# Is Rank Revokable?



## GouRonin (Mar 14, 2003)

Yes?
No?
Yes with conditions?
Drop your two cents worth in and tell us why!

:soapbox:


----------



## Cruentus (Mar 14, 2003)

See....I skewed the vote....100% say no!!!

All Gore??? What about Ralph Nader?

To address the thread:
Some may disagree, but when I say "No" I am refering to Black Belt.

I was trained under the thought that Rank before Black Belt is revokeable, but a Black Belt is not. So, lets say someone makes it to Blue Belt, quits for 10 years, then returns. If they don't know anything, I could see reason for a possible demotion (although as an instructor I would never demote them for that, but I wouldn't let them progress in rank until they know what they need to know to progress). I could definatily see a demotion for bad behavior, though, in the pre-black belt levels.

I do not feel that a Black Belt can be taken from someone, once they've earned it. To me it is like a high school or College Diploma. Lets say the President of Oakland University decides to hate me, and gets on the T.V. and publically denounces me as "the worst Oakland University student ever!" I still earned my diploma from Oakland U, it is endorsed by the state, so the University cannot revoke it no matter what they want to do. Same goes for a black belt. If an instructor has a falling out with a student, that instructor can denounce that student all he wants, but I don't feel that he can "revoke" his black belt, no matter what he wants to do.

Because I think this, this is one of the reasons that I take black belt so seriously, like a College Degree. If a blackbelt is something that a student will carry with them for eternaty, then students and teachers would take the rank a bit more seriously then they do today. I think that if instructors thought about this more, then they wouldn't give out rank like holloween candy. Black Belts aren't taken so seriously anymore; some evidence of this will be from the amount of people who, I conject, will argue that a black belt should be revokable. 

"What if someone quites right after black belt, and forgets everything?" I thought I'd beat you to the question. #1: If they quit after black belt, then so what. They still accomplished that goal, and it cannot be taken from them. If they return 10 years later and expect to get a 2nd degree, then they have to earn that 2nd degree the same as if they had never left; which means re-learning anything forgotton, and expanding on that knowledge enough to earn rank. #2: If they instructor did his job, and if the student truely earned the belt, then they will know how to fight, and they will know the system enough for the rank; just like riding a bike. So if they quit and come back, it will be a matter of working out rust mostly, not re-learning everything.

"What if someone decides personally that their instructor sucks, and that their own black belt is invalid, and they decide to go to another school of the same art?" I thought I'd beat you to this one too. Even if the student justifies it by saying, "I didn't learn anything from Joe Bloe, so my black belt in Sukie Karate doesn't mean anything," then it still doesn't matter. You can't change the past, you still earned a black belt from Joe Bloe's Sukie Karate, no matter what way you look at it. Now, if you decide to denounce your own rank, or leave it off your resume,' that is your choice, but you still earned it and no one can cahnge the past. Not even you. If you decide to start over as a white belt from a different instructor, and earn a black belt under THAT instructor, then you'll just have 2 black belts on your record. Not a bad way to redeem yourself, if that is your circumstance.

These are my feelings regarding the matter. I think that if more instructors felt the way I do, then more instructors would take the journey to black belt a bit more seriously. If more students also realized this, then they would put a little more thought into who and what art they want to recieve their first Black Belt from. Once recieved, there is no turning back!

Partially because I have had this thought for so long, I've never been a "rank collector." I don''t care too greatly about what my martial arts resume' looks like, because I would bet that my 1st degree earned in some arts exceeds some peoples 5th degrees. And I'll bet that I can prove it in the dojo, dojang, training floor, or street if I had to. 

So remember, no matter what anyone will tell you, it's not really about what's on your waist, it's about whats in your heart, mind , body, and soul.

:soapbox: :asian:


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by PAUL _
> *Lets say the President of Oakland University decides to hate me, and gets on the T.V. and publically denounces me as "the worst Oakland University student ever!"*



Hey hey now...we all _heard_ the rumours but we don't need to know the truth...


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 14, 2003)

I didn't start training in MA for Rank.  I started training to help me so that I don't get beat up on the street.  
People do what they want, and you are supposed to follow out of "loyalty".  Take My "BELT" if you wish, but you won't take my rank, and especially you won't take my knowledge.
:soapbox:


----------



## Elfan (Mar 14, 2003)

No I don't feal that rank is revokable.  Rank to me seems to me to symbolize a relashioship between student and teacher.  You can't just pretend that never happened by trying to revoke a rank.  In the case of people who go away for a long time and then come back, they will have to talk to the instructor and decide what is best.  Wear a lower rank, some electrical tape scheme on their belt, just have that high ranking belt for a LONG time before getting a new one etc.


----------



## tarabos (Mar 14, 2003)

i had a feeling this topic was coming Gou... 

i know of a couple high ranking kenpo guys that would more or less like to leave their current affiliation, but are aprehensive to due to the fact that they are unsure of what will happen to their current rank. i garner that i will most likely not be recognized by that orginization, the only one that really and truly recognizes it now.

it's a sticky situation but if they were to break off and do their own thing i don't really think it would matter what anyone thought of their rank and how legitimate it may be. the proof, after all, is in the pudding.

any instructor that would revoke rank for petty reasons is just an imature disgrace in my eyes and is undeserving of his or her own rank.

there are however instances that i would say a revoking or "demoting" in rank would be warranted. if someone were to commit certain acts or say certain things that were so disrespectful to the instructor, the school or the art...then by all means they should be punished somehow. there are alos instances when a student may change schools and arrive at his or her new place of training as a high rank, but comes to find that they are not living up to the standards of the rank at that particular school. then perhaps it is time to knock that student back a few levels. my instructor has done it on more than one occassion. the demoted student usually doesn't last much longer after that, but thems the breaks i guess. 

long story short...if it's petty reasoning, then it's uncalled for. however there are times when revoking or demoting are just what the doctor ordered.


----------



## Cruentus (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *Hey hey now...we all heard the rumours but we don't need to know the truth...
> *



LOL


----------



## Michael Billings (Mar 14, 2003)

I believe, over the years, I have heard of one instance where a Black Belt was taken away.    It was the head of the Association that promoted ... and takith away.  Of note was that, the rank was later given directly from the instructor to this person, but not from the Association.  So the documentation of Black could be questioned.  Fortunatly his skill set could not be questioned, and he runs a very sucessful school in Arlington, VA.

I think Sigung Steven LaBounty, and others, used to say "You must keep training or retire your (Black) belt."  Otherwise it is forfeit.  Dishonor it and it is forfeit.  Growining up in the Art with expectations like those put pressure on you, or attempted to mold you into a certain mind set, that you get what you deserve ... and have to keep working to keep it.

I see this as appropriate if this the expectation coming up through the ranks.  After the energy and time invested in getting a student to Black Belt, you want them to spread the knowledge they gained.  BIG NOTE:  This probably makes more sense in a pre-commercial (hah! as if there was ever any such thing - we just like to think there was, in this country) Kenpo world, where it took an average of 7 years for Black.  The fastest Black Belt I knew was someone training daily who was increadably talanted.  He did get Black in a little over 5 or so years.  Just FYI this was in the NCKKA, a Chinese Kenpo association.  Obviously it could be sooner depending on the Art or variant.

When you spend most of a decade getting to Black, your teachers, the people testing you, and your fellow students get to know you pretty well.  It would be hard to get a Black Belt "taken away", you just did not promote them.  

I do see the other side of the coin, especially now days when a Black Belt is seen as a degree to be earned educationally.  I just do not really remember lots of incompetent Black Belts in the late 60's or 70's ... but my perspective was a lot different due to my rank and experience.  Maybe they were there and I did not see them.  Nowdays all I have to do is walk in a tournament or visit other schools and it is easy to scratch my head and say "Black Belt? Well, OK".  It means what it means (see other posts on  similar topics.)

Oss,
-Michael
Kenpo-Texas.com


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 14, 2003)

There seems to be alot of focus when dealing with  a "black belt".  What about other ranks?  A person with an orange belt worked as hard for that rank given the "time and expectations" as a black belt did.  Should a lower rank be demoted for something like being away for a while, and a black belt not be demoted for the same thing?  Are lower ranking people less insignificant than black belts?


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 14, 2003)

I stated this in another thread. My brother-in-law is one that will revoke rank. He has stated so, not really sure if he actuall carried it out. But I do know that some do possess that mindset.

No matter what, the skill can not be taken away. And if a certificate is issued. He cannot come and take it away. He can revoke your "affilliation" with their organization at best. 

But I've heard, from my brother-in-law, that the "Federation" would delete all records like you never were there. 

A bit of dirty politics.


----------



## GouRonin (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jeffkyle _
> *Are lower ranking people less insignificant than black belts?
> *



Some black belts will tell you yes.

I will tell you that people should all be treated on the merits they have. A rank, belt, or certificate doesn't make someone less of an @sshole or a good person bad.


----------



## pesilat (Mar 14, 2003)

I'd say that rank is revokable. Ideally, it's only done with good reason. But, really, it can be done for any reason if the person in charge is petty.

But while rank is revokable, skill/knowledge/experience/ability isn't.

Mike


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *Some black belts will tell you yes.
> 
> I will tell you that people should all be treated on the merits they have. A rank, belt, or certificate doesn't make someone less of an @sshole or a good person bad. *



I agree with you!  But there again...some black belts won't agree with it.


----------



## Cruentus (Mar 14, 2003)

Michael Billings: I see your point, but even if the organization doesn't recognise the rank, the student still earned it. They have the belt, and they have the certificate. Even if they put a disclaimer or expiration on the certificate, they still can't take away the fact that the person earned (or at least recieved) the rank. You can't change the past. I personally feel that the expiration date thing, or the "forfiet your rank" idea is just a marketing ploy more then anything else. I have people who I train with who might disagree, but I see the facts pointing more towards a marketing ploy.

But the fact remains, you can't change the past. If an organization or instructor trys to really press the issue, when they were the ones to promote the student in the first place, then I feel that org/instructor is the one risking a loss credability.

JeffKyle: I am one of those Black Belts who will say yes to making lower ranks revokable. My reasoning is because there needs to be a way (I feel) to impose displinary action if lower ranks abuse their rank, or abuse the art. By the time the student gets to black belt, the instructor should know enough about the student to determine that he/she has enough character to have a black belt, where this kind of disciplinary action (revoking rank) should not be an issue.

Understand, I mean no disrespect for lower ranks. It is just that an instructor, especially in a big school, can't screen every student enough to know if that student is going to abuse the art. If they do abuse it, that instructor should be able to impose this sort of disaplinary action. Now, if the instructor is the kind who would abuse this power, then don't train with him. It is just that simple.

To further support my position regarding lower ranks is the fact that lower ranks don't have the leverage of a black belt. Example: I have a green belt in Aikido, but I haven't done the art in about 9 years. Should I be able to walk into an Aikido school with my green belt and expect recognition at that rank? I don't think so. That green belt doesn't give me any leverage. Now if I had earned a blackbelt in Aikido, even if I hadn't trained in 9 years, that black belt gives me enough leverage to wear it on the floor, and to be recognized as such. I may not be recognized as a skilled AikidoKa by the other students, and it may be a very long time before a 2nd degree test, but I still have the black belt all the same. Besides, I should have enough knowledge from my training to be able to wear it, even if it is very rusty knowledge.

This is similar to a College degree (again), and the leverage that this implies. If I go into a job interview with no credentials, but I took a couple of classes in college, this won't give me much to stand on. Even if I "almost" got my degree, sorry.....no leverage. But if I can show a Diploma, then that's leverage, even if I haven't taken a class in 10 years.

Just some things to consider.................... 
:asian:


----------



## Cruentus (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by GouRonin _
> *Some black belts will tell you yes.
> 
> I will tell you that people should all be treated on the merits they have. A rank, belt, or certificate doesn't make someone less of an @sshole or a good person bad. *



All though I do think Lower Ranks are revokable, I can agree with that!


----------



## fist of fury (Mar 14, 2003)

No I think the idea is stupid. You might no longer recognized with an official organization but so f***kin what.  You still put in the time and have the knowledge.


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by PAUL _
> *
> 
> This is similar to a College degree (again), and the leverage that this implies. If I go into a job interview with no credentials, but I took a couple of classes in college, this won't give me much to stand on. Even if I "almost" got my degree, sorry.....no leverage. But if I can show a Diploma, then that's leverage, even if I haven't taken a class in 10 years.
> ...



I don't think your example applies to the situation I proposed.  You seem to be talking about receiving a rank in one place and then going somewhere else.  And that being the case, there is NO guarantee that ANY belt will carry over from one school to the next.  It is almost like starting over, and you have to prove yourself.  Just like if you didn't get a degree in college, but you had all the courses you needed for the job you were applying for.  They may hire you for the job, but you would have to prove what you know to them.  Also if you go to one college, and take a bunch of classes and then move to a different location another college may not accept the curriculum you have studied at the previous college.  You may have to take lots of extra classes that you wouldn't have had to take at the other college, or you may even have to take certain classes over, even though you have been through them already, because the new college won't accept the curriculum from the previous college.

My point is about the same location.  Take your college example for instance.  You go to college, take several courses but don't receive a degree and then drop out.  10 years later you go back to college to finish up that degree.  They don't make you start back over in the classes you have taken and make you start as a freshmen all over again because you have been gone.  At the most you may have to take one or two courses over because they have changed so much.  But they still allow you to keep your status as a junior.  Usually they add classes to the curriculum so that you will have to take more classes in the future than you would have it you had continued and finished 10 years ago.


