Originally posted by DoxN4cer
You're trifling over semantics in terms of my military analogy, Jeff.
The electoral college; not the popular vote, appoints the president. I'm sure that you are familiar with that. Component commanders (general officers) are recommended by the president and are approved by Congress after review. However, comparing martial arts politics to the American government doesn't work. There is a system of checks and balances in the layout our government that doesn't exsist in the martial arts politcal arena.
I agree that the the example of the President doesn't work. However, you are the one who used the example to make your point, whether you realized it or not. Your main example was a military one, where the President is Commander and Chief, technically "the highest ranked." Tim is technically the "Commander and Chief" of the WMAA. 6th degree is the highest rank given in the U.S. for Modern Arnis. The electoral college votes according to the popular vote in their state, so our "Commander and Chief" is voted in by "lower ranks" any way you look at it.
However, I agree that the example, your example, doesn't fit. I would also conceed that the CEO example doesn't fit either. There are checks and balances in Business as well as in government. However, a CEO is "elected" in most big companies by a board of directors. The board is often "elected" through proxy by shareholders.
Because we are a democracy and not nationalist or monarchy, our structure for almost anything in America is that "leaders" and even "rank" and "status" for our chosen leaders are elected by the people below them. This is the American way. As a military man I would surely hope that you would support democracy, and the american way.
However, I agree that you will be hard pressed to find an example outside of the martial arts "world" that fits the current situation of Modern Arnis.
But this means that your examples don't fit either, and that you have failed to logically prove how Tim's promotion was "shady."
True, such promotions are not without precident. I'll conceed that point, but going over the Falls in a barrel and surviving isn't without precident either.
There you go again. Don't use examples that you can't back up. Tim's promotion hardly compares to "going over falls in a barrel."
You guys did what you felt you had to do. Fine.
Gee...thanks.
Were you surprised that people disagreed with it? You shouldn't be.
Actually, there hasn't been much disagreement at all. Your the only one who seems to disagree right now, even though you've failed to prove how the promotion was "shady."
Other options were available, weren't they?
But none of these other options were "better" then what was done. These other options also didn't fit the circumstance. Our leaders have done what they needed to do according to their individual circumstance.
Was there a big rush for the promotion? Was there a big number candidates for 6th dgree that the WMAA couldn't wait for further deliberation?
As Mr. Leader explained, the problem needed to be addressed before it got to a point were we had a canidate for 6th, or 5th. And actually, 5th would be the magic # because a 6th can't promote to his own rank.
Besides, there wasn't a rush. Professors body was long buried before Tim's promotion.
As for the WSHC (and the perhaps the GOE) rankning and recognition procedures go, my knowledge is not first hand; just word of mouth and what I have read. However, candidates must provide documentation of their continuous training and teaching experience (via certificates and resume), letters of reference, and undergo an evaluation by a board of masters, senior masters, and/or GMs.
My knowledge is first-hand. I was supposed to go to the event where Tim and Dan recieved their awards. So, re-read my explaination, for it is from a 1st hand understanding of their proceedures.
Also, even if the WSHC was there to verify rank, as Mathusula2 rightfully pointed out the award was recieved BEFORE the promotion.
So this point is also mute.
Bottom Line: Tim's promotion was far from "SHADY," and you have failed to prove otherwise.
Thank You,
PAUL
:armed:
P.S. I have no beef with you TIm K, by the way....I just disagree with you as much as I happend to like a good arguement.
