glory Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 (edited) Well let's define sinister:from m-w.com, archaic and inapplicable left out 3 : singularly evil or productive of evil 5 : presaging ill fortune or trouble 6 : accompanied by or leading to disaster To be fair, #3 is most certainly not what I or many of us are talking about. #5 and #6 are. Yet if you twist statements such as these, dropping "sinister" as how people that disagree with the Cadets/Hopkins direction goes, you are firebranding us with calling them evil. We have no such intention. Many of us do believe that the direction he is leading is by no means the best way for the genre, and in fact, he does have a great deal of pull within it. Evil, no. Disaster, ya. Your choice of words was dubious, and deserved a response. Now you're being coy (that's in the dictionary too). Be extreme, get attention, moderate, accept praise, and in the end, be championed for being the moving force. You have to give tons of credit, because this is the type of slow, progressive change that the world is moved with. When someone complains about about a perceived pattern of sophisticated manipulations that result in a disaster for the activity, that's describing sinister motives. That's seeing evil intent and method. That's confirming my apt description, not dubious at all. HH Edited June 27, 2007 by glory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzycat1 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Despite your personal feelings about Mr. Hopkins, there is no question about his service to The Cadets organization and dedication to the hundreds of young adults that have marched during his 25 years with them. Ask the vast majority of those kids their opinion of George Hopkins and I doubt you'll hear the word "moron" associated with his name. In fact, quite the opposite. While your vision of the ideal drum corps show may be diametrically opposite of his, assassinating his character is trite and immature. The only "moronic" thing here is this statement. Nice job. <**> <**> Perhaps you should take your own advice and stop reading anything associated with his blog. Eh? Thank you Mr. Hopkins for your blood, sweat and tears over the past two and a half DECADES. Thanks for setting me straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VKMello84 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 I assume that this must have been covered before, so feel free to just provide a link if you wish. Where exactly does narration cause movement on the judging sheets? I mean, I assume that it must but I cannot come to any sort of conclusion on where it should based on my apparently outdated knowledge of drum corps scoring.Nobody knows . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 (edited) I assume that this must have been covered before, so feel free to just provide a link if you wish. Where exactly does narration cause movement on the judging sheets? I mean, I assume that it must but I cannot come to any sort of conclusion on where it should based on my apparently outdated knowledge of drum corps scoring. I see that you, in essence, bumped this question because it still hadn't been answered. But in doing so, I think you unwittingly DID answer it -- Nobody knows!!!! This is what rankles me most about this whole process. (Disclaimer: In this post, I will not explicitly take, discreetly imply, or in any way even remotely refer to a side in the whole amps/narration debate. So please don't read one into it). What gets me is that the rule changing process at DCI is ... for lack of a better word ... schlocky. I remeber when this proposal for amps came out, it was weeks (maybe even months) before anyone figured out that spoken word was, in fact, allowed. The proposal was written so poorly and open-ended that although the focus was on amps for the pit, it opened the door to narration and I'm not sure that even the folks voting on it knew that. And now, 4 years later, we're STILL trying to figure how, if at all, it's judged. Sure, there are theories (overall GE, music GE, etc), but nowhere has this been explicitly spelled out by DCI or the judging community. Could you imagine the NFL or NBA passing a rule change without including specific instructions to the refs on how to apply it??? I mean, just look at the rules proposals voted on this year -- hand-written scribbles about a concept -- no specifics, no actually researched impact statements, etc. All in all, very unprofessional for "Marching's Major Leagues" :ramd: (/off) Please return to your regularly scheduled HopBlog-analysis Edited June 27, 2007 by Liam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcat Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 I see that you, in essence, bumped this question because it still hadn't been answered. But in doing so, I think you unwittingly DID answer it -- Nobody knows!!!!This is what rankles me most about this whole process. (Disclaimer: In this post, I will not explicitly take, discreetly imply, or in any way even remotely refer to a side in the whole amps/narration debate. So please don't read one into it). What gets me is that the rule changing process at DCI is ... for lack of a better word ... schlocky. I remeber when this proposal for amps came out, it was weeks (maybe even months) before anyone figured out that spoken word was, in fact, allowed. The proposal was written so poorly and open-ended that although the focus was on amps for the pit, it opened the door to narration and I'm not sure that even the folks voting on it knew that. And now, 4 years later, we're STILL trying to figure how, if at all, it's judged. Sure, there are theories (overall GE, music GE, etc), but nowhere has this been explicitly spelled out by DCI or the judging community. Could you imagine the NFL or NBA passing a rule change without including specific instructions to the refs on how to apply it??? I mean, just look at the rules proposals voted on this year -- hand-written scribbles about a concept -- no specifics, no actually researched impact statements, etc. All in all, very unprofessional for "Marching's Major Leagues" No matter where you fall, amen to this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rut-roh Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Just curious...has anyone here ever asked (or had the opportunity to ask) a judge about all of this? I know it's not the easiest thing to do for the casual fan, but there are many here who do interact with the judges on staff and such. Just wondering... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Just curious...has anyone here ever asked (or had the opportunity to ask) a judge about all of this? I know it's not the easiest thing to do for the casual fan, but there are many here who do interact with the judges on staff and such. Just wondering... You know...that off-season thing they did with the webcast at the Rules Congress last year would have been perfect for it. Perhaps with all the webcasting going on with this years Season Pass, we can get Dan Potter to do a Field Pass on this very question with the judging community....I know DCI staff read DCP as well. /runs off to write e-mail. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rut-roh Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 You know...that off-season thing they did with the webcast at the Rules Congress last year would have been perfect for it.Perhaps with all the webcasting going on with this years Season Pass, we can get Dan Potter to do a Field Pass on this very question with the judging community....I know DCI staff read DCP as well. /runs off to write e-mail. B) Good idea. It just seems to me that while the letter of the rule might be different in DCI than it is in BOA or USSBA or whatever, most of these music judges have been judging shows with electronics and amplification and narration for years. They'd probably be able to give people a far better answer than just asking random fans on a message board IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 What gets me is that the rule changing process at DCI is ... for lack of a better word ... schlocky. I remeber when this proposal for amps came out, it was weeks (maybe even months) before anyone figured out that spoken word was, in fact, allowed. The proposal was written so poorly and open-ended that although the focus was on amps for the pit, it opened the door to narration and I'm not sure that even the folks voting on it knew that. And now, 4 years later, we're STILL trying to figure how, if at all, it's judged. Sure, there are theories (overall GE, music GE, etc), but nowhere has this been explicitly spelled out by DCI or the judging community. What matters is whether the judges and corps staffs/admins know, not whether you or I are privy to that information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecamburn Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 I've never seen a corps director micro-manage like that....at least not in the modern era. I was struck by the same thing. How many times in that passage did he mention things he's going to do. I thought there was no I in team. B) eric 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.