018. If corps can make corrective actions to have the suspension lifted, that would be the ideal situation. If not, then there should be a similar vote as the one Pioneer faced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 1 hour ago, IllianaLancerContra said: IMHO DCI used the abuse allegations as a convenient excuse to get rid of a Corps that didn’t fit the brand. Cadets situation was a whole lot worse, and even after reorganization & new BoD there were ‘member on member’ accusations in Indy that are similar to those described above. And nothing happened. What kind of message did that send? Two things. First, "nothing happened" is not accurate: 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: Because police did investigate the cadets issue and if I recall there were holes in the story that caused no charges to be filed As for "what kind of message did that send"... there was none, so stop looking for one. Whistleblower systems for harassment, intimidation and sexual abuse are designed with privacy built in. That is to protect the whistleblower from retaliation or escalating abuse, and to protect the accused in the event they turn out to be not guilty. This later incident at Cadets reminds us why that latter protection is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weaklefthand4ever Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 19 minutes ago, Smug Trumpet Guy said: You see these stories with phantom and the cadets and you think this would have never happened where you marched, until a story like this comes out and completely shatters your entire feelings on drum corps. Exactly! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 46 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: There is no such "rule". Pioneer was voted out. right. like everything else make it up as you go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 14 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: Two things. First, "nothing happened" is not accurate: As for "what kind of message did that send"... there was none, so stop looking for one. Whistleblower systems for harassment, intimidation and sexual abuse are designed with privacy built in. That is to protect the whistleblower from retaliation or escalating abuse, and to protect the accused in the event they turn out to be not guilty. This later incident at Cadets reminds us why that latter protection is there. hi...notice i said i believe...i didnt state it as fast as i didnt have time to look it all up. and i never said it was sending any message. i prefer if you'd stop trying to put words on my keyboard i had no intention of saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 now...lets not get caught in the weeds here, which DCP can do. this is more than just rookie talent night. this is a detailed accusation, with dates and people's roles mentioned. i am wondering if there's more not said in the accusation that is IMHO worse 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 11 minutes ago, rjohn76 said: Pioneer was voted out, but not until they had already been suspended indefinitely by the DCI Executive Director per authority established in DCI Policy 321 - Compliance Enforcement. The vote to revoke their DCI membership came after the organization failed to meet terms necessary to have the suspension lifted, which is logical since there's no reason to maintain membership status if a corps is barred from participating in DCI activities. So one could argue that the Executive Director should be taking action per Policy 321 in this case, as well as some of the other cases that have come to light since the Pioneer suspension in 2018. If corps can make corrective actions to have the suspension lifted, that would be the ideal situation. If not, then there should be a similar vote as the one Pioneer faced. Firstly, Policy 321 is a "policy", not a "rule". So when I stated there was no "rule" that put or kept Pioneer out, that is still demonstrably true. Subsequently, Policy 321 is hopelessly vague. With all the legal wiggle room granted by words such as "may include" or "not limited to", no one knows what a DCI executive can or cannot do. Granted, it does specifically list the ability to suspend a corps "for any period of time"... but "indefinitely" is not a period of time. Then, there were the conditions to be met to lift the suspension. Those are not governed by rule or policy, and have never been applied to any other DCI corps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 4 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: hi...notice i said i believe...i didnt state it as fast as i didnt have time to look it all up. and i never said it was sending any message. i prefer if you'd stop trying to put words on my keyboard i had no intention of saying. I had two quotes from two different people. The other person said the "send a message" part... not you. You are free and clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GetOFFmyDot Posted January 9, 2022 Author Share Posted January 9, 2022 Current and past members of Spirit are now attacking and harassing the person who shared their experience of being assaulted and not supported. Anyone engaging that behavior should not be allowed to March in any corps. Spirit needs to respond. Atlanta media has been made aware of this situation and I know at least one reporter has made initial inquiries. ugh 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weaklefthand4ever Posted January 9, 2022 Share Posted January 9, 2022 2 minutes ago, GetOFFmyDot said: Current and past members of Spirit are now attacking and harassing the person who shared their experience of being assaulted and not supported. Anyone engaging that behavior should not be allowed to March in any corps. Spirit needs to respond. Atlanta media has been made aware of this situation and I know at least one reporter has made initial inquiries. ugh Agreed. That's not the culture that we created, fostered and lived / live by. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts