34 + ME

[supersop]

Brigadiers!

I'm sure the 85 mile trek to Nationals hurt their budget

[Gary Matczak]

You're right - sorry.

No, I didn't ask Lee why he chose to discuss only the top-ten voting proposal on DCP, and not the 40-member minimum or others. But like I said, I could already imagine several reasonable answers to that question, so I didn't feel compelled to ask.

..............but you felt it necessary to take a shot at others who raised the question here,..............and directed them to ask Lee?,............so what are your several resonable answers to the question?

[CallipygianKing]

Going back to the original topic (ie, the offer to be the 35th marching member)...

I've been in Chops for going on 8 seasons now, and both this thread and a man that I was reintroduced to at a wedding last Saturday make me chuckle a bit. This is similar to something that my own corps used to do. Every year, somehow we'd find ourselves at the 61 members needed to qualify as Div II-sized. But, they put American Guard and drum majors in the headcount, too... We'd always measure up the bus drivers for uniforms, and the aforementioned groomsman was even recruited one year simply because he was in DeKalb that year.

I think the best "addition" was the year we had a guy fake a limp going on to the field, and he hung out in the pit the whole show with a soprano. He hadn't marched a show all year, but we needed just that one more person and he just stood up and ad-libbed a part here and there. Later, friends who recognized him limping onto the field approached him later with concern about his leg. He replied with a smile and an innocent reply that nothing was wrong at all.

Rules are rules. And they are there for reasons, whether to ensure fairness in competition or to ensure a "quality" product on the field. And there's always a way to get around the rules, too... Especially the ones that people may feel are a tad less than fair. I myself can't volunteer to take the field with another corps, but I'm sure that if there is a need come Prelims that there are others involved with my corps that could help out. Chops had found a way in the past, and if it means more great corps on the field (despite size) I'm sure that we could help find a way in the future, too.

[Just Another Sop]

but that is a big part of my question ~ if this rule has far greater impact on DCA overall why if Lee brought one thing public did he not bring this as well?

I havent read to page 11 yet but I just wnated to respond to this even if it may be responded to in the next 3 pages.

I in no way would blame Lee for not posting about this. He saw a repeat of a rule he passionately beat down 2 years ago resurface. He got angry and just as anyone here would do, you sort of get blinders on when you feel personally attacked. He may have know about this proposal also, but his mind was stuck on the rule that he fought against 2 years ago.

Who's fault is it that no one knew about this proposal? Partially those of us that are posting here against or for it because we didnt try harder to find out about the proposed rules and how they might affect us? Not really because unless you know someone who gets copies of the proposals, you would never find out about them. NO the fault lies with DCA wanting to keep the proposals secret. Why? Possibly because they feel public discussion is a bad thing. Or maybe they would be embarassed to have a proposal published publically they know, deep down in their conscience, is not good for the activity.

Don't blame Lee for not bringing up this issue when he was preoccupied with another. Blame DCA for not releaseing information. Why do they keep it secret?!? I think an important step for DCA to take is to publish all of the proposals for anyone to read prior to the vote just as DCI does. It may not make a difference in the vote of the final 10 dictators of the activity, but at least we could discuss it and feel like we have a part in the decisions of the activity in which we participate. This could also keep bad proposals from even being written.

[brassomaniac]

I guess I understand what you are saying here Wade,................but consider this please, I am a lifelong drum corps fan supporter and participant, and we have hosted several shows here in Erie,.................4 years ago we hosted a DCA contest where 2 of the 5 corps were very small, but we gladly hosted them and propoted them, however, the general fan that attended were somewhat disappointed that they were really only treated to three drum corps that night, my personal opinion is very different from theirs, and that goes without saying, but they are the tickets buyers, advertizers and sponsors, and I found myself defending my opinion over the next several weeks,................. and this situation had direct fallout for the next year, as we ended up not sponsoring a show due to the inability to convince sponsors and advertizers that the quality of corps would be different, improved, better, or whatever,............I hope this makes sense,..................and if not, flame if you have to, but I will then try and explain it a different way.

I'm with you, Gary.

have to respect you for stepping up with an alternative viewpoint.

I have many thoughts on the issue. But, it's just not worth getting flamed.

Edited January 22, 2007 by brassomaniac

[Vagabond Skyliner]

I havent read to page 11 yet but I just wnated to respond to this even if it may be responded to in the next 3 pages.

I in no way would blame Lee for not posting about this. He saw a repeat of a rule he passionately beat down 2 years ago resurface. He got angry and just as anyone here would do, you sort of get blinders on when you feel personally attacked. He may have know about this proposal also, but his mind was stuck on the rule that he fought against 2 years ago.

Who's fault is it that no one knew about this proposal? Partially those of us that are posting here against or for it because we didnt try harder to find out about the proposed rules and how they might affect us? Not really because unless you know someone who gets copies of the proposals, you would never find out about them. NO the fault lies with DCA wanting to keep the proposals secret. Why? Possibly because they feel public discussion is a bad thing. Or maybe they would be embarassed to have a proposal published publically they know, deep down in their conscience, is not good for the activity.