----------



## streetwise (Mar 14, 2003)

Rank is just an arbitrary thing, meaningful only within a system/organization. It can be revoked, but so what? Your skills are your own, your personal development cannot be measured by a colored piece of cloth. I really dislike ranking systems in general, and if I ever start my own style and declare myself a 723rd degree grand ultimate master super warrior commander, or some such crap, I will eliminate all rank within my system except "certified instructor".


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by streetwise _
> *Rank is just an arbitrary thing, meaningful only within a system/organization. It can be revoked, but so what? Your skills are your own, your personal development cannot be measured by a colored piece of cloth. I really dislike ranking systems in general, and if I ever start my own style and declare myself a 723rd degree grand ultimate master super warrior commander, or some such crap, I will eliminate all rank within my system except "certified instructor". *



Sounds like a good idea to me!


----------



## Mickey (Mar 14, 2003)

Yes, with reasons,

For example if you have a really bad guy in your organization then the head person should be able to revoke the rank and remove the person from the system.

Now, can you revoke the knowledge? NOPE!

Does the person have to give back any certificates? NOPE!

So, you can revoke rank, yet does it really mean anything?

Only in that organization. 
:asian:


----------



## Zujitsuka (Mar 14, 2003)

A belt is just a belt.

The man or woman makes the belt not the other way around.  I'd rather be a white belt that fights like a black belt, than be a black belt that fights like a white belt.  Like one of the Gracies said, "A belt only covers two inches of your ***.  The rest is up to you."

Personally, I could care less about the color of my belt - it is my intention to train and keep seeking out new things until the day I die anyway.  So either way, I'm always going to be a white belt.

Peace....


----------



## Cruentus (Mar 14, 2003)

Your right....there are holes in my examples.

My University example doesn't fit every aspect of a belt ranking. Martial arts ranks aren't state endorsed, etc. Plus, of course in a University you can start where you left off, which I don't believe should be the case for M.A.. My example does fit the other aspects of what I had said however, mainly the points I was trying to illustrate.

Also...of course there is no guarantee that your belt rank will carry over from school to school, and you definatily risk starting from scratch. However, your black belt would still hold more leverage then an underbelt if it was the same system. I've seen many cases where the student and the instructor have made compromises, were the black belt student from the other school could wear his belt, but was required to retest for his current degree before testing for a higher rank, and so forth. It is also usually easier (at least it should be) for a Black Belt to excel in another martial arts altogether, making it easier to attain another black belt in that other martial art. My point was, that your black belt holds a lot more leverage then an underbelt in just about any situation you look at.

To me, I basically believe that there is a barrier, or "Chinese Wall" if you will between black belts and underbelts. Basically the underbelts are your "apprentices," who are subject to demotion, promotion, etc. Your "Knights" are your black belts. Does this illustration fit every aspect of the belt system in Martial arts, no it won't.

I don't know. If it sounds like I'm reaching here, it's because I am. The reason is that mainly, the belt system in Martial Arts is completely unique in and of itself. I can use examples to illustrate my points, but they will all fall short in one way or the other. The second part of my problem is that this is my way, and I really don't have or need a compelling arguement to back it up. And, I really don't care. I believe my way is right because of the results that can be derived from my way of thinking about rank; I feel that these results are better. I don't care if other people don't think it's "right."

My way is that the road to black belt is a journey. If you give up, take a break, vere off the correct path, etc., then you risk getting demoted, among other risks and trials on this journey. When you reach your first black belt, you are at the end of one journey, but at the beginning of another. That is what a black belt, to me, signifies: the end of one journey, a level of enlightenment or rebirth from the achievement, and the beginning of another journey. It signifies accomplishment as an apprentice, while opening up a new pathway to mastery. In your 1st journey you were subserviant to black belts; you looked to them for guidance, and you risked getting rebuked by them. This could mean a demotion in rank (in a very rare circumstance) by the head instructor. When you are a black belt, you now have many classmates who are under you, and who look to you for guidance. As a black belt you have achieved something that cannot be taken away, and new doors to greater experiences have been opened up to you. The consequence to that is with this black belt, you have great responsabilities to your art, to society, and to yourself. You have to own up to a lot more. You have new trials and tribulations, new things to master, and new things to learn. Really, your black belt is just a beginning. But, it is a new beginning that cannot be taken away.

This is my way. I think that "Black Belt" should be revered differently then any of the "under belts." This is how I teach my students, and this is how I treat my own personal rank regardless of the thought of my instructors. I take these things very seriously. If all instructors revered a black belt the same way I do, it is my opinion that they would be kicking out better quality students, and their students who recieved black belts would wear them with more respect, responsability, gratitude, and pride then people do today.

