Jump to content

Wow, no one wants to discuss VANGUARD?


Recommended Posts

I want a Vanguard return, but only when they can (more or less) guarantee they stay active

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/12/2023 at 8:30 PM, ContraFart said:

I notice only one in a Mandarins uniform, so that dispels the notion that their success was due to an influx of SCV kids. 

Prospective talent seems like the more compelling argument. If you were a talented marcher in CA prior to this season you had one less corps to choose from. PC and Mandarins had historically great seasons 🤷‍♂️

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, valjean said:

Prospective talent seems like the more compelling argument. If you were a talented marcher in CA prior to this season you had one less corps to choose from. PC and Mandarins had historically great seasons 🤷‍♂️

The Mandarins will win DCI before SCV does again. Which is no shame in it. It's being headed by the SCV 99 championship director that was pushed out by erroneous financial reporting that shielded the bingo fraud. 

 

I say that as the Treasurer shortly after that period and got to see the mess myself.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Richard Lesher said:

The Mandarins will win DCI before SCV does again.

It's looking that way. They're a great group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scheherazadesghost said:

My empathy is extended to the victims of this corps who have reported to me first and primarily. My empathy and smooth communication with them can't give you a whole picture because it's locked behind confidentiality. But sure assume all of my interactions with alum are like this one with you.

Empathy is a two way street and by your own admission, our supposed interaction at meetings was awkward at best. That's not how empathy works.

the thread of what is under discussion has been lost. Not the first time. I am not assuming anything I am citing a statement that empathy is not extended to alum generally as an example of not treating others with sufficient sensitivity when one does not know the story of those in scope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Other than the theft, the other concern I see on the form sent to State of CA is acknowledgment that there was no independent audit performed.  I realize this is for 2019/20.  So maybe one or more have occurred since then.  
 

A third-party audit by a qualified CPA firm would go a long way toward addressing the concerns many seem to have with the financial side of SCV.  

Using Blue Devils as a proxy (because they are both under the same CA laws, and same timelines), SCV is still delinquent and has not even submitted a registration (with audit or not) for 21 or later, which BD has.

SCV potentially gets away without having to do an audit in 2020 because revenues are reported at below $2M, but they haven't even submitted any sort of registration for 2021.  

So even if they do an audit for 2019, they still have to do one for 2021 (and bookkeeping connectivity between 2021 the unaudited year of 20 still has to be up to snuff because it's the starting point of a required audited year. So at the very least have to show starting balances are legit). 

I'm so mad, because it wasn't long ago SCV outsourced the bookkeeper to a CPA firm. All they had to do was not F that up. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, DSpruce said:

the thread of what is under discussion has been lost. Not the first time. I am not assuming anything I am citing a statement that empathy is not extended to alum generally as an example of not treating others with sufficient sensitivity when one does not know the story of those in scope.

The threads are not lost, they're closed to additional comment. They're still publicly available for anyone to see and make their own judgments. Only your comments which violated DCP policy have been removed by mods. AFAIK none of mine have been removed unless they were in response to you or other comments which violate policy.

My empathy was not extended to alum who were indirectly hostile in alum meetings or directly so in privacy, as well as those that enable them, knowingly or unknowingly. Honestly, I'm sad for all of us, and that includes empathy for all of us... but empathy does not always mean being sweet, accommodating, or "nice." It simply doesn't. Those are not synonyms.

If you want my empathy for alum who have not even been open about their victimhood or cannot handle direct, assertive communication over those who have reported to me, then I fear you don't understand what it means to hold the confidence of over a dozen alum-reporters. Especially not when the latter report that being among alum is undesirable for them too. If you and the world knew their stories, perhaps you wouldn't be so quick to judge my actions. They would make you sick. As they have me, constantly, for the last two years.

35 minutes ago, DSpruce said:

I do not recommend using the word preach. I have not preached. I do not recommend making threats, even if they would be ineffectual if carried out.

I have never threatened anybody. My words were clearly "I don't recommend" because it reflects poorly on us all for someone under the influence to be making public claims about the organization we love. Especially with the number of very serious reports in my cache of substance misuse by alumni and staff. It also reflects poorly on all of us for you to join a social media platform with the clear intention of victim blaming me, which you continue to do.

In fact, I know alum who have been threatened by other alum. I have modified my actions in order to minimize being threatened. It's projection to imply that my words here are threatening when my reports include actual alum being actually accosted.

To imply that I would take any kind of threatening action because of what an anon said on the internet speaks more to your mindset than my own.

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...