# Cadet Videos on You Tube



## foerestedwarrior (25 Apr 2007)

Ok, maby some of you cadets may not realise that people that work in Regional HQ's look at You Tube. This may seem random, but I just thought I would give you guys a heads up. Be very careful what you put on you tube. Especially ones that show regimental kit, and ranks(makes it pretty easy to match that up, and take the face to the CO to find out just who it is). I wont get into this anymore due to an ongoing investigation, but I thought I would give anyone THINKING about doing this a heads up, and a friendly "think about what you are going to do".


----------



## Mike Baker (25 Apr 2007)

Think this should be pinned?


----------



## MikeL (25 Apr 2007)

wow.. I just did a search on youtube for some cadet vids.. first one I looked at was just wow... wtf were these kids thinking.


----------



## foerestedwarrior (25 Apr 2007)

MikeL said:
			
		

> wow.. I just did a search on youtube for some cadet vids.. first one I looked at was just wow... wtf were these kids thinking.



Like I said.....think long and hard about any possible implications of what you are A)recording what you are doing, B)Putting it out in the public for anyone to see.


----------



## Mike Baker (25 Apr 2007)

MikeL said:
			
		

> wow.. I just did a search on youtube for some cadet vids.. first one I looked at was just wow... wtf were these kids thinking.


Was it this one?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNh5-AHrxT8


----------



## HItorMiss (25 Apr 2007)

You have got to be kidding me........


----------



## Mike Baker (25 Apr 2007)

HitorMiss said:
			
		

> You have got to be kidding me........


Sad but true.


----------



## Pea (25 Apr 2007)

I would have had my ass handed to me by my officers if we tried anything as stupid as that when I was a Cadet. My god...


----------



## brihard (25 Apr 2007)

Un-friggin'-real.

This has been passed on to someone appropriate, I would assume?


----------



## HItorMiss (25 Apr 2007)

One can only hope!

As was said to me, something like this discredits the whole system!


----------



## stealthylizard (25 Apr 2007)

Some of them are really well done, too bad a handful have to ruin the excellency of what others have accomplished.


----------



## foerestedwarrior (25 Apr 2007)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Un-friggin'-real.
> 
> This has been passed on to someone appropriate, I would assume?



Oh buddy....it has gone to someone pretty high, and very appropriate. The major issue with this is that it is in the public domain. Also the lack of supervision.


----------



## Mike Baker (25 Apr 2007)

Proud Forester said:
			
		

> Oh buddy....it has gone to someone pretty high, and very appropriate.


Good to know.


----------



## GGHG_Cadet (25 Apr 2007)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Un-friggin'-real.
> 
> This has been passed on to someone appropriate, I would assume?



Oh yea...it definately has been. I just finished talking with the RSM of one of the units involved and there is currently an ongoing investigation. 

Knowing the CO of one of the units and the staff at Area there will be hell to pay.


----------



## HItorMiss (25 Apr 2007)

I do not so much blame the cadets though they are directly at fault. I blame the CIC's and adult supervisors. Where were they an why did these kids ave access to firearms even if they did not have ammo?


----------



## medaid (25 Apr 2007)

: *MedTech Faints and Falls Off Of His Chair*

wtf?!


----------



## NL_engineer (25 Apr 2007)

:

If they are going to do room clearing drills, they should be done according to the pam.

After looking at that video, it places the CF in a bad light, because of the actions of some 13 (just a random age) year old kids.  My point comes from the "Cut His Throat" made around 42 seconds in; and the treatment of the PW's in particular the stabbing actions made 49 seconds in.

IMO the kids are not to blame, as they may be to young to understand the image there actions displayed.  BUT the officers and staff present should have stopped this from happening; and should charged for leaving fire arms unsupervised, and leaving them in the presence of kids.


----------



## GGHG_Cadet (25 Apr 2007)

It doesn't matter, but the firearms they were using are DP rifles which have been dewatted.


----------



## NL_engineer (25 Apr 2007)

GGHG_Cadet said:
			
		

> It doesn't matter, but the firearms they were using are DP rifles which have been dewatted.



