Where is the love?

[HockeyDad]

7 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.  

Ok well I tried. In the most respectful and neutral way I could. Thanks for the attitude.   Your words sunk in, believe me.  What’s disappointing is that you can’t tour in 2024. Failures occurred. That’s not an accusation. And you don’t seem willing or able to describe what you are doing to ensure it doesn’t happen again. I wish you well. 

[Chris RL FHNSAB]

17 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

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

It's truly baffling......

[scheherazadesghost]

1 hour 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. 

Indeed, the essential work of a nonprofit is balancing transparency with confidentiality. There are mechanisms like Roberts Rules that tip toward the confidential side, and there are simple mechanisms for tipping in the other direction. Like here https://www.linkedin.com/advice/0/how-do-you-balance-transparency-confidentiality-16c

Quote

For example, you may share your mission, vision, values, goals, strategies, activities, outcomes, impacts, challenges, and learnings with your stakeholders, using various channels and formats, such as reports, newsletters, websites, social media, events, or meetings. You may also explain how you use feedback, evaluation, and accountability mechanisms to improve your performance and impact. Your transparency policy and practices should also clarify what information you do not share, and why.

So, what is the Cadets' org or board transparency policy?

1 hour ago, Chris RL FHNSAB said:

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.

I peeped your website. 2/15 of your directors have nonprofit admin experience (outside of drum corps) and none of your staff do. Kudos on the 2 board directors that do though, genuinely, as they look super qualified. I hope that their expertise in grants and donor stewardship help ease y'all's challenges.

I don't see that across the activity though. Most corps board directors (including in Cadets' case) built their careers in entirely different fields with wholly different mechanisms and expectations. Nothing wrong with that, except that they are less familiar with the internal administrative strategies of healthy nonprofits.

And transparency is a particularly tricky strategy to employ, and not one you can necessarily learn as well in other fields.

1 hour ago, Chris RL FHNSAB said:

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've only attempted to volunteer but continually get doors shut in my face across the activity. I'm getting tired of asking. I can't donate at this time... not unlike much of my age cohort, tyvm. So, any other ideas? The nearest show to me is 6 hours one way, so that's what I'm going to try and do. Otherwise FloMarching and this is about all I have. Feels great though, considering how much I still can't help but love this little niche of ours and have tried to be more involved...👍🏽

So, I've been sequestered here. I've met some incredible people here, some of whom reach out to me about productivity, safeguarding, and fundraising so I'm not exactly unproductive. I also don't think it's fair to pin the challenges of the activity on who you call "gossipers" though. There are so many other causes for the challenges in drum corps that ache for org accountability primarily anyway... no need to go looking for more external enemies and challenges.

When alum are treated like threats for bringing up difficult topics that they are experts about, I'd argue that the activity as a whole has already lost its moral/ethical compass.

1 hour ago, Chris RL FHNSAB said:

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?  

You sound like some Vanguard alum I've met. Seemingly unwavering in their stance that acknowledging serious flaws in the activity is "negative." It's also called toxic positivity and it's not good for nonprofits. That's because:

I, and many others, experienced nonprofit mission failure in the drum corps activity. Our voices are just as important as yours and... could actually help construct a healthy, sustainable activity moving forward.

[2000Cadet]

17 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:

Indeed, the essential work of a nonprofit is balancing transparency with confidentiality. There are mechanisms like Roberts Rules that tip toward the confidential side, and there are simple mechanisms for tipping in the other direction. Like here https://www.linkedin.com/advice/0/how-do-you-balance-transparency-confidentiality-16c

So, what is the Cadets' org or board transparency policy?

I peeped your website. 2/15 of your directors have nonprofit admin experience (outside of drum corps) and none of your staff do. Kudos on the 2 board directors that do though, genuinely, as they look super qualified. I hope that their expertise in grants and donor stewardship help ease y'all's challenges.

I don't see that across the activity though. Most corps board directors (including in Cadets' case) built their careers in entirely different fields with wholly different mechanisms and expectations. Nothing wrong with that, except that they are less familiar with the internal administrative strategies of healthy nonprofits.

And transparency is a particularly tricky strategy to employ, and not one you can necessarily learn as well in other fields.

I've only attempted to volunteer but continually get doors shut in my face across the activity. I'm getting tired of asking. I can't donate at this time... not unlike much of my age cohort, tyvm. So, any other ideas? The nearest show to me is 6 hours one way, so that's what I'm going to try and do. Otherwise FloMarching and this is about all I have. Feels great though, considering how much I still can't help but love this little niche of ours and have tried to be more involved...👍🏽

So, I've been sequestered here. I've met some incredible people here, some of whom reach out to me about productivity, safeguarding, and fundraising so I'm not exactly unproductive. I also don't think it's fair to pin the challenges of the activity on who you call "gossipers" though. There are so many other causes for the challenges in drum corps that ache for org accountability primarily anyway... no need to go looking for more external enemies and challenges.

