audiodb Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Why? 1. Why not? ($1 to MikeD) 2. To encourage better proposal development, and discourage the redundant, thoughtless xeroxing going on today. Corps officials from all over North America are traveling at their own expense to the DCI annual meeting so that they can have half their time wasted discussing rule change proposals that haven't been properly researched, thought out and/or documented on paper. It's gotten so severe that we have a proposal that went down 21-3 last time, and is simply being xeroxed and submitted again by the same person, with the intent to repeat the process again and again at the expense of everyone's time. These people could be doing more worthwhile things with that time, like addressing parity, the new governance structure, or the continuing attrition among junior corps. If you only get one chance to propose something, you'll do it right the first time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 (edited) And it can't be brought up by the same person. If an idea has validity, let someone else propose it. I've proposals we now take for granted submitted by the same person (or corps) one Rules Congress, get voted down and then get voted in later after people had a chance to digest the proposal and consider all the angles. Case in point...Wayne Downey with three-valve horns. Edited January 8, 2007 by Michael Boo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 (edited) I've proposals we now take for granted submitted by the same person (or corps) one Rules Congress, get voted down and then get voted in later after people had a chance to digest the proposal and consider all the angles. Case in point...Wayne Downey with three-valve horns. Do you think we'd never have passed three-valve horns otherwise? No one else would have ever proposed it? Part of my point is that when people consider all the angles, as you say, the proposal should be refined to reflect that. Lately, people have been tossing proposals into the hopper over and over with no such refinement or updating. An idea with any chance of passing a majority vote of the 24 DCI directors certainly ought to be able to find a different author and/or sponsor for resubmission. Edited January 8, 2007 by audiodb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 1. Why not? ($1 to MikeD)2. To encourage better proposal development, and discourage the redundant, thoughtless xeroxing going on today. Corps officials from all over North America are traveling at their own expense to the DCI annual meeting so that they can have half their time wasted discussing rule change proposals that haven't been properly researched, thought out and/or documented on paper. It's gotten so severe that we have a proposal that went down 21-3 last time, and is simply being xeroxed and submitted again by the same person, with the intent to repeat the process again and again at the expense of everyone's time. These people could be doing more worthwhile things with that time, like addressing parity, the new governance structure, or the continuing attrition among junior corps. If you only get one chance to propose something, you'll do it right the first time. While the proposal text may not be wordsmithed very well...the gist is just fine...and IMO there is no need, nor is it even remotely desirable, to put artificial limits on this sort of thing. If the directors have no interest, they can vote it down in short order and move on to the next item. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 If these proposals were as doomed and lame-brained as some of you suggest, then I'd think you'd want to see them voted down decisively to send a message to the drum corps community. But that's not the case. The reason you don't want them proposed more than once isn't their futility; it's because you fear their passage. You recognize the consensus against change isn't permanent because preferences and priorities do change. It's acceptance which you seek to avoid with an artificial time limit on the democratic - and proper - process. Take another more popular example. DCI rules used to allow ties. Suppose the first proposal to "break" the ties was rejected. How many ties would you have tolerated under your regime blocking resubmission of rejected rules proposals? Or suppose this year, a proposal to resume retreats in the classic old format lost by a few votes. But next year, there would be enough. How many years would you propose we wait to revisit that one? HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Yes, all of us are brain-dead, non-progressive stick in the muds... :P Please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeM Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 That would be Sticks in the mud Bawk. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 That would be Sticks in the mud Bawk.:P Hey, they let you out of your cave, too, dinosaur? RAWR! :lolhit: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeM Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Yeah, ain't it grand? I'm probably universally loathed by this crowd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Yes, all of us are brain-dead, non-progressive stick in the muds... Not all of you - just the brain-dead, non-progressive sticks in the mud among you. And for the rest, I ask again in different words: What's to fear from the defeat of a proposal you don't like one more time? What's to gain from the inability to reconsider a proposal you do like? HH 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.