What is wrong with US?

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Terri Schehr said:

You’d be surprised at how the GH whistleblowers were treated after he was gone.  They were basically told that we got rid of him, now shut up and go away. 

 

 

 

remember the disaster that was Spirit's social meda when they announced taking 22 off?

[HockeyDad]

2 hours ago, Slingerland said:

There are a several key issues that are biting away at the activity's ability to be self-sufficient and secure, and the solutions are easy to name, but difficult to implement.

1. It's hard to manage an activity with this many moving pieces without professional paid staff. Being on the road and in spring training for 11 weeks can't be done with moms and dads volunteering to do much of the work every day since moms and dads have to, y'know, hold down jobs. So the National Touring Model requires dozens of people around each corps, each of whom will need to get paid something for their time and effort, in order to make the model work.

2. But WITHOUT interested parents involved (on the busses, at the housing sites, AROUND the members every single moment of the day), the possibility for bad actors among the members and the adults to do harm increases in likelihood. Would the horror show of SOA's "talent night" have gone on if a couple of dads were on that bus? Highly unlikely. 

3. So the issue could be solved with more, professionally trained and qualified adults. But drum corps people don't provide nearly enough financial support to the activity to make it possible to hire professional staff at the levels that would be needed to make that possible. You would think that with tens of thousands of drum corps alums out there that ponying up $15-20 million a year in direct support for corps wouldn't be a big deal, but the giving numbers for drum corps alums are a tiny fraction of that number.  

Why? I don't know. For me, it's a primary focus of charitable giving (multiple corps supported), but dozens of people I marched with don't support any org, even though they still go see shows so are aware of what's what. But until the alums of the activity get involved either as volunteers or as active, engaged donors so that others can be paid to do the work that volunteers can't, it's not gonna get fixed.

You’ve convinced me Slingerland. It’s an unsustainable (read “failed”) business model. Well, it was fun while it lasted. 

[scheherazadesghost]

23 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

yeah. i feel for them in one way...they're getting beat up on all fronts. now that doesn't excuse the reactions they displayed, but i can understand the frustration and pressure they're under.

but as for stuff getting out online.....well...Cadets 18, the big explosion, and a few smaller ones til last week. Pioneer. Oregon. Crossmens old director and a certain hire. Spirit. heck this past summer with the BD tenor player. a former Mandarins staff member i think it was?

in many of these cases other steps were taken, but what changed? Nothing much, at least til it exploded here, Reddit or the newspapers. which backs up what i said before....drum corps is way too often reactionary, and after it's already beyond reasonable control

I mean, respectfully, when two of the aforementioned testimonies I retain include actual physical assault, decades apart, I'm reluctant to call public scrutiny "beating up" in the case of Vanguard. One of those testimonies is on this forum (mostly ignored by DCPers) the other too horrifying and humiliating to share.

Nobody likes seeing an organization struggle, least of all me, cause I built my career in noprofits and higher ed. But when you risk the safety of future members on top of stifling the opinions of survivors, what else is left but to say something publicly? At best, attempts at reconciliation have been half-hearted, and when that's been pointed out, the response is huffiness and well, you'll never be satisfied so we have better things to do. Alrighty then, but you have to put in the effort and I can tell you haven't. Stalemate.

Survivors are the best resource for improvements period so... I'll just sit here in the desert mountains I guess. At a distance that makes alumni acting out on their stupid threats at least more difficult.

[GUARDLING]

9 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

oh success turns many a blind eye. we've seen that in so many facets of the world

Now that is very true

[Jeff Ream]

17 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said:

You and I go further back than that.  It was about ten years ago that we started squawking about questionable people in the activity.  The slings and arrows came our way, too. 

You’re right.  We’ve moved from square one to square one A. 

it was closer to 20 years ago on RAMD. Funny....that name we shant say out loud did the same thing too. however that had a zillion other issues attached to it

[Jeff Ream]

8 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:

I mean, respectfully, when two of the aforementioned testimonies I retain include actual physical assault, decades apart, I'm reluctant to call public scrutiny "beating up" in the case of Vanguard. One of those testimonies is on this forum (mostly ignored by DCPers) the other too horrifying and humiliating to share.

