Adam Taylor
New Member
The bother comment wasn't in response to your opinions on contesting. But thanks for clarifying you are not a member of Wingates Band. Enjoy the rest of your thread!
Adam
Adam
No mate I didn't mean that we spoke yesterday. I was just talking in general. And was joking around about the fact that we go way back, I get giddy on Mondays - apologies. But I did agree with the majority of your points - kudosThink you may be confusing me with someone else (mostly because I was NOT at NW area contest at any point - was at band practice in Brum when the results came up).
The bother comment wasn't in response to your opinions on contesting. But thanks for clarifying you are not a member of Wingates Band. Enjoy the rest of your thread!
Adam
Well no that's possibly the most simplistic interpretation of my post that you could have chosen to go with. Things are a lot more subtle. And I suspect that you probably have to intelligence to recognise that but wanted to make my post look as ridiculous as possible so you posted a ridiculous reply. Everyone seems to be very well connected and decisions have been made in the past (not just contesting I'm talking about in the wider banding infrastructure) by people with a personal interest in the situation or who are bosom buddies with those who the decisions affect and surprise surprise they have been made in a corrupt way.I'm not sure I understand what you mean by corruption. Are you suggesting someone took a brown envelope stuffed with cash to ensure Fodens won?
If this post may influence the opinion of one person, then it's a success. I know that old habits die hard which is why the majority of you are too closed minded to see that as the hobby is made up of us... banders then if we want something to change then it has to or the hobby won't successfully continue. Let's make this hobby more open instead of a hush hush cloak and dagger affair with people making decisions in 'darkened rooms'![]()
I laughed out loud at this. You're a 'that's banding' champion. Love it. Would you say this to people who revolt against autocratic governments and stuff.
Why have a crappy version of banding when we can have an awesome improved version?
ProbablyYou're a 'that's banding' champion. Love it. Would you say this to people who revolt against autocratic governments and stuff?
It's so subjective it's impossible to have a true 'fair' way of doing these things. However the cream usually rises, there's no conspiracies just differing opinions.
I do think some of the things you get penalised for needs to be looked at, yesterday we were penalised for taking 'too long' inbetween movements.
Why have a crappy version of banding when we can have an awesome improved version?
Part of the problem with adjudications is that it's not clear what the relationship between negative/positive comments and points are - for example, I can understand an adjudicator mentioning the break (6:00 to 6:10) between movements in your recording, it felt way too long to me... but what bearing did that have on points/results? They'll hardly have written "We've docked you 5 points for taking too long a break between movements", and it's difficult to know whether they're penalising much (if at all?) for that sort of thing when they put a score to it.
A magical utopia with rainbow and smiles where there's some form of quality control. The whole system wouldn't need restructuring but it would be cool if there was a contingency plan which would kick in when things end up like a farse. Perhaps something resembling a large committee of representatives. Of course that means that decisions would still be subject to people's whims but if the panel were as representative as possible through coming from a broad-ranging spectrum of banders then we could hope to try and reform this archaic defunct system by stopping mistakes happening!Go on then, let's have something interesting to chew on.
What's the awesome improved version we're missing out on?
A magical utopia with rainbow and smiles where there's some form of quality control. The whole system wouldn't need restructuring but it would be cool if there was a contingency plan which would kick in when things end up like a farse. Perhaps something resembling a large committee of representatives. Of course that means that decisions would still be subject to people's whims but if the panel were as representative as possible through coming from a broad-ranging spectrum of banders then we could hope to try and reform this archaic defunct system by stopping mistakes happening!
Well no that's possibly the most simplistic interpretation of my post that you could have chosen to go with. Things are a lot more subtle. And I suspect that you probably have to intelligence to recognise that but wanted to make my post look as ridiculous as possible so you posted a ridiculous reply. Everyone seems to be very well connected and decisions have been made in the past (not just contesting I'm talking about in the wider banding infrastructure) by people with a personal interest in the situation or who are bosom buddies with those who the decisions affect and surprise surprise they have been made in a corrupt way.
Mistakes are bound to happenA magical utopia with rainbow and smiles where there's some form of quality control. The whole system wouldn't need restructuring but it would be cool if there was a contingency plan which would kick in when things end up like a farse. Perhaps something resembling a large committee of representatives. Of course that means that decisions would still be subject to people's whims but if the panel were as representative as possible through coming from a broad-ranging spectrum of banders then we could hope to try and reform this archaic defunct system by stopping mistakes happening!
A magical utopia with rainbow and smiles where there's some form of quality control. The whole system wouldn't need restructuring but it would be cool if there was a contingency plan which would kick in when things end up like a farse. Perhaps something resembling a large committee of representatives. Of course that means that decisions would still be subject to people's whims but if the panel were as representative as possible through coming from a broad-ranging spectrum of banders then we could hope to try and reform this archaic defunct system by stopping mistakes happening!
A magical utopia with rainbow and smiles where there's some form of quality control. The whole system wouldn't need restructuring but it would be cool if there was a contingency plan which would kick in when things end up like a farse. Perhaps something resembling a large committee of representatives. Of course that means that decisions would still be subject to people's whims but if the panel were as representative as possible through coming from a broad-ranging spectrum of banders then we could hope to try and reform this archaic defunct system by stopping mistakes happening!