That may be, but the international public doesn't know that.


----------



## Mike Baker (25 Apr 2007)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> That may be, but the international public doesn't know that.


+1


----------



## foerestedwarrior (25 Apr 2007)

You have hit the nail on the head here. Yes the cadets in question will be delt with. The greater issue is the supervision while the cadets have firearms(deactivated or not), well lack thereoff. If there was supervision while this happened, even worse so. I am all for the kids having a good time, but you have to be smart about what fun entails.


----------



## medaid (25 Apr 2007)

GGHG_Cadet said:
			
		

> It doesn't matter, but the firearms they were using are DP rifles which have been dewatted.



That's right it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that idiots are being shot by LEOs, because they've got Air Soft or other 1:1 ratio weapon replicas. Ya... I don't think so. 

Back when I was in Cadets, if anyone of them fooled around with a weapon like that, they would've had a very angry, and very loud F/Sgt in their face asking them what they were doing.

I'm sorry, but it seems the level of supervision has definitely gone down over the years. This is only my point of view but the quality of CIC officers have also declined. When I worked with some cadet units, I found a general lack of respect for the uniform. Lack of deportment with the uniform and an over all general lacking of the 3Ds. The cadets learn from the staff that supervise them. If the staff are slack and idle the cadets will pick up on that, and take full advantage of the situation. 

What really annoyed me was that these 'cadets' were on a Senior Leadership course. Obviously SLC has changed over the years... I just cant believe that this happened. Very VERY disappointed.


----------



## stealthylizard (26 Apr 2007)

It was a seniors leader course judging by the title of the video.  Even when I was in cadets we didn't have this stuff going on, even without adult supervision.  The senior NCM's played the role of adult.  Lead by example.  Sure there was things that still went on that probably shouldn't have, but nothing on this kind of scale.  We didn't have the ability to post them on the internet either.  This kind of thing will ruin the future careers of many, especially those that were looking forward to a life in the military, as this will go into their permanent records.  It may even lead to criminal charges.  All because of the relative immaturity of a few fools, this is why so many military applications have been taken away from the general cadet training curriculum.


----------



## Jaydub (26 Apr 2007)

The video in question seems to have been removed.  That's probably a good thing.


----------



## Mike Baker (26 Apr 2007)

Jaydub said:
			
		

> The video in question seems to have been removed.  That's probably a good thing.


Yeah I noticed that. Good thing I guess.


----------



## GGHG_Cadet (26 Apr 2007)

Piper said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, where was this? I'm assuming, judging from the different 'unit's present and the type of weapon and the location, it was a regional drill competition or something along those lines?



It was in Borden, on a certain cadet corps' annual JLC/SLC March Break leadership week. There were several cadets corps involved from two or three different units.


----------



## ryanmann356 (28 Apr 2007)

Jaydub said:
			
		

> The video in question seems to have been removed.  That's probably a good thing.



spooked somebody.  What happened in the video?  
It seems like anything can get posted on youtube without fear of consequences, and they like to hide behind free speech.  Same thing with facebook and nexopia etc.. But where do you draw the line?


----------



## rwgill (30 Apr 2007)

Received this memo today, and it has made it to general circulation:



> All,
> 
> If you have not seen this video, it is definitely inappropriate and presents the wrong image of what the cadet movement is all about. As fallout discussion ended up at the Bde Comd level, and our Comd was made aware, I engaged him today regarding my response. We will not be taking disciplinary action against the cadets, but rather counselling. More importantly, we must educate our cadets, and all those involved with the cadet movement, of the serious consequences such inappropriate actions could have. This event, along with questionable Facebook postings, drives home the point that this is not an isolated incident. Until we can get something more formal promulgated, all units must be advised as expeditiously as possible that every effort must be made to prevent such an event, to include the public posting of the activity, from occurring again. Depending on the situation and circumstances, disciplinary action may be appropriate in the future.
> 
> ...


----------



## FredDaHead (30 Apr 2007)

They're not punishing people for repeated offenses? They might be kids, but if you don't spank a naughty kid, he'll learn it's fine to do whatever he or she wants.


----------



## rwgill (30 Apr 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> They're not punishing people for repeated offenses?


By They're, I assume that you mean LCol Armstrong and the Bde Comd.



> They might be kids, but if you don't spank a naughty kid, he'll learn it's fine to do whatever he or she wants.


Unfortunately, not all kids are aware of all of the rules.  

In this case, the decision has been made:

1.  Make cadets aware of the rules.

2.  If problem occurs after rules have been explained, then discipline.

I am not aware if the individual cadets/officers/staff/units have been disciplined already....................before this memo was released.  What is the sense of being punished more then once, for one offence?  There are rules against that.


----------



## FredDaHead (30 Apr 2007)

rwgill said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, not all kids are aware of all of the rules.
> 
> In this case, the decision has been made:
> 
> ...



The memo was explicit in saying they have NOT been punished. At all. There is definately a large problem if kids are handling weapons without knowing the rules. Adults get various rules drilled into their heads when we get our rifles at the Mega; kids need even more teaching. However, the fact that they were not smart enough and didn't have enough common sense to realize that doing "room clearing" with what appears to any observer to be actual weapons, let alone the completely irresponsible treatment of "prisoners," as was pointed out earlier, on _a leadership course_, means they should be disciplined. If it was little kids who had just gotten in, I'd see it sliding off, but not for cadets who are supposed to be leaders.


----------



## Munxcub (30 Apr 2007)

rwgill said:
			
		

> ...
> Unfortunately, not all kids are aware of all of the rules.
> ...



Last I checked ignorance was not a valid defense. If I get pulled over for speeding and say "Oh sorry officer, I didn't see the sign that said 30Km/h... the last one I saw said 80. My bad..." Would I get away with it? I have my doubts...


----------



## p_imbeault (30 Apr 2007)

I think they should be made an example of, the fact that they did it was bad, but posting it on the internet to boot? They knew exactly what they were doing, it even looked to be rehearsed somewhat. I'd like to know where the officers or staff cadets were when all this was going on?
Letting them get away with a warning doesn't make any sense, they were taking a leadership course. Are these the types of teen leaders you want incharge of a group of young impressionable cadets?

I've seen alot of stupid things done by a small percentage of cadets when unsupervised but this tops it, very unfortunate incident


----------



## Burrows (30 Apr 2007)

Something to think about:

A lot of these kids come from varying family backgrounds.  Many of these families may not teach their children ethics or senses of right and wrong appropriately.  It is the job of the CCM to develop the youth in their charge and because this was allowed to happen at all, it is the fault of the supervising officers on the exercise.

I'm not approving of what the cadets in question did, but pulling out the guillotine for an offense that hasn't really been touched on is a bit much.  Desire to make an example or not, the cadets must always be the main priority of the CCM, and to this extent all fairness must be given.

Correct and develop, don't punish and leave in the dirt.


----------



## stealthylizard (30 Apr 2007)

There is probably more to the background of the activities in the video which we do not know about.  That might explain the reason why no discliplinary methods will be handed out.  All we saw was a video.  It is kind of like the media just showing part of it, and ignoring the rest.


----------



## FredDaHead (30 Apr 2007)

stealthylizard said:
			
		

> There is probably more to the background of the activities in the video which we do not know about.  That might explain the reason why no discliplinary methods will be handed out.  All we saw was a video.  It is kind of like the media just showing part of it, and ignoring the rest.



Background like that? The cadets in question knew what they were doing, they knew that they were "getting away with it" because the instructors weren't around. What more is there to know? That's like saying a murderer might not be such a bad person, because we don't know their background.

Kyle,

It seems like you're blaming everyone BUT the cadets who messed up. Part of developping the youth and teaching them right and wrong and how to deal with things, is teaching them to deal with their mistakes. Besides, they were on a leadership course, they should have had a sense of right and wrong already.

I don't think they should be criminally charged and dismissed from the cadets and all, but they should definately have a black spot on their record and possibly a reduction in rank so that they don't lead impressionable younger cadets before they themselves have matured enough.


----------



## Mike Baker (30 Apr 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> I don't think they should be criminally charged and dismissed from the cadets and all, but they should definately have a black spot on their record and possibly a reduction in rank so that they don't lead impressionable younger cadets before they themselves have matured enough.


+1. This may also detere any other Cadets trying to do things that they know is not right.


----------



## p_imbeault (30 Apr 2007)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> Something to think about:
> 
> A lot of these kids come from varying family backgrounds.  Many of these families may not teach their children ethics or senses of right and wrong appropriately.



Family background has very little if anything to do with it, I've got friends in the program that have a far from perfect family standings but the minute they are not being supervised they don't act like this. These young adults are just as responsible for they're actions as the staff who left them unsupervised. I don't believe we should drag there names in the mud and kick them out of the program, but some consequences should be given for their actions.


----------



## rwgill (30 Apr 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> The memo was explicit in saying they have NOT been punished. At all. There is definately a large problem if kids are handling weapons without knowing the rules. Adults get various rules drilled into their heads when we get our rifles at the Mega; kids need even more teaching. However, the fact that they were not smart enough and didn't have enough common sense to realize that doing "room clearing" with what appears to any observer to be actual weapons, let alone the completely irresponsible treatment of "prisoners," as was pointed out earlier, on _a leadership course_, means they should be disciplined. If it was little kids who had just gotten in, I'd see it sliding off, but not for cadets who are supposed to be leaders.


Re-read the memo.  It says WE, refering to the CO RCSU and the Bde Comd.  This does not suggest that the individual cadets have not been disciplined already.  

For those not aware, each and every individual cadet was identified.

Kyle is absolutely correct: *Correct and develop, don't punish and leave in the dirt.  *

Ignorance is not an excuse.  What many cadets have a hard time dealing with is civilian vs cadet time.  When do we switch on, when do we switch off?  It can be very difficult for a young mind to understand.

The actions being taken are appropriate.  The counselling required is in refernce to CATO 11-07.  It's more about posting any video than posting a bad video.  This also includes forum boards, flickr, photobucket, myspace and facebook.  

The contents of the video, I am more than positive, have been dealt with in an appropraite manner.  The fact that a memo says "WE WILL NOT BE TAKING DISCIPLINARY ACTION" does not suggest that it has already been done.   The memo was released on 26 Apr 07, the process began on or before 22 Apr 07.


----------



## Burrows (30 Apr 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> Background like that? The cadets in question knew what they were doing, they knew that they were "getting away with it" because the instructors weren't around. What more is there to know? That's like saying a murderer might not be such a bad person, because we don't know their background.
> 
> Kyle,
> 
> ...



Pulling a punishment out of a hat, while one may feel it is warranted isn't a truly just way of handling something.  Cadets is an organization that focuses on developing youth, not slapping them down for doing something wrong.  The issue is being resolved by the CO of the RCSU and the Bde Comd and we should leave it at that.  People with far more years under their belts than you or I are much more capable of making the decision.

Not every situation needs to have a hollywood ending with the criminal being drummed out of the corps.  Would you rather not have a cadet see the error of his ways and reform than be bitter towards the system and leave it? 

A lot of what occurs relates to home life more than people may think as well.  I personally have met some cadets with terrible home lives who do need proactive correction to help them adjust to a normal society.  I have noticed that cadets with less than average home lives tend to cause a lot more of the discipline issues for reasons that could be as simple as them not having spent several formative years of their lives with strong adult influence.

Well said rwgill.


----------



## aesop081 (30 Apr 2007)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> Correct and develop, don't punish and leave in the dirt.



There is a time for both Kyle, believe it or not.


----------



## rwgill (30 Apr 2007)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> There is a time for both Kyle, believe it or not.


You are absolutely right.  Given the time line here, running them through the dirt MAY have already been done.  What isalso being done here, and what is MORE important, is that we learn from our mistakes.  

The ultimate error here is the posting of the video, NOT the content of the video.  

This site has guidelines, and they must be followed.  A member of the CF on this site must obey not only this site guidelines, but also the various and numerous rules and regulations of the CF.  Cadets are not fully aware that there are Cadet Regulations regarding the internet.

Quite honestly, many (dare I say most) youth today have selective hearing and selective memory.  They know that there are rules out there and sometimes forget or sometimes ignore.  If we threw every teenager who did wrong in jail and threw away the key..............all teenagers would be in prison.  You and I would still be there 

This site, and similiar sites, do an excellent job at policing themselves.............to protect the image of Cadets and the CF, by using moderators.  Other sites, like YouTube, flickr, Photobucket, MySpace and even eBay do nothing unless a complaint is made.  Luckily this incident was quashed before any real and major damage could be done.  Making Cadets aware of this will help not only the CCO, but also the CF.

Counselling cadets can prevent another incident, which is the ultimate goal.  Rather than hiding a mistake, the CCO is acknowledging it, correcting it and moving forward.  I only wish that more people could move on.


----------



## FredDaHead (30 Apr 2007)

rwgill said:
			
		

> This site, and similiar sites, do an excellent job at policing themselves.............to protect the image of Cadets and the CF, by using moderators.  Other sites, like YouTube, flickr, Photobucket, MySpace and even eBay do nothing unless a complaint is made.  Luckily this incident was quashed before any real and major damage could be done.  Making Cadets aware of this will help not only the CCO, but also the CF.



How so? By breeding cadets--the future CF members, I assume, that will bring the benefits to the CF--who will believe that if they screw up massively, it's okay, because they'll just get "counselled," and nothing will actually happen? By breeding a culture of pointing the finger at everyone else, as Mr. Burrows is doing?

I hate to play up the slippery slope, but considering some cadets get to St-Jean with the laughable idea that they know what "the Army" is about, they're likely to bring with them the idea that if you break the rules, you won't get punished. Those people will be a liability at best, a danger to others and themselves at worse. That is not what the CF need right now, or ever.


----------



## ryanmann356 (1 May 2007)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> Cadets is an organization that focuses on developing youth, not slapping them down for doing something wrong.  The issue is being resolved by the CO of the RCSU and the Bde Comd and we should leave it at that.



I have to agree.  While I do not at all condone what these kids did, there really isn't any standard punishment for this kind of thing.  Facebook and Youtube are relatively recent things to emerge and the senior staff do not have much experience with cadets posting on blogs and facebook, nexopia etc.  Please remember that I do not at all condone what these kids did.  Its hard to say without seeing what was on the video.  But these kids shouldn't get the boot from the organisation for this, I agree with the corrective measures training.  

Perhaps a new training should be added to CHAPP or something to deal with this sort of thing.  I recently did a student challenge with the Vancouver Police Department where students from around Vancouver could experience a little bit of what the VPD recruits go through.  We did do some shooting and driving and other techniques and the instructors sternly told us not to post whatever pictures we had with the control tactics or driving or anything else on Facebook or Nexopia or whatever as outsiders who do not know what the program entails would not understand what we were doing and would assume we were being taught violent things.
So perhaps the staff and senior cadets alike should take this as a lesson and inform cadets of the repercussions of posting their pictures and videos around the internet.

Just MHO


----------



## rwgill (1 May 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> How so? By breeding cadets--the future CF members, I assume, that will bring the benefits to the CF--who will believe that if they screw up massively, it's okay, because they'll just get "counselled," and nothing will actually happen? By breeding a culture of pointing the finger at everyone else, as Mr. Burrows is doing?



1.  Punishment is a short term solution to any given problem.

2.  Counselling, though a softer approach, has better long term effects.

3.  Mr. Burrows, is taking a bang-on approach.  We have to find out why.  It is the only way to be able to properly correct the problem.

Cadets learning from their mistakes will help them understand the virtually identical rules of the CF.  They will be able to properly project the professional image currently portrayed by the CF.  Joe Canadian often gets the two (Cadets and the CF) mixed up.  The two are very different.

When the CF makes a major mistake, the CCO feels the pressure.  When the CCO screws up, well we have this discussion.

May I suggest, if you are that upset with the LCol's memo, write to him.

BTW, the CO RCSU is not a CIC officer.  Last time I checked, the Bde Comd was not either.


----------



## FredDaHead (1 May 2007)

rwgill said:
			
		

> 1.  Punishment is a short term solution to any given problem.
> 
> 2.  Counselling, though a softer approach, has better long term effects.



Punishment AND counselling is the solution. Punish those who screwed up, and counsel everyone so nobody screws up again. Otherwise it gives the message that it's not so bad, it's just something you might not want to do.



> 3.  Mr. Burrows, is taking a bang-on approach.  We have to find out why.  It is the only way to be able to properly correct the problem.



What approach is that? Blaming *everyone but* the _cadets on a leadership course_ for what said cadets did? Hardly the proper solution, and definately *NOT* "bang-on."



> Joe Canadian often gets the two (Cadets and the CF) mixed up.



That is why cadets who are going into leadership positions should be held up to high standards, otherwise there will be a breakdown at the lower ranks and the whole organisation will break down, spraying crap all over the CF.


----------



## Burrows (1 May 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> How so? By breeding cadets--the future CF members, I assume, that will bring the benefits to the CF--who will believe that if they screw up massively, it's okay, because they'll just get "counselled," and nothing will actually happen? By breeding a culture of pointing the finger at everyone else, as Mr. Burrows is doing?
> 
> I hate to play up the slippery slope, but considering some cadets get to St-Jean with the laughable idea that they know what "the Army" is about, they're likely to bring with them the idea that if you break the rules, you won't get punished. Those people will be a liability at best, a danger to others and themselves at worse. That is not what the CF need right now, or ever.


By no means am I absolving the guilty parties.  What I'm saying point-blank is that cadets aren't educated enough about what should and shouldn't be posted on the internet.  This incident is the first I've ever heard of.  By all means, punish the troops for making a stupid video, but you can't legitimately lay the blame solely on them and dish out a severe punishment.

Like it or not there was a fault in the chain of command for not properly supervising these kids as well as not teaching them what shouldn't be posted on the internet (or even done for that matter).  Like I've said before, this is the first time I have ever heard of any rules being applied to what cadets are posting on the internet.

I'm not totally laying the blame on others as you so eagerly try to fault me for Frederik, but if a troop doesn't know to use his weapon because someone neglected to teach him, do you blame the troop solely or the instructor that was busy contemplating the most prolific meaning of his navel?

Just to clarify, a punishment is needed, but not one with a normal amount of severity.  Why?  If nobody covered this with the cadets then they were just exercising their own poor judgement without the knowledge of any rule that prohibited posting the video.


----------



## FastEddy (2 May 2007)

[/quote]

Gentlemen, having read pages 1 to 4 and noticing that most of the posters comments were complaining or up set with a certain Video of Cadets. And upon searching for said video on the provided link, I found nothing that could be related to this Thread or the comments within.

Perhaps, some kind soul could bring me  (and other late readers) up to date on the subject of this video and its contents

Many Thanks,

FastEddy.


----------



## rwgill (2 May 2007)

Page 2 Eddy



			
				NL_engineer said:
			
		

> :
> 
> If they are going to do room clearing drills, they should be done according to the pam.
> 
> After looking at that video, it places the CF in a bad light, because of the actions of some 13 (just a random age) year old kids.  My point comes from the "Cut His Throat" made around 42 seconds in; and the treatment of the PW's in particular the stabbing actions made 49 seconds in.



The offendings videos haves been  pulled from You Tube.

If you are still interested, there are some great Cadet You Tube videos here:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dcdts


----------



## FredDaHead (3 May 2007)

rwgill said:
			
		

> Page 2 Eddy
> 
> The offendings videos haves been  pulled from You Tube.
> 
> ...



And that's relevant, how? It has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.


----------



## Rocketryan (3 May 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> And that's relevant, how? It has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.




