Where is the love?

[Jeff Ream]

10 hours ago, Vuitton said:

Exactly. This whole thing has just gotten so silly. I wish the mods would just shut down all these Cadets and Vanguard threads. NO ONE, yes NO ONE, knows what they are talking about. Only those on the inside know.

Some seem to be getting some joy out of this. We'll see how joyful they are when it's their corps that has to take the season off.

Well at least it’s not Trellis.com

[2000Cadet]

16 hours ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

After all the events since 2018, I honestly can’t fathom why a Corps wouldn’t be 100% transparent.  
 

Yet here we are.  

 

15 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said:

I see two options why they aren't and welcome others to share ones I'm not thinking of:

1. They don't know how to be transparent + effective (especially after decades of doing the opposite)
2. They don't want to be transparent (because that would seem like less control and power over the orgs/product to anyone from for-profit background ... or to those who have only served on boards rather than actually done the work of seeing a mission through to its actuation at the admin level)

Both aren't good and we see the adverse outcomes of this non-transparent approach every season. There are countless guides available by web search if hiring a tested nonprofit pro is unaffordable for orgs atm.

People have different ideas about what "transparency" is.

[IllianaLancerContra]

7 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

 

People have different ideas about what "transparency" is.

Transparency is like the Supreme Court’s definition of pornography- I know it when I see it.  

[KVG_DC]

20 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Transparency is like the Supreme Court’s definition of pornography- I know it when I see it.  

 

[HockeyDad]

32 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

 

People have different ideas about what "transparency" is.

Yeah. That’s a controversial word. Let me try a reply that doesn’t use that word. 
My problem here (MY problem, others are entitled to their opinions and I respect that), I think, is that I’m just not buying the explanation provided by the BOD member. Paraphrasing (in other words, how my brain interpreted it) - some bills came in late that we weren’t expecting, and busses were an issue and we won’t skimp on that kind of stuff.   And that’s why they can’t tour in 2024.  I’m not buying it. There is more to the story here. That’s where I am with this. 

[IllianaLancerContra]

26 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Yeah. That’s a controversial word. Let me try a reply that doesn’t use that word. 
My problem here (MY problem, others are entitled to their opinions and I respect that), I think, is that I’m just not buying the explanation provided by the BOD member. Paraphrasing (in other words, how my brain interpreted it) - some bills came in late that we weren’t expecting, and busses were an issue and we won’t skimp on that kind of stuff.   And that’s why they can’t tour in 2024.  I’m not buying it. There is more to the story here. That’s where I am with this. 

Bills may have come in late.   But they shouldn’t be unexpected.  Makes me wonder ‘who bought what, put it on credit card (or said send us a bill), & didn’t tell anyone (or at least didn’t tell the right people)’? 

Edited November 6, 2023 by IllianaLancerContra
Punc.t.uation

[Chris RL FHNSAB]

18 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said:

I see two options why they aren't and welcome others to share ones I'm not thinking of:

1. They don't know how to be transparent + effective (especially after decades of doing the opposite)
2. They don't want to be transparent (because that would seem like less control and power over the orgs/product to anyone from for-profit background ... or to those who have only served on boards rather than actually done the work of seeing a mission through to its actuation at the admin level)

Both aren't good and we see the adverse outcomes of this non-transparent approach every season. There are countless guides available by web search if hiring a tested nonprofit pro is unaffordable for orgs atm.

Boards have a fiduciary responsibility to the organizations they are elected to lead.  There are a multitude of internal and external restrictions on what and how information is shared generally to the public, as well as confidentiality we are bound to.  Both of your bullets above are incorrect. Not for profit BOD's generally have (including Cadets) massive experience on both for-profit and not for profit boards, and I would ask you to look at BOD's out of our little (and shrinking) niche activity and their depth of detailed (or lack their to) communication to the public, and when.  Please support whatever corp you can, today. Volunteer, donate, anything but following/starting gossip on a website.  If DCI is to survive, we need everyone to be productive, literally like today...or you will end up with no activity to be posting about. 

I am speaking as a fan/volunteer/teacher/past marching member and not as my current role as BOD member of Cadets.  We speak as one voice through our public statements and all of my comments above are in generality and not directly related to Cadets and my 33 years of involvement . 

Not once have I chose this forum to speak negatively of massive volunteer army's who give unselfishly of days, years, and decades to their org of their choice.  And yes, not only do boards volunteer they are generally the largest financial donor pool as well....so consider that as you question BOD's motivation across the activity.  Every BOD I guarantee wants their organization to thrive, or why would they do what we all do?  

Edited November 6, 2023 by Chris RL FHNSAB

[HockeyDad]

23 minutes ago, Chris RL FHNSAB said:

Boards have a fiduciary responsibility to the organizations they are elected to lead.  There are a multitude of internal and external restrictions on what and how information is shared generally to the public, as well as confidentiality we are bound to.  Both of your bullets above are incorrect. Not for profit BOD's generally have (including Cadets) massive experience on both for-profit and not for profit boards, and I would ask you to look at BOD's out of our little (and shrinking) niche activity and their depth of detailed (or lack their to) communication to the public, and when.  Please support whatever corp you can, today. Volunteer, donate, anything but following/starting gossip on a website.  If DCI is to survive, we need everyone to be productive, literally like today...or you will end up with no activity to be posting about. 

I am speaking as a fan/volunteer/teacher/past marching member and not as my current role as BOD member of Cadets.  We speak as one voice through our public statements and all of my comments above are in generality and not directly related to Cadets and my 33 years of involvement . 

Not once have I chose this forum to speak negatively of massive volunteer army's who give unselfishly of days, years, and decades to their org of their choice.  And yes, not only do boards volunteer they are generally the largest financial donor pool as well....so consider that as you question BOD's motivation across the activity.  Every BOD I guarantee wants their organization to thrive, or why would they do what we all do?  

Can you explain what you good folks on the BOD did wrong such that you can’t tour in 2024, and what corrective actions you are taking to prevent reoccurrence of this?  Thank you. 

[Chris RL FHNSAB]

33 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Can you explain what you good folks on the BOD did wrong such that you can’t tour in 2024, and what corrective actions you are taking to prevent reoccurrence of this?  Thank you. 

Our current statements, and future ones, have and will continue to clarify/expand as we can. We don't speak as a BOD via DCP and I do not speak representing the BOD here, but as my own voice. We speak as one via our statements.

I do see that my general post you are responding to did not sink in, based on your question and it's accusatory tone.  That's disappointing as I'm trying to help within the previously stated parameters all boards are governed.  

[2000Cadet]

2 minutes ago, Chris RL FHNSAB said:

Our current statements, and future ones, have and will continue to clarify/expand as we can. We don't speak as a BOD via DCP and I do not speak representing the BOD here, but as my own voice. We speak as one via our statements.

I do see that my general post you are responding to did not sink in, based on your question and it's accusatory tone.  That's disappointing as I'm trying to help within the previously stated parameters all boards are governed.  

Glad I'm not the only one who notices those things.