GGarrett Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 In Dan's defense...in computer-ese this comes across as yelling, esp the larger font sizes that did not translate in this quote:Mike I hear ya Mike... I was only emphasizing... not yelling. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_S Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 PLEASE stop closing your mind to what the "meaning" might be. Someone types it in one way, you read it another, it gets resuggested and blown into a totally different thing that takes ten posts of debate to straighten out. There isn't a single veteran of any corps anywhere who would intentionally hurt a current corps or corps member the way that is being implied here. You couldn't possibly understand unless you are/were a part of that organization. Heh, so let me get this straight. When someone like FlamMan completely blasts what the Scouts have done the past few years, he's not actually blasting anyone at all. He's actually being very constructive, but we can't possibly understand that, because we weren't Scouts? Pardon me, but why on earth would he air such comments on DCP, where it can be assumed that the majority of members have not been, nor ever will be, Scouts? If it's true that "if (you) have to explain what the intended meaning of what these former Scouts are saying, then you'll never understand", then might I suggest that these former Scouts keep their comments in-house? I'm not a Scout, but the comments I've read seem pretty clear to me. If I'm mistaken, as you would seem to be saying, then might I suggest that either you ask your brothers to practice greater restraint in what they say publicly, or else try your darnedest to explain what they 'really' mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galen Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 I had a wonderful, if brief, talk with Sal...he truly has/had the best of intentions for the corps. However, sometimes things don't quite work out the way we want. Which begs the question, which things? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGarrett Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Heh, so let me get this straight. When someone like FlamMan completely blasts what the Scouts have done the past few years, he's not actually blasting anyone at all. He's actually being very constructive, but we can't possibly understand that, because we weren't Scouts? Pardon me, but why on earth would he air such comments on DCP, where it can be assumed that the majority of members have not been, nor ever will be, Scouts?If it's true that "if (you) have to explain what the intended meaning of what these former Scouts are saying, then you'll never understand", then might I suggest that these former Scouts keep their comments in-house? I'm not a Scout, but the comments I've read seem pretty clear to me. If I'm mistaken, as you would seem to be saying, then might I suggest that either you ask your brothers to practice greater restraint in what they say publicly, or else try your darnedest to explain what they 'really' mean. ... ok... face is blue. I'm done. Read into it what you will. You're probably right. You win. Contest over. I did the best I could. Sorry you can't seem to understand. But be sure you NEVER post "opinions" here that might sound harsh, or I'll be all over you like butter on toast... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_S Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 I read negative opinions. I take them for what they're worth. I'll disagree when I feel the need. What I'm having a hard time understanding is this idea that I didn't really read what I thought I read. It's a tough question, if FlamMan's comments (and others) can't be understood if you're not a Scout, why post them in a public forum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Heh, so let me get this straight. When someone like FlamMan completely blasts what the Scouts have done the past few years, he's not actually blasting anyone at all. He's actually being very constructive, but we can't possibly understand that, because we weren't Scouts? I'd like it to family. You can talk honestly and openly to most of your closest family about anything, whether it's a PC comment or not. Outside looking in, most all of us share that same sort of camaraderie in different ways. I'm not going to put words in Geno's mouth, but I think the gist of it is that the brotherhood goes beyond critiquing the shows, thinking they should play "X", or what have you. That doesn't imply carte blanche to rip the corps a new one...and I don't think anyone of the alumni who have posted have. Most of this is ancillary to the topic, anyway...the Scouts need a director. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark1 Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 I read negative opinions. I take them for what they're worth. I'll disagree when I feel the need.What I'm having a hard time understanding is this idea that I didn't really read what I thought I read. It's a tough question, if FlamMan's comments (and others) can't be understood if you're not a Scout, why post them in a public forum? So they can be read by someone who can understand them. If you don't like where the tread went, don't read it. Glad to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orpheus Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 (edited) 2 – Don’t take too seriously the pontifications of a bunch of people that don’t know what their talking about with regard to the traditions of the brotherhood. It’s not true, you know it and we know it. Blow it off. Now I'm really confused, because it's former Scouts, guys who should know what they're talking about (re: brotherhood), who seem to be "bashing" (for want of a better word) the current corps, while a lot of people who marched elsewhere (if at all) are defending what they put on the field in '06. If you're gonna post here about the '06 Scouts not living up to their "traditions" and whatnot, then why not provide at least a general definition of what you're talking about? Something about their on-field performance? Or is it about goings-on behind the scenes? As for me, the 2006 edition will probably go down as my favorite Madison Scouts show since 1999. addendum: I'd like it to family. You can talk honestly and openly to most of your closest family about anything, whether it's a PC comment or not. Outside looking in, most all of us share that same sort of camaraderie in different ways. Well, then ... putting it in terms of "family," I don't think I'd get on the internet and post negative things about my brothers, especially if they were in the public eye, without expecting some sort of response from other people. Edited August 24, 2006 by Orpheus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMadMan Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 Actually, talk or in this case, text is very cheap! It's amazing how people feel justified in speaking for others! For your information, Scott doesn't "hate DCI!" He hates what DCI did to his beliefs in the activity! (right or wrong) Note: I'm not supporting anyone, but I dislike it when people pretend to know everything about anything... I concur...just go back and read Scott's 1997 "state/direction of the activity" letter and you'll see that he definately had the right "vision", but DCI hooked onto Hopkin's leash instead of Scott's. With Scott involved in the activity, DCI is better immediately....however I don't know if this is possible based on the past. I would certainly hope that it is.... we will see... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMadMan Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 If the name I hear taking over the helm is true (and I have not seen this name mentioned yet in this thread) it will turn the drum corps world on its collective ear. Not funny Mike... :P ummmmm...Jim Mason?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.