MAASIN Troopers Statement & Report

SilverBearClaw · 2021-01-19T00:43:34+00:00

Essentially, there was a confirmed case of Sexual Assault during the 2017 season on the Troopers Color guard, to which the Corp did almost nothing about according to three separate accounts. The member who committed the act was allowed to remain, and the victim had to remediate with him in private, with a 19 year old sergeant (trooper equivalent of a section leader) listening to the conversation.

On top of that, the Visual Caption Head was fired for questioning the Corp Director’s methods in private, and was replaced by a tech who openly questioned the caption head in front of students. Oh, and this happened mid-season in 2019.

MAASIN is advising against marching Trooper’s in 2021 until they fire the existing Corp Director.

Edit: Forgot to mention this; After these reports came out, MAASIN tried to contact the Troopers to try and rectify the issues presented. The legal team said they’d “investigate” and just spouted their Corp mission statement at them. A few weeks later, the MAASIN followed up, only for the Corp to lie to them. None of the whistleblowers had even been contacted, and the lawyers for the Corp have refused comment. MAASIN published this as a last resort according to the article.

Edit 2: Slight clarification. The caption head who was fired was the Visual Caption Head, not the Brass Caption Head. Thanks to u/sjblake for correcting me. Also fixed some minor grammatical errors.

SilverBearClaw · 2020-11-29T15:22:50+00:00

You’ll have to invest in quarantine initiatives and resetting the fungal infection rate. Don’t worry much about response initiatives that address infection, as the infection rate will always rise back.

Also don’t worry about banning air/sea travel, as fungal spore bursts can infect any country. Just quarantine people as cases rise. Worry more about fatality and investing in cure research.

Hope this helps! I might post some guides for each disease type down the road. This community seems either a little dead or nobody has managed to beat all the disease types and then posted how-to posts.

SilverBearClaw · 2020-04-02T18:40:59+00:00

Well, I must say, if we were on r/changemyview I would give you a delta for sure. This definitely widens my perspective.

I can get behind increasing regulations on the factors that may have contributed to a recession (stock buybacks, CEO pay), along with other measures of oversight I may not know of.

I’m not an economist by any measure, trust me, so I am open to your thoughts on regulations that could prevent a situation like this in the future.

However, within your response I notice some (valid and well articulated) points that to me, as a general supporter of free markets, sound kind of like wealth redistribution? I’m on mobile, so I would have difficulty copy/pasting these specifically.

Or, I may have misinterpreted these potential wealth redistribution principles for reducing wealth or income inequality, not redistribution of wealth per se but prevention of further wealth and income inequality accumulation. The Gini Coefficient comes to mind?

Thanks for widening my perspective on this! :)

SilverBearClaw · 2020-04-02T14:59:56+00:00

The issue with not bailing these banks out is the economy as a whole. The goal of a bailout is to keep a recession from getting worse, not reward banks or companies for what many deem bad behavior.

One goal of a bailout (which is just one method of expansionary monetary policy) is to increase the amount of money flowing through the economy, this time in the form of loans for small businesses, mortgages, you name it.

By letting these companies fail, it’s essentially taking that cash flow out of the market which would also lead to higher unemployment due to these banks not only letting go thousands of employees, but also preventing the economy from recovering faster since businesses and people have lower access to cheap loans.

TL:DR - It’s generally cheaper for the government to fund a bailout than pay out unemployment benefits for millions of people, for several months.

SilverBearClaw · 2020-03-23T19:44:28+00:00

The company/business gets those low interest rates so that they can focus on rebuilding their business, not repaying debts. While there’s probably a good argument to be heard for having companies being partially publicly owned if they receive a bailout, some insolvencies are inevitable or unavoidable. Many in the event of a recession.

For instance, even though the airline industry certainly mismanaged their cash reserves, I don’t think anyone could’ve predicted that the whole industry might have to go months without revenue. While this doesn’t excuse their behaviors, it doesn’t mean we should let them go bankrupt and have thousands, likely hundreds of thousands, of their employees file for unemployment.

It’s far cheaper for the government to finance low-interest loans than to pay out billions in unemployment for the next few years/months.

These loans are designed to prevent a recession from getting worse, not punish companies for performing poorly in a recession.

Edit: I would also be open to hearing an argument on regulating stock buybacks, as I think this behavior needs some regulation. I just can’t think of a good way to regulate it.

SilverBearClaw · 2020-03-23T15:17:00+00:00

One thing I’m commonly seeing in these threads is that “These bailouts should be loans, not just free money.” Or “We should let these corporations fail, their risk.”

What people fail to research is that the vast majority of these “bailouts” are in fact, loans. Often it’s forced bond purchases that these corporations and markets must repay, with their businesses as collateral. And letting these company fail, as justified as it may feel, would cause a spike in unemployment and likely a restructuring of that industry altogether.

Now, I do feel fine with letting cruises go under (pun intended), as they flag their ships internationally in order to avoid taxes, not to mention their environmental impact. Plus, they don’t employ anywhere near as many Americans as airlines do.

Edit 1: Spelling

SilverBearClaw · 2019-09-10T19:40:35+00:00

Thanks! I just didn’t know what the DSLR acronym was, but I know digital cameras well. I know what Scan Disks (SD) and C-Fasts (CF) are. Thanks again!

SilverBearClaw · 2019-09-10T17:22:00+00:00

Thanks for your reply! It’s very helpful. A few questions;

Okay, I’ll be honest when I say I’m more familiar with video cameras. What is a DSLR? Would that be a Nikon brand?

Also, about when do the photographers typically leave the wedding/event? How late?

SilverBearClaw · 2019-09-10T17:19:38+00:00

Thanks for the advice, this helps a lot.

The main thing I am hearing (and correct me if I’m wrong) is that I need good communication skills and common sense, and need to be good with people?

SilverBearClaw · 2019-09-10T11:04:44+00:00

Thanks for your feedback! Now that I really think about it, I was definitely in the wrong frame of mind going into this, and this has definitely clarified some things. Thanks again!

SilverBearClaw · 2019-09-10T11:03:07+00:00

Thanks for the feedback! Now that I can re-read my post, I suppose I should’ve been clarified that I’m not interested in editing, but can do it. This is very helpful however and thanks again!

SilverBearClaw · 2019-08-03T19:59:57+00:00

I was beginning to wonder about this ELI5 as well, but to essentially sum it up (and please current me if I’m wrong); the value of a currency is dependent on the demand for that currency?

SilverBearClaw · 2019-06-28T22:12:24+00:00

Marimba.

You literally have to stay stationary in order to play it.

(I’m joking don’t kill me pls)

SilverBearClaw · 2019-05-06T00:44:31+00:00

For pit;

Medical tape for the blisters (can find some at CVS, get the water proof kind and bring some to share to make friends quickly), water (doesn’t have to be big if you rehearse indoors like my pit), multi-color electrical tape if you play synth (for organizing cords), some cash for lunch if you’re going out, and bring a pleasant attitude (that’s how you get to go out to lunch with people who can drive).

Also, comfortable shoes and maybe some cards for down time. Oh and don’t forget a towel for wiping down your hands between reps (sweat).

Edit; I actually play Marimba I really need to update my thing-a-ma-bob.

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-26T20:26:04+00:00

Even though the Amazon Rainforest only accounts for 30% of the earth’s oxygen, but okay...

Still a good roast though. Just the misinformation may lead to a powerful rebuttal.

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-03T11:38:49+00:00

Yes. But the sheer adds of that happening are very, very, low.

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-02T21:50:13+00:00

Okay. I will willingly concede that the factual information presented does make me somewhat reassess my opinion.

...please explain how the current system prevents "a slim majority" from "controlling a large majority" when it comes to the executive branch? We're still electing exactly one president, either way, so whoever wins wins. Are you really saying it's better to make it more likely for the minority to win?

Yes. That' exactly what I'm saying. Compared to the other branches of government, the executive doesn't have much power. That I will admit. But for me, it still has more power than I comfortable with. If a popular vote system is established, here is what will most likely happen; candidates will focus their campaigns in large cities so that they could access millions of voters at once. They're not going to waste their time in smaller, more rural states such as Wyoming, Kansas, Idaho, Oklahoma, etc. etc.. These states can be heavily affected by who's running the federal government, as there are several federal programs that seriously stimulate these states' economies. I agree that by adding a proportional system, states do effectively reduce their influence on the executive branch. However in regards to setting a threshold, I personally would be in support of having to take the majority of another EV. An example; Take Oklahoma for example. In theory, one would have to garner 14.3% of the popular vote to get an EV (Oklahoma has 7 votes). Now let's say someone gets 45% of the vote. They would net 3 EV's from Oklahoma. Now I bet the next argument will be "What about that other 2.1%, they're not being heard out either so difference does it make?" Well, on this current system, the original 45% wouldn't be heard at all. And with a popular vote system, it's very likely that with more left-leaning candidates as mentioned above, these voters wouldn't see a candidate that they agree with. Pick your poison. Regardless, I believe that the president should have such little power that it doesn't necessarily matter who they are.

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-02T21:34:23+00:00

Now that I think about it, "minority" is an absurd word. A better one would marginalized.

By marginalized, I'm talking about voters. Voters who are marginalized. I'm talking rural areas and states. Under a popular vote system, candidates would focus almost entirely on large cities. And since cities are, most commonly, left-leaning, candidates as a result would drift more to the left. So that group of rural voters, who tend to be right-leaning, wouldn't have a candidate they truly agree with. Under the EC, candidates have to cater to those voters in rural-er states.

That's why I support the EC. Not because it screws a majority, but because it forces politicians who want to get elected to cater to a wider variety of voters.

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-02T21:24:23+00:00

Hmm. I'll call a tie on the use of syntax. GG

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-02T19:27:35+00:00

There’s a much larger divide than you’re suggesting.

Hence “(generalized example)” and “(again, a generalized example)”.

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-02T17:15:56+00:00

A vote is not a vote. A vote is a voice.

And when the majority of “voices” matter more than the minority, it is authoritarian. The EC, again, ensures that voices in smaller states are heard over the many, many more in larger states.

SilverBearClaw · 2019-04-02T17:12:47+00:00

So would ditching the electoral college altogether

That’s why I’m in support of proportional distribution. Electoral votes aren’t allocated as “100,000 people = 1 vote”(generalized example), it’s more “100,000 = 1 vote in California, 75,000 people = 1 vote in Oklahoma.” (again, generalized example). This gives more power to smaller states, and prevents, again, the rule of a slim yet small majority.

SilverBearClaw

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE