I will not be outdone by other Drum Corps Internet Trolls (I own VMAPA.org)

[Richard Lesher]

Everything that I have compiled relating to SCV and their collapse is going to be data dumped at:

www.VMAPA.org

It might not seem like much, but early in the year when I attempted to start the complaint process through SCV's own communication channels their Whistleblower policy pointed to a dead link. No one owned the domain. So if one read their policy and clicked on the link they got "this site can't be reached". 

So I took the domain after two months passed after notifying SCV. They never responded to my complaint, a complaint mind you that I notified them the link was dead and no one owned it. A complaint mind you that not having a functioning Whistleblower Process in itself is a violation of DCI's own Code of Conduct for Participating Organizations (a complaint I also submitted to the entire DCI board at the same time). 

For those that have been following the drama you're not going to find anything new there. 

There is nothing really exciting on there right now. I'm new to this building website things. I only went as far tonight to post some 990's their by-laws (which apparently are impossible to get), and the supporting screen shots showing why I decided to snag VMAPA.org. 

Basically, after my content submissions tonight validating I can string a sentence together and post supporting documentation and photos I happily go to bed knowing I have a new instrument available to my voice. 

The real value in what will ultimately be the website is a single location of information presented in a manner that connects all the dots. One doesn't need to collectively chase down posts scattered all over social media, and FB, or Reddit. 

All the 990s will eventually be there, the letters from the CA Dept of Justice, the math showing how economically things just can't be working out, the source documentation to all the laws and ordinances being violated, ect. Everything I have. 

So I guess I'm saying this venue will see a lot less of me since www.VMAPA.org is my voice. I'll still chime in from time to time I suppose, but any serious content is going to end up on my page first. 

Congrats to all the corps out there competing.

Vanguard defined me, and I am a product of the brainwashing they beat into my generation what integrity meant. 

 

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Richard Lesher

[scheherazadesghost]

My concerns about VMAPA's wb process includes their previously broken weblink to vmapa.org, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. Specifically, it is crucial that organizations maintain separate domains or service providers between their main website and their whistleblower processes. This builds in the capacity for checks and balances that gives reporters faith that their info won't be mishandled by biased administration. This is best practice. This is what VMAPA's own handbook implied back in 2018, but was never enacted. That part of the handbook was updated this year to say that they will house the wb process at scvanguard.org. There are alum who have reported to me who marched in the last five years who deserved best practices.

I have been concerned about VMAPA's whistleblower process since my direct interaction with it in April 2022. I am additionally concerned about at least 1 subsequent wb process initiated by another alum who has voluntarily reported their lack of progress to me. This is far more concerning than my own situation. It sets an inappropriate tone and does nothing to garner trust among alum who report, or want to report abuse.

The leadership is not adequately trained to be handling such sensitive information at this time, let alone effectively integrating it into improving best practices. Because I don't have consent to share others' experiences with it, I'll share mine. The process was re-traumatizing for me, despite leadership's best, but floundering efforts. Technically, my whistleblower process is still open, according to leadership themselves, but I have heard nothing from them since April 2022. I fully understand there are bigger fish to fry, but I am still a stakeholder, and one originally encouraged in 2021 to join the board of directors (by the current CFO and former president of the board no less.) A simple communication about closing my wb process and an explanation why, at this point, would suffice, given that they emphatically confirmed the intent of ongoing dialogue with witnesses present. (Nor have I heard from 2 of the 3 other corps whose CEOs assured me dialogue btw.)

I have endured significant negative reactions in my interactions with SCV alumni (VAA and VHS) in the last year that are truly discouraging. These reactions cause further concern in the case that additional abuse survivors want to step forward. The reactions were always among my fellow alum, whose actual first reaction should be one of compassion and support for myself and others, but especially others. Instead, too many of the loudest voices react with denial, skepticism,  downplaying, or outright hostility. This includes the former CEO.

Most alum who endured abuse that I've spoken to continue to fear retaliation from Vanguard and fellow alum, as well as activity-wide denylisting. Many of them have been enduring the lasting effects of abuse for months or years, like me. Too many of them confirm that they've endured similar reactions from alum over the years as well. I've spoken to 16 alum in total, 14 of whom endured abuse of some kind. Their unique instances of abuse total in 58, dating back to the early 2000s. Where is the accountability from directors of the board who have been in leadership since that time?

How can Vanguard and the activity learn from past mistakes when the above describes the current state of affairs by an alum whose care for the legacy of Vanguard is endless? What hope do other reporters have, especially if they have less professional nonprofit experience than me?

What about them?

Edit to add two days later: ty to mods for being willing to allow this thread. In later posts, I'm sure I and others test their patience. Returning to first comment to again express my gratitude.

Edited August 4, 2023 by scheherazadesghost

[IllianaLancerContra]

22 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:

My concerns about VMAPA's wb process includes their previously broken weblink to vmapa.org, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. Specifically, it is crucial that organizations maintain separate domains or service providers between their main website and their whistleblower processes. This builds in the capacity for checks and balances that gives reporters faith that their info won't be mishandled by biased administration. This is best practice. This is what VMAPA's own handbook implied back in 2018, but was never enacted. That part of the handbook was updated this year to say that they will house the wb process at scvanguard.org. There are alum who have reported to me who marched in the last five years who deserved best practices.

I have been concerned about VMAPA's whistleblower process since my direct interaction with it in April 2022. I am additionally concerned about at least 1 subsequent wb process initiated by another alum who has voluntarily reported their lack of progress to me. This is far more concerning than my own situation. It sets an inappropriate tone and does nothing to garner trust among alum who report, or want to report abuse.

The leadership is not adequately trained to be handling such sensitive information at this time, let alone effectively integrating it into improving best practices. Because I don't have consent to share others' experiences with it, I'll share mine. The process was re-traumatizing for me, despite leadership's best, but floundering efforts. Technically, my whistleblower process is still open, according to leadership themselves, but I have heard nothing from them since April 2022. I fully understand there are bigger fish to fry, but I am still a stakeholder, and one originally encouraged in 2021 to join the board of directors (by the current CFO and former president of the board no less.) A simple communication about closing my wb process and an explanation why, at this point, would suffice, given that they emphatically confirmed the intent of ongoing dialogue with witnesses present. (Nor have I heard from 2 of the 3 other corps whose CEOs assured me dialogue btw.)

I have endured significant negative reactions in my interactions with SCV alumni (VAA and VHS) in the last year that are truly discouraging. These reactions cause further concern in the case that additional abuse survivors want to step forward. The reactions were always among my fellow alum, whose actual first reaction should be one of compassion and support for myself and others, but especially others. Instead, too many of the loudest voices react with denial, skepticism,  downplaying, or outright hostility. This includes the former CEO.

Most alum who endured abuse that I've spoken to continue to fear retaliation from Vanguard and fellow alum, as well as activity-wide denylisting. Many of them have been enduring the lasting effects of abuse for months or years, like me. Too many of them confirm that they've endured similar reactions from alum over the years as well. I've spoken to 16 alum in total, 14 of whom endured abuse of some kind. Their unique instances of abuse total in 58, dating back to the early 2000s. Where is the accountability from directors of the board who have been in leadership since that time?

How can Vanguard and the activity learn from past mistakes when the above describes the current state of affairs by an alum whose care for the legacy of Vanguard is endless? What hope do other reporters have, especially if they have less professional nonprofit experience than me?

What about them?

It may be the tip of the iceberg, but one has to start somewhere.  And this seems as good a place as any.  

[LabMaster]

12 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:

My concerns about VMAPA's wb process includes their previously broken weblink to vmapa.org, but that is only the tip of the iceberg. Specifically, it is crucial that organizations maintain separate domains or service providers between their main website and their whistleblower processes. This builds in the capacity for checks and balances that gives reporters faith that their info won't be mishandled by biased administration. This is best practice. This is what VMAPA's own handbook implied back in 2018, but was never enacted. That part of the handbook was updated this year to say that they will house the wb process at scvanguard.org. There are alum who have reported to me who marched in the last five years who deserved best practices.

I have been concerned about VMAPA's whistleblower process since my direct interaction with it in April 2022. I am additionally concerned about at least 1 subsequent wb process initiated by another alum who has voluntarily reported their lack of progress to me. This is far more concerning than my own situation. It sets an inappropriate tone and does nothing to garner trust among alum who report, or want to report abuse.

The leadership is not adequately trained to be handling such sensitive information at this time, let alone effectively integrating it into improving best practices. Because I don't have consent to share others' experiences with it, I'll share mine. The process was re-traumatizing for me, despite leadership's best, but floundering efforts. Technically, my whistleblower process is still open, according to leadership themselves, but I have heard nothing from them since April 2022. I fully understand there are bigger fish to fry, but I am still a stakeholder, and one originally encouraged in 2021 to join the board of directors (by the current CFO and former president of the board no less.) A simple communication about closing my wb process and an explanation why, at this point, would suffice, given that they emphatically confirmed the intent of ongoing dialogue with witnesses present. (Nor have I heard from 2 of the 3 other corps whose CEOs assured me dialogue btw.)

I have endured significant negative reactions in my interactions with SCV alumni (VAA and VHS) in the last year that are truly discouraging. These reactions cause further concern in the case that additional abuse survivors want to step forward. The reactions were always among my fellow alum, whose actual first reaction should be one of compassion and support for myself and others, but especially others. Instead, too many of the loudest voices react with denial, skepticism,  downplaying, or outright hostility. This includes the former CEO.

Most alum who endured abuse that I've spoken to continue to fear retaliation from Vanguard and fellow alum, as well as activity-wide denylisting. Many of them have been enduring the lasting effects of abuse for months or years, like me. Too many of them confirm that they've endured similar reactions from alum over the years as well. I've spoken to 16 alum in total, 14 of whom endured abuse of some kind. Their unique instances of abuse total in 58, dating back to the early 2000s. Where is the accountability from directors of the board who have been in leadership since that time?

How can Vanguard and the activity learn from past mistakes when the above describes the current state of affairs by an alum whose care for the legacy of Vanguard is endless? What hope do other reporters have, especially if they have less professional nonprofit experience than me?

What about them?

I am curious about the “retaliation” that is feared by whistleblower alums who’ve been abused or reported abuse.  So long as there is factual evidence and incident provability, I would think there is nothing to fear.  It may be more of a threat of retaliation, made directly or implied of inferred by offending and “offended” alums, who in reality should be fearful of their own exposure of being an abuser, abetting abusers, being silent about abuse. There is nothing that actually can be done in a retaliatory manner,  that would not open up questions of culpability on their part.  And that exposure alone is a bit of leverage a wb might have.  WB’s shouldn’t fear any other alum. They are an alum like they are and have no power over anyone.  They aren’t protecting an org. If they think they are, they have an unbalanced set of life priorities.

WB’s unify yourselves and defend and push back on any so called alums who are denying your right to speak, expose and correct behaviors.  Abuse problems continue to exist and persist because they are fortunate to be cloaked in anonymity.  Exposing offenders, naming names, making it all public, will enable changes.  So long as provable facts support everything being brought out,  there is no retaliation possible.

We applaud all those of you WB’s who are making the waves, exposing the wrongs, being brave.  You are not the trouble makers, those that want you silenced are.

[scheherazadesghost]

1 hour ago, LabMaster said:

I am curious about the “retaliation” that is feared by whistleblower alums who’ve been abused or reported abuse.  So long as there is factual evidence and incident provability, I would think there is nothing to fear.  It may be more of a threat of retaliation, made directly or implied of inferred by offending and “offended” alums, who in reality should be fearful of their own exposure of being an abuser, abetting abusers, being silent about abuse. There is nothing that actually can be done in a retaliatory manner,  that would not open up questions of culpability on their part.  And that exposure alone is a bit of leverage a wb might have.  WB’s shouldn’t fear any other alum. They are an alum like they are and have no power over anyone.  They aren’t protecting an org. If they think they are, they have an unbalanced set of life priorities.

Some alum are afraid that speaking up will spell the end of Vanguard. Personally, to me, this is false, as the bad actors and those who enabled them for decades are at fault. There are more reports that I don't have consent to share than those I do, by a long shot. And that is because of this faulty whistleblower process that reporters can sniff out themselves, without asking my opinion. Bringing such information to light is the only thing that gives Vanguard a chance of surviving and thriving again... it is also the only thing that will help the rest of the activity improve. I strongly believe that GR and Myron would agree if they still with us and knew what I know.

Some alum fear that they will be unemployable across the activity if they step forward, in part because our reports include very big names. It doesn't take a genius to put together who my own abusers are, and yet, they're still around, happily employed by the activity without facing any semblance of accountability. These alums' only way of contributing to the activity for its betterment, in their eyes, is by staying silent. I would say more fall in this category than the previous one. I strongly believe that I faced denylisting as a result of (1) my leaving Vanguard due to injury as a young person, i.e. "abandoning the corps" and (2) my assertive attempts to bring abuse to light starting in 2022. I have contacted numerous organizations to attempt to lend my support (even is only a volunteer, with professional AmeriCorps volunteer experience.) And yet, I'm ghosted by leadership of these corps, even after opening formal whistleblower complaints that remain open to this day. This is the real fear that many of us have faced for speaking up.

