What is wrong with US?

[Terri Schehr]

2 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

None y’all’s business would be a typical answer

“You wouldn’t understand.”  Or at least, that’s what I heard at finals in 2022. 

[HockeyDad]

2 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said:

“You wouldn’t understand.”  Or at least, that’s what I heard at finals in 2022. 

Did they pat you on the head as they said it?  “There, there, sport. How ‘bout a Fresca?!”

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, jjeffeory said:

I think it comes off as destructive and looks like a bunch of busybodies trying to stir crap. It's really disgusting because it's obvious that it's not done out of concern but just to stir the pot. Basically, let's kick them while they're down.... Burn the whole thing down... That's why I have an issue with it.

but in reality thats not what the majority of us here want.

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Jimmyjames said:

10000000000000000 percent. Everything the cadets do should be looked at under a microscope. After "hopgate" and now their money problems. They absolutely can not be trusted. 

correction the proper term is Hopghazi.

 

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, jjeffeory said:

No name-calling was done by me. I've been on DCP since the beginning. I think most people here know that I'm okay, but welcome "new" poster! Guess, incorrectly that I'm part of the problem. Cheers!

well, as someone else here since the beginning......are we really ok? LOL

[Jeff Ream]

44 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Did they pat you on the head as they said it?  “There, there, sport. How ‘bout a Fresca?!”

well bless your heart, thanks for asking

[2000Cadet]

5 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

Two of those corps do not have leaders in place.  The rest are not willing to answer.

But we are starting to talk past each other.  I sense your concern is about overreaching "gotcha" posts (a valid and timely concern at the moment), and what you characterize as "dirty laundry" about specific corps.  My concern is about trends impacting multiple corps.

No, I'm sure we both have the same concerns which is why I started this thread in the first place. 

5 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

are they? i've asked a simple question here and elsewhere and just got pointed back to a press release that gave only vague details.

 

circle the wagons mentality is the worst thing possible.

5 hours ago, MarimbaManiac said:

Yeah that's the problem. You can ask very pointed and specific questions to the "right" people, and get very generic responses that don't actually say anything, like: "we are taking all necessary steps to field a corps in 2024."

...well what does that mean exactly? 

I'm sure you both know this happens with many organizations and not just within drum corps. I am not ok with giving political answers either, but it doesn't hurt to ask the source to see if you can get an answer. 

2 hours ago, jjeffeory said:

I think it comes off as destructive and looks like a bunch of busybodies trying to stir crap. It's really disgusting because it's obvious that it's not done out of concern but just to stir the pot. Basically, let's kick them while they're down.... Burn the whole thing down... That's why I have an issue with it.

This is my view as well. Victims are a different story as their story should be told. But those who have no skin in the game, or who weren't victims of anything that specific corps may have done, well, I cannot see a specific reason why they'd post things like that on here without confronting the organization directly. 

2 hours ago, Jimmyjames said:

I've yet to see one example of a corps that did not deserved to be kicked while they were down. Most of the things pointed out and what they have been caught doing are beyond unacceptable. 

A lot of what you've said is correct. However, I think you're forgetting that an entirely new team (in fact, multiple new teams) had been brought in to correct the ship. And while it still hasn't been smooth sailing, much of what they had done until this latest "scandal" has all seemed to be in good faith and "class up" the organization and provide a better experience for the members. 

2 hours ago, Jimmyjames said:

10000000000000000 percent. Everything the cadets do should be looked at under a microscope. After "hopgate" and now their money problems. They absolutely can not be trusted. 

That's a stretch of a statement given a lot of people who were affiliated with Cadets at that time are no longer there. But hey, dredging up mitigated situations is always a great idea. And speaking of money "problems," I'm always curious about how many people on here actually donate to these corps. 

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by 2000Cadet

[scheherazadesghost]

26 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

but it doesn't hurt to ask the source to see if you can get an answer. 

Again, how do you know this isn't happening? But to your point, folks could easily tag the board member on DCP and see what happens. However, the last thread that happened in was nuked. Doesn't exactly garner trust.

26 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

But those who have no skin in the game, or who weren't victims of anything that specific corps may have done, well, I cannot see a specific reason why they'd post things like that on here without confronting the organization directly. 

Similar to above, but victims and stakeholders have similar motives in scrutinizing organizations. They are both due transparency and honesty. Parsing them apart isn't the strong argument you're going for, I think.

26 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

A lot of what you've said is correct. However, I think you're forgetting that an entirely new team (in fact, multiple new teams) had been brought in to correct the ship. And while it still hasn't been smooth sailing, much of what they had done until this latest "scandal" has all seemed to be in good faith and "class up" the organization and provide a better experience for the members. 

This sounds a lot like many responses I get from Vanguard alum. "The staff that hurt you aren't there anymore so problem solved." But, the enablers are still there. And even then, this argument assumes it's as easy for some stakeholders and victims to set aside past harms as it is for those who weren't harmed... or those who know a healthy org when they see one. That's not how things work and it lacks empathy. A better, more constructive question would be,  "what would help them trust these orgs again?"

26 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

But hey, dredging up mitigated situations is always a great idea.

Mitigated for you maybe. But there are other people out there, as indicated above, who have justifiably different standards.

Edited October 26, 2023 by scheherazadesghost
typo

[greg_orangecounty]

29 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

That's a stretch of a statement given a lot of people who were affiliated with Cadets at that time are no longer there. But hey, dredging up mitigated situations is always a great idea. And speaking of money "problems," I'm always curious about how many people on here actually donate to these corps. 

Most likely 0%.  In my opinion those that post the most regarding Santa Clara and now Garfield actually care the least about those corps.  It's mostly self-serving, self-promotion, and self-aggrandizement.  

[scheherazadesghost]

2 minutes ago, greg_orangecounty said:

Most likely 0%.  In my opinion those that post the most regarding Santa Clara and now Garfield actually care the least about those corps.  It's mostly self-serving, self-promotion, and self-aggrandizement.  

Some can't afford it. 👍🏽