Don't blame Lee for not bringing up this issue when he was preoccupied with another. Blame DCA for not releaseing information. Why do they keep it secret?!? I think an important step for DCA to take is to publish all of the proposals for anyone to read prior to the vote just as DCI does. It may not make a difference in the vote of the final 10 dictators of the activity, but at least we could discuss it and feel like we have a part in the decisions of the activity in which we participate. This could also keep bad proposals from even being written.

AND I REPEAT from page 10;

" All I am saying is that the people that propose these changes should be Proud enough to put thier Name on them.

Then tell us why it is such a great idea.

Let us "The Paying Public" and the Members of ALL the units give our OPINION. Then if need be that the meeting be done in Private. So BE IT.

I am not asking to intrude on the deliberations. But having us here and on other Public Forums give our views. So that the people that DO get to go and vote know how the Paying Public and Marching Members feel. To me, "Which Corps Voted How". Is not as important as the the RESULT.

If nothing else, it just flat looks bad, the way it was just IMPOSED on the smaller Corps.

You know from reading my Posts here. I think that the Voting group should have been Enlarged not made smaller. Leaving the more Power to those that have been there longer and those that have made it to the top, with Extra Votes. Yet giving a greater voice to the ever growing number of corps.

You may have also read how I think making 3 divisions might be an answer. But to Eliminate a whole group (between 22 and and 34) seems a little Dumb, Not well thought out, or very Callus. Take your pick!

AND.

YES. I think this new rule is bad for DCA.

I only hope that I will be able to help one of the corps that fall short. So they can March in some Contests and the Championships. "

(and by the way. I was Born and Raised, and Marched, for National Contender Corps in the NORTHEAST)

Edited January 22, 2007 by LucysSkylinerAlumni

[Just Another Sop]

Not familiar with the Generals, but I didn't see you on the DCA site.................

I am not familliar with them either. Perhaps they are just starting out this year and now feel like they could be butting their heads against the wall because they may not currently have the interest that will get them to 35. I don't know.

However, not seeing them on the "corps" page of the DCA website means very little. SoCal Dream, Class "A" 3rd place finalist, isn't listed on the "Corps" page of the DCA website either. And, there are corps listed there that didn't even compete at championships. A side note, Why is that? SoCal Dream is the only corps at championships last year not listed.

If you were looking at the "scores" page and not seeing them listed, then perhaps they are a new start-up corps.

I really like seeing the support posts here where people are saying "Help those smaller corps recruit so they can compete." Hopefully that will be a reality. If not, I am glad there are people willing to stand in the corner to make them 35 at championships.

[Just Another Sop]

AND I REPEAT from page 10;

" All I am saying is that the people that propose these changes should be Proud enough to put thier Name on them.

Then tell us why it is such a great idea.

Let us "The Paying Public" and the Members of ALL the units give our OPINION. Then if need be that the meeting be done in Private. So BE IT.

I am not asking to intrude on the deliberations. But having us here and on other Public Forums give our views. So that the people that DO get to go and vote know how the Paying Public and Marching Members feel. To me, "Which Corps Voted How". Is not as important as the the RESULT.

If nothing else, it just flat looks bad, the way it was just IMPOSED on the smaller Corps.

You know from reading my Posts here. I think that the Voting group should have been Enlarged not made smaller. Leaving the more Power to those that have been there longer and those that have made it to the top, with Extra Votes. Yet giving a greater voice to the ever growing number of corps.

You may have also read how I think making 3 divisions might be an answer. But to Eliminate a whole group (between 22 and and 34) seems a little Dumb, Not well thought out, or very Callus. Take your pick!

AND.

YES. I think this new rule is bad for DCA.

I only hope that I will be able to help one of the corps that fall short. So they can March in some Contests and the Championships. "

(and by the way. I was Born and Raised, and Marched, for National Contender Corps in the NORTHEAST)

I read that post of yours after I posted mine, and all I can say to that is G.M.T.A..

[CallipygianKing]

Not familiar with the Generals, but I didn't see you on the DCA site or on the corpsreps. Seems like you all haven't done DCA prelims yet.

I think they've performed at DCA-South shows (perhaps as exhibition?), and the way that the person from this corps is talking it sounds like they're considering making the trip to DCA Prelims. And this rule would be a bit of a hindrance to their small corps.

[randomnoise]

was this 35 rule, which apparently had originally been proposed as 40, not brought up in the original meeting back in the fall? if it was, how come no one tried to rally the troops then after that meeting? was it presumed that it stood no chance of passing? IF the same approach was taken that Lee took do you feel the final outcome of the DCA vote would have been different?

Lee may not have read the proposal - the rules proposals were well over 100 pages in length, and he was not at the Rules Congress. He never planned to go to that meeting. Greg and I were there, and we participated in the discussion.

The so-called 'Renegades Rule' was separate - introduced at the October meeting (which we did not attend as it was the same day as our corps banquet) and voted on there. We had to revisit it at the Rules Congress because that is the way by-law changes are handled.

Edited January 22, 2007 by randomnoise