When alum are treated like threats for bringing up difficult topics that they are experts about, I'd argue that the activity as a whole has already lost its moral/ethical compass.

You sound like some Vanguard alum I've met. Seemingly unwavering in their stance that acknowledging serious flaws in the activity is "negative." It's also called toxic positivity and it's not good for nonprofits. That's because:

I, and many others, experienced nonprofit mission failure in the drum corps activity. Our voices are just as important as yours and... could actually help construct a healthy, sustainable activity moving forward.

 I think you'd be better off not comparing Vanguard's troubles to Cadets troubles. Each corps has their own issues and ways in which they have to deal with them, but holding all corps under the same fire based on your own experience with one corps is unfair in my opinion. 

[scheherazadesghost]

11 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

 I think you'd be better off not comparing Vanguard's troubles to Cadets troubles. Each corps has their own issues and ways in which they have to deal with them, but holding all corps under the same fire based on your own experience with one corps is unfair in my opinion. 

I didn't compare the problems at the corps. I'm not craving getting blasted here, honestly.

I compared the way that some alum respond to other alumni for bringing up their concerns publicly or privately. "Dampening" is the most diplomatic way for me to describe it. And it's not healthy. And it's not just Vanguard or Cadets. It's nearly everywhere I've looked. That's a trend. I and others pointed it out before Cadets announced their hiatus.

Also, it's not just my experience. And, as I sad above, not just my corps.

You mentioned earlier that people define transparency differently. The experts don't. They agree on what it looks like, have written extensively via free resources about it online, and that's who I listen to.

Edited November 6, 2023 by scheherazadesghost
typo

[IllianaLancerContra]

1 hour 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.  

When do you anticipate the next public statement (if any) by the BoD?

[IllianaLancerContra]

19 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

 I think you'd be better off not comparing Vanguard's troubles to Cadets troubles. Each corps has their own issues and ways in which they have to deal with them, but holding all corps under the same fire based on your own experience with one corps is unfair in my opinion. 

Yes & No.  SCV & Cadets (& Southwind for that matter) troubles are like a Mandelbrot set.  At one level they are the same - not enough $.  But when you zoom in the reason for not enough $ varies.  

[2000Cadet]

23 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:

I didn't compare the problems at the corps. I'm not craving getting blasted here, honestly.

I compared the way that some alum respond to other alumni for bringing up their concerns publicly or privately. "Dampening" is the most diplomatic way for me to describe it. And it's not healthy. And it's not just Vanguard or Cadets. It's nearly everywhere I've looked. That's a trend. I and others pointed it out before Cadets announced their hiatus.

Also, it's not just my experience. And, as I sad above, not just my corps.

You mentioned earlier that people define transparency differently. The experts don't. They agree on what it looks like, have written extensively via free resources about it online, and that's who I listen to.

Well, here you have a guy who was willing to answer, and did answer your question, but not to your satisfaction. If I were in his shoes, I would think there's really nothing he or any BOD member could say that would appease those who claim to be looking for answers. Best thing they can do is learn from their mistakes and not repeat them, and to help people understand they're trying to fix whatever wrongs have been committed. 

[craiga]

I am frankly surprised that it hasn't dawned on anyone that perhaps the reason why the Cadets organization isn't giving specifics may be on advice of legal counsel.  Given their history with their former director, this wouldn't seem too far fetched, would it?

[scheherazadesghost]

16 minutes ago, 2000Cadet said:

Well, here you have a guy who was willing to answer, and did answer your question, but not to your satisfaction. If I were in his shoes, I would think there's really nothing he or any BOD member could say that would appease those who claim to be looking for answers.

I didn't ask him anything except a question in a thread that's vanished. Still no answer there. In this thread, he hopped in and defended the org without my prompting. I asked whether I was missing something (quite open to the possibility) and he responded that I was incorrect about my verifiable observations. I even provided info from y'all's board, by his prompting, to further my point. 🤷🏽‍♀️

I don't understand the pushback on holding orgs to higher ethical/transparency standards. I'm glad you were appeased by their response; great, they need you and all other faithful supporters right now. I, too, recognize that value 'cause I'm actually not a monster or an enemy. Where we differ is that I also see value in raising questions and concerns, as publicly and respectfully as possible.

I just think public discourse is important in public nonprofits. And I've gotten results.