He was helping FastEddy by posting a quote which gave the best explanation of the video.
And he posted a link to youtube showing different Army Cadet videos since I am sure he thought that FastEddy might have also been looking for various Cadet videos.


----------



## FredDaHead (3 May 2007)

Rocketryan said:
			
		

> He was helping FastEddy by posting a quote which gave the best explanation of the video.
> And he posted a link to youtube showing different Army Cadet videos since I am sure he thought that FastEddy might have also been looking for various Cadet videos.



He asked specifically for 



			
				FastEddy said:
			
		

> Perhaps, some kind soul could bring me  (and other late readers) up to date on *the subject of this video and its contents*



NOT cadet videos in general. The topic at hand is that despicable show of idiocy in the filming and posting of that video, not cadet videos in general, as I'm sure there are a lot of good ones.


----------



## FastEddy (3 May 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> He asked specifically for
> 
> NOT cadet videos in general. The topic at hand is that despicable show of idiocy in the filming and posting of that video, not cadet videos in general, as I'm sure there are a lot of good ones.




Ah ! Gentlemen , you are all correct, 

1. I did discover that the Video had been pulled.

2. I did review some other splendid videos of Cadets whilst there.

3. I did get the drift of the video from "regill".                                                   

4. And Yes "Frederick G" is correct, that is what I specifically wanted
 was the drift or content of the video.                                                                                                           

I thank you all for your quick responses and info. 

I must also voice a strong objection to this type of exposure and training for CF Cadets and their civilian peers.

Cheers.

Edited for paragraphicing.


----------



## rwgill (3 May 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> He asked specifically for
> 
> NOT cadet videos in general. The topic at hand is that despicable show of idiocy in the filming and posting of that video, not cadet videos in general, as I'm sure there are a lot of good ones.



I added it in  AFTER  answering the question.

Sorry if I offended you :


----------



## Burrows (3 May 2007)

Cool your jets Frederik.  Making a scene isn't going to get you any points here.  Put the barbs away.

If you feel that a post is irrelevant then please report the post using the post report system, all telling someone off does is make ANOTHER useless post, bringing the useless post count to at LEAST one provided the first post is relevant.


----------



## FredDaHead (3 May 2007)

Reporting posts apparently accomplishes nothing, even when there is a blatant breach of the guidelines (not that it was the case in this instance), hence my pointing out that the post was irrelevant to the topic at hand rather than using the post report thinger. Besides, as you don't seem to agree with my assessment that the post was useless, and you're the mod for this part of the boards, I don't see what it would have accomplished, even if reporting posts worked in other instances.


----------



## Burrows (3 May 2007)

Frederik G said:
			
		

> Reporting posts apparently accomplishes nothing, even when there is a blatant breach of the guidelines (not that it was the case in this instance), hence my pointing out that the post was irrelevant to the topic at hand rather than using the post report thinger. Besides, as you don't seem to agree with my assessment that the post was useless, and you're the mod for this part of the boards, I don't see what it would have accomplished, even if reporting posts worked in other instances.


 We do deal with every post report and valid ones are logged.  When a report it made EVERY moderator receives the email and those that require action are dealt with.  

I quickly tire of your tomfoolery and this is as far as this subject is going.  If you have an issue then please PM the Site Owner, Mr. Mike Bobbitt, otherwise get on with your life.  Just because you don't think reporting a post would accomplish anything doesn't mean play vigilante. Report posts that you think may be inappropriate and they will be dealt with, any other course of action is creating yet another problem.  

Being annoying doesn't make rwgills post any more against the rules, it just makes you look like an idiot.  Grow up.


----------



## foerestedwarrior (4 May 2007)

Appropriate action was taken. That is that. If you genuinley have an issue with how this is situation was delt with, I will walk down the hall and ask for Col Armstong for his email, so you can personally voice your complaints. 

Freddy G, dude, chill out. Judging by your profile, well lack of. I will assume you are in cadets, thus your interest in this forum. You have been here since 2001, so longer then me, though you dont seem to get the just of the whole, being nice to the random people that run this place thing. Stop complaining about how the VOLUNTEERS to run this place, run it. Unless you have a valid complaint, then do what Mr Burrows said, PM the Site Owner..


PS-Kyle, I got a good chuckle out of your use of the word tomfoolery


----------



## FredDaHead (4 May 2007)

Proud Forester said:
			
		

> Appropriate action was taken. That is that. If you genuinley have an issue with how this is situation was delt with, I will walk down the hall and ask for Col Armstong for his email, so you can personally voice your complaints.
> 
> Freddy G, dude, chill out. Judging by your profile, well lack of. I will assume you are in cadets, thus your interest in this forum. You have been here since 2001, so longer then me, though you dont seem to get the just of the whole, being nice to the random people that run this place thing. Stop complaining about how the VOLUNTEERS to run this place, run it. Unless you have a valid complaint, then do what Mr Burrows said, PM the Site Owner..
> 
> ...



In addition to the PM I sent you, I'd like to point out that piling on after a mod has dealt with the situation is generally frowned upon. I'm nice to most of the random people who run this place and I have nothing but the utmost respect for Mr. Bobbitt (I hope I spelled that right...), and while maybe I don't get the jist of being nice to everyone, I do get the jist of not trying to do the mod's job after they've already done it.


----------



## aesop081 (4 May 2007)

Is this all going somewhere thats worth the bandwith ?

army.ca staff


----------



## FredDaHead (4 May 2007)

Probably not, and considering the situation has been dealt with by the appropriate authorities and the video has been pulled... maybe it's time someone locks the thread.


----------



## Burrows (4 May 2007)

I'd like to point out that Proud Forester added to the discussion before making any off topic remarks.  When those remarks were made they were pretty funny, much more so than you whining.

Evidently you also DON'T get the gist of not deviating from topic to tell other off, which is my job.

Quit now. 

*There is still a potential for discussion here and the thread will remain open due to it. Further deviation will result in warnings.*

Kyle


----------



## rwgill (4 May 2007)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> *There is still a potential for discussion here and the thread will remain open due to it. Further deviation will result in warnings.*





			
				Proud Forester said:
			
		

> Appropriate action was taken. That is that.



I agree 100%.  It is time to learn from a mistake and move on, with hopes that this will never happen again.

BTW, we had our counselling session on Tuesday.  Most of our cadets do not have the internet at home, and so had no idea as to what You Tube was.


----------



## FredDaHead (4 May 2007)

rwgill said:
			
		

> BTW, we had our counselling session on Tuesday.  Most of our cadets do not have the internet at home, and so had no idea as to what You Tube was.



I'm surprised about the kids not having the internet bit, but that's better left to sociology students.

Out of curiosity, could you give us some more details about the counselling? I'd assume it was along the lines of "don't make videos or take pictures of things that might make the Cadets look bad," but I'm curious as to what exactly the message being pushed is.


----------



## rwgill (4 May 2007)

Freddy G said:
			
		

> I'm surprised about the kids not having the internet bit, but that's better left to sociology students.


I live in rural Eastern Ontario.  Only small parts have high speed internet.  Dial-Up really sucks when many sites now include Flash and Applets.  It makes loading a page a headache.

It also takes forever to upload or download videos 

Our area is French as is the Cadet Corps.  Most of the internet is in English.  Though many of the cadets are bilingual, only a few parents are.  Out of 40 cadets, at least 10 don't even have computers at home.  The schools have them, but sites like YouTube, flickr et al. are banned sites.



> Out of curiosity, could you give us some more details about the counselling? I'd assume it was along the lines of "don't make videos or take pictures of things that might make the Cadets look bad," but I'm curious as to what exactly the message being pushed is.



We explained:

1.  When is a cadet a cadet?  In short, if you state that you are a cadet, then you are a cadet and should act accordingly.
2.  Accountablility when making posts (as a cadet).  Photos, videos, written, signatures, IDs/Login Names
3.  Internet Bullying (as a cadet)
4.  Proper Image portrayal. (cadets)

Starting next training year, we will add this to the CHAP periods.


----------

