supersop Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Maybe the answer to all of this lies somewhere in between. I have to say, at the DCI meeting I met some great people in the All Age arena. All were willing to discuss the direction of the activity openly and honestly. Some great ideas were shared and I left with my chest swelled and my brain on overdrive. One thing I saw DCI do ... I must say it was refreshing :).... everyone sat at the table for each region and asked their questions. The dialogue was open and informative. True answers were given from the powers that be. The regional meetings had their own council that represented the corps in that region. They were the voice of the Region to DCI's executive board. (INTERESTING CONCEPT). I have to say ..... the communication was incredible. It reminded me VERY MUCH of the DCA-Central meeting I attended when the region was formed. To me it stands to reason that this round table approach needs to be exercised and adopted by DCA as a whole. If the bylaws are to be changed to only include 10 corps rather than 14..... I would suggest adding the Chair of each region have a vote as well.... or at least a voice/say. In fact .. **break for brainstorm** **Brainstorm complete** Results: Throw the 10/14 rules right out the window. Give each Chair from each region 1 vote. DCA(east) 1 vote, DCA-C 1 vote, DCA-S 1 vote, DCA-P 1 vote..... and to make it "FAIR" give the top 3 from the prior year a vote as well. That gives you a board of 7 members. All proposals and bylaws changes go before each region prior to the rules congress meeting. Each Chair casts their vote based on the outcome of the regional meeting vote (all members of each region who have paid DCA and regional dues are eligable to vote) and the top 3 vote their own interests. In theory, the East would have possibly 4 votes. One thing is for sure, I don't see those guys giving up the top end without one helluva fight. If something like this were to be implemented then rules congress would have to meet yearly for sure. So there you have it!!!! Everyone has a voice.... everyone get's a vote. b**bs b**bs b**bs there's my 2 yen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaraNYC Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) Maybe the answer to all of this lies somewhere in between. I have to say, at the DCI meeting I met some great people in the All Age arena. All were willing to discuss the direction of the activity openly and honestly. Some great ideas were shared and I left with my chest swelled and my brain on overdrive. One thing I saw DCI do ... I must say it was refreshing :).... everyone sat at the table for each region and asked their questions. The dialogue was open and informative. True answers were given from the powers that be. The regional meetings had their own council that represented the corps in that region. They were the voice of the Region to DCI's executive board. (INTERESTING CONCEPT).I have to say ..... the communication was incredible. It reminded me VERY MUCH of the DCA-Central meeting I attended when the region was formed. To me it stands to reason that this round table approach needs to be exercised and adopted by DCA as a whole. If the bylaws are to be changed to only include 10 corps rather than 14..... I would suggest adding the Chair of each region have a vote as well.... or at least a voice/say. In fact .. **break for brainstorm** **Brainstorm complete** Results: Throw the 10/14 rules right out the window. Give each Chair from each region 1 vote. DCA(east) 1 vote, DCA-C 1 vote, DCA-S 1 vote, DCA-P 1 vote..... and to make it "FAIR" give the top 3 from the prior year a vote as well. That gives you a board of 7 members. All proposals and bylaws changes go before each region prior to the rules congress meeting. Each Chair casts their vote based on the outcome of the regional meeting vote (all members of each region who have paid DCA and regional dues are eligable to vote) and the top 3 vote their own interests. In theory, the East would have possibly 4 votes. One thing is for sure, I don't see those guys giving up the top end without one helluva fight. If something like this were to be implemented then rules congress would have to meet yearly for sure. So there you have it!!!! Everyone has a voice.... everyone get's a vote. b**bs b**bs b**bs there's my 2 yen Yes - that's how we do it in rugby. Yeah, there is still some political stuff that goes on, but for the most part, positive progress is made with this model - but no teams get to vote - just Local Area Union directors directors and a few other directorships like the international athelete rep. Territories are what we call regions and are made up of Local Area Unions - so in the Northeast TU we have three LAUs - MetNY, NYState and New England. The board is worked out so each LAU has three votes. Now as far as seeding, the strongest competitive regions get more seeds - that's where the reward for performance comes, on the field, not the board room. For example, for a while the northeast senior women clubs had 4 seeds out of 16 for nationals - southern Cal had 1 because they don't have as strong as a competitive structure. (well, and because I'm a kick ### administrator who fought like heck to get my women the chances to compete to earn the seeds they deserved... ^0^ ) Edited November 10, 2006 by SaraNYC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 I'm not in any way saying that my model is perfect. I had just hoped it would open some discussion in regards to this type of governing body. I really can't see a negative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 I'm not in any way saying that my model is perfect. I had just hoped it would open some discussion in regards to this type of governing body. I really can't see a negative. Good idea, but in order for thre West folks to have a vote, there must be a region...and the rukles right now don't allow us to form one. Relax the sanctioning rule to allow a region to be sanctioned so long as there are three competing corps, and you have it...right now, the three must go to DCA...and that may kill a corps or two, rendering the snacitoning issue moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaraNYC Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) I'm not in any way saying that my model is perfect. I had just hoped it would open some discussion in regards to this type of governing body. I really can't see a negative. What you are suggesting is good stuff. I think all administrative structures are works in progress and should be constantly evolving and changing to better whatever activity they are in charge of. I actually stepped down from my rugby post because I was burnt out and felt I was going to stifle the continued growth of my territory, so I found an even better administrator to take my place and the union has continued to move forward. After all, our activity is always growing in different artistic directions - why should our administrative structure be so static? Edited November 10, 2006 by SaraNYC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow_7 Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Correct me if I'm wrong, but this change could possibly eliminate 5 votes, leaving only 9 votes to be cast. As opposed to the 14 votes that were previously sought after. I'm not much of a survivor fan, but if this rule passes, isn't that like voting five people off the island in one episode? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Correct me if I'm wrong, but this change could possibly eliminate 5 votes, leaving only 9 votes to be cast. As opposed to the 14 votes that were previously sought after. I'm not much of a survivor fan, but if this rule passes, isn't that like voting five people off the island in one episode? NO It actually adds 18 (we have 32 corps right?) additional votes ..... rather than chopping 4+ votes as the current proposals are about to do. Hence, each corps get's a vote in their region ..... each region get's a vote ... and the top 3 get a vote. I thought I spelled it out pretty clear. Either way, it's just an "IDEA". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Unless that wasn't directed at me ..... in which case we both just said the same thing :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Reward is just an All Age Championship with no bias and a nice venue too. Advantage to drum corps fans. i dont see any bias in the judging, and i dont see a ton of world class facilities that can draw the amount of fans we get in the NE lining up to host finals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 I agree. NO ONE has yet said the basis for why these rules were proposed, and yet we have the counterarguement about why they are bad.....ergo, MOST people have already made up their minds WITHOUT hearing the other side of the arguement. IF someone came in here to state why they proposed the rules, they would likely be crucified before they could get a word out. agreed, tho it would kill a lot of the assumption out there. i mean, without knowing the reasoning and just reading the proposal, it doesn't look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts