Re: OPEN Competitions vs. OPEN to the association members only

Samstag, 26. Juli 2008 14:28

Would you feel more at ease if

the competitions were called  IDSF Closed (with  an admission just  for anyone belonging to IDSF family ),  or CADA Closed to anyone belonging to CADA,    or,    WDC Closed to all dancers  within WDC , CCDSC Closed for WDC and CCDSC members  ?

In contrast to    IDSF or  CADA Open ,  open to dancers, within and outside the "IDSF family",   or  WDC, or CCDSC Open,  open to dancers  within but also outside the "WDC family" ?

Where the OPEN  competitions would have no other conditions than abiding by the  rules of the organizer ad the sanctioning association ?

Would we not just play with words ?  Would  such an "accuracy" make significant difference ? 

You could  go even further and have a special designation for competitions where there is a great variety of adjudicators representing all sides.  Having a "healthy" mix of adjudicators would give dancers the confidence that the dance, rather than politic will determine the outcome of the event .

How about having a distinstive name for OPEN events with " top"  adjudicators,  that is if adjudicators would receive ssome ranking based on their  experience as adjudicators,  and also as dancers ?

Would dancers not prefer to be judged by their professional brothers and sisters, instead by a book-worm type person with a license to judge ?   

I feel both WDC and IDSF are ready to back off from their rigid  antagonistic ways, realizing there cannot be a clear winner, and that their actions are hurting everyone.

Please do not beat me over the head that it was one side and not the other which started the sorry situations which exists today.   That would lead to just more I am right, you are wrong situation, and further antagonizing.

It is time for both sides to take a step ( or two ) back,  IDSF and WDC  do not have to become the best friends,  they can just co-exist recognizing that both sides can play  an important role, and there is a space for both. 

Dancers themselves need to get together and decide what is better for them,  a divided dance world with bans , prohibitions and penalties,  or a cohesive dance world with a fewer rules, more opportunities and a better and more fair system  to measure dancers achievements and progress.

Re: OPEN Competitions vs. OPEN to the association members only

Montag, 28. Juli 2008 14:17

quicktime2 wrote:

"Each country had a closed championship open only to individuals of that country. Nowadays, the word open is often used to designate open to members of other organizations. It is confusing."

.....closed championship open only  to ...?    or  ...closed championship closed only to ?

that is the question !

The way I see it  :    Nowadays, the word open is often used to designate  "open to members of the organization/association  which  sanctioned the event" - in another word an NOT OPEN  event but  CLOSED TO  SANCTIONING ASSOCIATION MEMBERS.

I would be completely content if   the word open was  often used to designate open to (ALSO) members of other organizations ( WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED),  or simply, word open was not at all restrictive and respected  its  meaning ,  OPEN TO ALL (dancers ) WHO FOLLOW THE OPEN COMPETITION RULES ( in order not to have chaos with costumes, make-up,  technique etc,  age limits  )

I agree that WDC and IDSF  family members should be treated same, and what applies to IDSF should apply to WDC dancers  ( and vice verse ) wishing to support and participate in an open event.

Lets say, IDSF and their national members  got in the habit and  "used to " disallow their members from attending competitions unsanctioned by them, even "used to mention certain, specific, and non-specific threats,  and had  applied these threats against a few chosen dancers.

Why do you think the  same associations have not prohibited their members from supporting the "not-sanctioned" competitions  by purchasing a ticket to view the program, the show, and attending the venue ?

Is it perhaps that it was non-of their business ?  If this logic rings truth,  if anyone is allowed to visit and view 'the other's' program,  does the actual participation in the competition make such a huge difference to make so much fuss about.

You mentioned memberships.  Using same logic.  If I want to view the event I purchase an entry ticket.  Must I subscribe to an annual membership ?  Just try it,  and you will not have many spectators.

You suggest, I may be IDSF member.

What difference does it make to the cost of bread, milk ?    Are you saying all IDSF supporters are blind and cannot see what is around them, and that they can see the point from only IDSF view point ?  That would be an unfortunate mistake because that attitude could prevail on WDC side. 

No,  I side and feel  for the dancers.  Who was the well respected and wise British dance guru, Bill  Erwin who reminded us,  " Take care of your dancers, dancers  are the most important important thing  " ? 

What he meant was,  without dancers there is no WDC, IDSF, dance associations, directors of the board...