Nobody likes seeing an organization struggle, least of all me, cause I built my career in noprofits and higher ed. But when you risk the safety of future members on top of stifling the opinions of survivors, what else is left but to say something publicly? At best, attempts at reconciliation have been half-hearted, and when that's been pointed out, the response is huffiness and well, you'll never be satisfied so we have better things to do. Alrighty then, but you have to put in the effort and I can tell you haven't. Stalemate.

Survivors are the best resource for improvements period so... I'll just sit here in the desert mountains I guess. At a distance that makes alumni acting out on their stupid threats at least more difficult.

i've been told i'm too vocal to get judging gigs. ok cya then. i'll spend more time with the family

[2000Cadet]

4 hours ago, MarimbaManiac said:

So, you acknowledge that there are problems that need to be addressed, and in later posts acknowledge that other avenues for fixing those issues have been attempted, yet you complain when people trying to bring those issues to light?

Let's be clear about something. When there are systemic issues in an organization, and that organization is unwilling to even ACKNOWLEDGE them yet alone address them, there are two options. Let it be, or dig further and shine a spotlight. The problem, as you put it, is that for decades people were too comfortable with, or encouraged by others, to stay quiet and let things be. There was too much willingness to overlook clearly serious issues for "the health of the activity" or "out of respect for the organization." It bred a toxic environment where issues were allowed to fester, and whistleblowers were declared to be the problem because it was "too messy."

Frankly, the people who want change, but refuse to get their hands dirty, are the worst offenders of this story. They cry foul enough to make it seem like they're engaged and offended, but are actually more offended by the heavy handed processes that are required to force change in intransigent organizations. In my opinion, they are the ones who are doing the most damage to the activity, because they're too "grossed out" by the dirty work that they allow corruption and incompetence to continue, even when that results in very real negative effects on the marching members and staff. 

If SCV, or Cadets, or SOA, or whomever is refusing to acknowledge their systemic issues, then THEY are the ones who have destroyed the reputation of the organization. THEY are the ones who brought this upon themselves, and THEY are the only parties responsible for their unwillingness or inability to get their houses in order. It is NOT the people who have been bringing up these issues quietly for years, only to be dismissed or ignored. It's NOT the people working to uncover and bring to light these issues, and it's NOT the people amplifying the message that a house cleaning is in order. 

The organizations being ripped apart, brought this on themselves, and they only have themselves to blame. Stop shooting the messenger. 

 

 

First off, I'm not "complaining" and you can leave your little attitude at the door. I am simply saying if people really want to solve an issue, DCP is not the place to do it. 

Second, I'm pointing out an issue that is ridiculous in my view. As I've said in my original post, I think it's right to point out when drum corps have done things that need to be addressed, but DCP does not seem to be the right place to handle issues. 

Third, The POINT of my initial post was to ask why people choose to bring issues on DCP, which usually leads to nothing being done except threads being led down rabbit holes with no solutions, and ultimately that thread getting closed. If people TRULY want to get something fixed within that specific organization, then they should approach that organization instead of adding to the destruction of that organization. 

But if you're all for posting that type of crap, then by all means, do you. Just because you can do something doesn't mean that's the right way to do it. 

[scheherazadesghost]

6 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

Third, The POINT of my initial post was to ask why people choose to bring issues on DCP, which usually leads to nothing being done except threads being led down rabbit holes with no solutions, and ultimately that thread getting closed. If people TRULY want to get something fixed within that specific organization, then they should approach that organization instead of adding to the destruction of that organization. 

First, I want to say I'm a prime ally in recognizing some semblance of what you might be feeling right now regarding your corps' hiatus. I was a hot mess around this time last year. There are plenty here who also might know that feeling. I'm sorry you and many others are going thru it. Just painful.

And... there will always be some who jump to protect the org (good, that's important) and some just as quick to identify gaps (I think that's also good, but clearly others disagree, fine, free country and whatnot.)

It's when one of those groups tries to silence the other that my hackles go up. And poster after poster in this thread has described why going to the orgs rarely works. Hint: it's silencing. You can choose to ignore that if you want, but I'm all about identifying patterns as a qualitative researcher, and that's a big one.

So we're getting closer and closer to shooting the messengers here, rather than taking a closer look at the orgs with documented failures in their legacies. But it will be pointed out.