The vast majority of us fear speaking out because it feels like a betrayal to our home corps. The "keep it in the family" approach and reprisal for not doing so has been alive and well within our corps for decades. I had to be mistreated for several seasons to see through this "family" notion. And truly, once I started speaking out, the notion of "family" has been all but disproved by interactions with alum who would rather I didn't say anything. There are some out there who react appropriately, with compassion, but they are rare in my experience. Some alum have been accosted by other alum for speaking out. In the last couple years.

1 hour ago, LabMaster said:

WB’s unify yourselves and defend and push back on any so called alums who are denying your right to speak, expose and correct behaviors.  Abuse problems continue to exist and persist because they are fortunate to be cloaked in anonymity.  Exposing offenders, naming names, making it all public, will enable changes.  So long as provable facts support everything being brought out,  there is no retaliation possible.

There are substantial barriers to naming names. Here on DCP, and on reddit, and on the SCV alumni FB page which is controlled by VMAPA leadership. I've exhausted other channels including (1) a handful of official corps whistleblower channels, (2) DCI, (3) the FTC, (4) The US Department of HHS, (5) The US Center for SafeSport, (6) The Army of Survivors, and (7) the Courage First Athletes Helpline. None of these channels respond with viable means for communicating these concerns to wider audiences, largely because most reports do not involve criminal activity. That does not mean that the incidents in the reports didn't leave lasting scars on reporters. I have even contacted (8) Trisha Nadolny, who responded that I should contact local media with my concerns.

The only entity in drum corps to respond appropriately to my work has been the CEO of Spirit of Atlanta, who reached out to me, not the other way around. No one else comes close. You'll notice I haven't named names, only titles. That's because each time I name names here, my comments are hidden, despite the fact that Vanguard corroborated my report in its entirety. I do not fear retaliation, but I had to leave the activity for that freedom, and assume that I will no longer be employable or valued at all within it. Good, I guess. But that potentially indicates that drum corps are scared of working with someone like me who is unafraid of calling out harmful actors and actions. Be careful of the company you keep.

Thank you and @IllianaLancerContra for your candid responses. It has been a whirlwind of two years trying to bring these issues to light.

Edited August 2, 2023 by scheherazadesghost
if you value this info, take your screen shots now

[Toby]

Posting guidelines are in place to protect posters, affiliated people/organizations, and DCP itself. 
 

If you have concerns about how the site is moderated, you can reach out to any of the moderation staff or administrators. 

[MarimbaManiac]

I did say to screenshot the post before it was removed by the creaky knee brigade. 

Just as a note, deleting posts that discuss abusive moderation does nothing to deter the conversation about abusive moderation. 

 

[IllianaLancerContra]

1 minute ago, MarimbaManiac said:

I did say to screenshot the post before it was removed by the creaky knee brigade. 

Just as a note, deleting posts that discuss abusive moderation does nothing to deter the conversation about abusive moderation. 

 

Well, as they say, if you’re not part of the solution……

[MarimbaManiac]

1 minute ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Well, as they say, if you’re not part of the solution……

I always strive to be part of the solution, but when met with resistance I have no issue becoming a problem. My mouth has always gotten me in trouble, the only thing that's changed with age is I'm more confident that I'm usually in the right and less deterred by mindless silencing practices. 

How about this...the moderation on EVERY OTHER SITE BUT DCP that discusses these issues is problematic and participates in silencing behavior for the purpose of not rocking the boat. DCP moderation is clearly superior, but EVERY OTHER SITE run by similar people with similar agendas are problematic. 

 

Better?

[scheherazadesghost]

8 minutes ago, Toby said:

Posting guidelines are in place to protect posters, affiliated people/organizations, and DCP itself. 
 

If you have concerns about how the site is moderated, you can reach out to any of the moderation staff or administrators. 

👍🏽 I have communicated with mods effectively and respectfully regarding posts that have been removed, and I happily, readily admit that mods reached out to me in some of those case.

I understand liabilities to myself, DCP and affiliated organizations. Prioritizing such liabilities, in the case where my report and character have been corroborated by Vanguard, have only served to protect abusers and enablers. But I get it. It's what the site has to do to protect itself. That simply doesn't negate the end result. And again, DCP is far from the only entity that has reacted to protect itself and drum corps entities/names first, before reporters.

This is further evidence that there is no entity besides MAASIN that protects and serves reporters first. Even they have their limits and advised me not to name names.