It was pointed out in the SoA thread by at least a few posters (some survivors) that blaming whistleblowers for the potential destruction of an org was victim blaming. What's the difference here? Genuine question, not a gotcha.

[2000Cadet]

4 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

Beautifully written.  It’s a weird thing - I would expect to get a sense of humility coming from SCV and Cadets leadership teams. Instead it feels like we’re getting attitude. 

I am not affiliated with the Cadets as far as staff or otherwise. I only marched and now I donate. Any attitude you think you're getting from me (which is none) would be coming directly from ME and not Cadets. And I think a lot of people on this site could practice a little humility. 

5 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said:

Yes, they improved the mechanics of their whistleblowing system; allowed a meeting between myself and board regarding safeguarding so they're mostly aware that I've gathered the testimony of 16 alum with 60 instances of abuse over the decades; and have pledged transparency FWIW. Further, they shared my open letter internally with the staff during spring training of the 22 season. Lastly, they also stated that they are receptive to receiving evidence of retaliation should I encounter any. Have documentation of all of this.

I won't share other things I'm aware of because I don't actually share everything. But yes, there have been changes.

If nothing else, they're on notice that a growing number of critical alumni are watching and scrutinizing them quietly and vocally. If there were nothing else, I'd be fine with that too. But there is.

Because, and I don't know why this is so difficult for the drum corps community to grasp, public and stakeholder scrutiny is supposed to be baked into the nonprofit mechanism. Drum corps pushback to scrutiny is the outlier here. Not the scrutiny itself. If you had evidence that your beloved corps was risking is own future, wouldn't it be your love for them that drove you to take action?

And as I said in the now shuttered thread, none of you know the other steps whistleblowers have taken just because you've read what they say on social media. In fact, it would endanger most of them to list out the steps they've taken. So to assume they haven't taken the steps you deem appropriate is oddly both hurtful and futile.

Well, I did not say I was against holding any corps accountable for the wrongs they've done. I am specifically talking about the way people feel the need to post dirty laundry on here. If I were in that position, I most certainly would take action to make sure people are held accountable. But in my view, there are more effective ways to do it. 

And let's get real folks. We ALL know there are certain people on this forum with axes to grind, who foam at the mouth at the slightest bit of controversy within corps they do not particularly like (or maybe the people within those corps), so let's not get brand new. 

Additionally, none of us know if people have tried to bring up issues in the past within their specific drum corps so speaking negatively about the entire staff as a whole on a drum corps forum doesn't seem to get anywhere. 

When I was in the Navy, we were taught if we had a problem, to handle it at the lowest level. If that doesn't work, you take it to the next level and the next and the next until the issue is fixed (and I'm talking about certain issues, so let's not twist my words here). I was never taught to go directly to the media (or social media, although we know a lot of people have done that) to get the issues fixed. While that doesn't always work, it's a start. 

Edited October 25, 2023 by 2000Cadet

[scheherazadesghost]

12 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

Well, I did not say I was against holding any corps accountable for the wrongs they've done. I am specifically talking about the way people feel the need to post dirty laundry on here. If I were in that position, I most certainly would take action to make sure people are held accountable. But in my view, there are more effective ways to do it. 

And let's get real folks. We ALL know there are certain people on this forum with axes to grind, who foam at the mouth at the slightest bit of controversy within corps they do not particularly like (or maybe the people within those corps), so let's not get brand new. 

Thanks for the dialogue.

We've already been clear here that going to the orgs hasn't worked, so what other steps do you recommend?

The "axes to grind" and "dirty laundry" language is kind of a no starter for me. Heard it too much with my own alum when I have brought up legitimate, verifiable concerns. It's used to flippantly to take seriously at this point.

12 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

Additionally, none of us know if people have tried to bring up issues in the past within their specific drum corps so speaking negatively about the entire staff as a whole on a drum corps forum doesn't seem to get anywhere. 

I don't think I get who put what your referencing here so I'll leave it.

12 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

When I was in the Navy, we were taught we had a problem, handle it at the lowest level. If that doesn't work, you take it to the next level and the next and the next until the issue is fixed (and I'm talking about certain issues, so let's not twist my words here). I was never taught to go directly to the media (or social media, although we know a lot of people have done that) to get the issues fixed. While that doesn't always work, but it's a start. 

Again, how do you know this hasn't been done?