This is the way I grew up, and was taught. And this is the way I will teach, because when I give ANYONE a black belt, it is because I am sure that they are able to uphold the responsability. This is my way, wrong or right. If you want to follow a different way, then it's your livelyhood.

Now, if someone here on MT would like to enlighten us on some history behind belt ranking syestem in itself, then we can observe how the difference between "black belt" and "under belts" were treated in other cultures, in different times (mainly when "ranking" was first established in MA). I don't know enough history (nor do I have the time to research it), otherwise I could bring something forth of which we could make comparisons. I am very curious to learn how my way, the ways of today (which I think are different then my way), and the ways of the past hold up against each other. What are the consequences of each way of thought? If someone has any info, I think it would add to the discussion greatly.

As for those who say "rank doesn't matter," I also uphold that position to a degree. Your skill level is the bottom line. However, it would be nice if a rank really could reflect achievement in the combat arts. Unfortunatily with the way it is taken for granted, it usually doesn't, now a days.



 :asian:


----------



## Master of Blades (Mar 14, 2003)

Nope, it shouldnt be revoked.......I still like to believe that I can trust other MAists and if someone comes to the class with a Belt and asks for it to be revoked then Ok, I'll think about it, but if there not up to standard just make them do stuff till they are. On the basis of the students belt being revoked in the same school then that is stupid, you gave him the belt, your own fault :asian:


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 14, 2003)

I don't think its right to revoke rank at all except if they said something along the lines of you are no longer a ## Dan in the #### Federation. Period. MA politics should not get in the way of schools livelyhood.

Disassociation is acceptable and expected but spreading more dirt in the MA world is just more negativity for us all.


----------



## Michael Billings (Mar 14, 2003)

Well said Paul, the only thing I would add is that you never "give" anyone a black belt ... they earn it.

Oss,
-Michael
Kenpo-Texas.com


----------



## Rich Parsons (Mar 14, 2003)

I think YES it can be revoked! WIth a reason.

Are they in your Organization? Are yo kicking them out of the organization?

If so then Yes,

If just to get even with someone then Nope!

:asian:


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *I think YES it can be revoked! WIth a reason.
> 
> Are they in your Organization? Are yo kicking them out of the organization?
> ...



Assuming someones rank is revoked and they were at an instructor level. What now? Are they a "legit" instructor or not?


----------



## Rich Parsons (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by akja _
> *Assuming someones rank is revoked and they were at an instructor level. What now? Are they a "legit" instructor or not? *




In that Art NOPE!

Can they go to a new town and Lie, YES!.

Will they still have their Certifiactes. Most likely.

Yet I could strap a BB on call my self Grand Poh Bah of "Tie this one one" or some other rank of this art, and if I really did have something to offer, I would and could teach it. People would listen.

Every Art had to start somewhere.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *In that Art NOPE!
> 
> Can they go to a new town and Lie, YES!.
> ...



Thats the part that I don't agree with. Blackballed from a system, OK, but if I pay you, what I receive day by day becomes mine to do as I choose fit.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Mar 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by akja _
> *Thats the part that I don't agree with. Blackballed from a system, OK, but if I pay you, what I receive day by day becomes mine to do as I choose fit. *




I agree, what you do day to day is fine, as long as what you do does not affect the organization. It should not cause the organization to loose money or loose face or reputation. IF so, the head of the organization should be able to kick you out. NAd say you have no rank.

The person kicked out, can then say I am in a differnt organization and still have the same rank.

I think we are closer than you may think
:asian:


----------



## D.Cobb (Mar 14, 2003)

Where I train, it's not just about the techniques.
Each belt or rank shows that you have progressed, not just in your martial arts knowledge, but also as a person......

When you reach black belt in our school, it means you have put in the time and more importantly effort. It also means you are a person of character. If you should do something to show that this is not the case, then you will either be demoted or asked to leave, depending on the severity of what you have done.

If any of us attend a grading and do not put in, we will be demoted on the day, and have to regain rank at the next grading.
This applies to everyone above yellow belt.

Also within the school, there are some of us that are expected to go that little bit further, for what ever reason. We are seen to be the next generation of instructors, and our Senseii asks a lot from us. However, it is not what he asks that is important, it is what we are prepared to give.

So if I am prepared to show commitment to my training, and to push myself to the point of collapse on grading days, and prepared to help anyone that needs it, and then get my black belt, because I have earned it, then after receiving it, I turn around and just train 1 day a week, and go to grading days but don't put in, and dont try to help anyone because I couldn't be bothered, then yes I should lose my rank.

True, my knowledge stays with me, but the rank means more than that. It testifies to my character.

--Dave

:asian:


----------



## sweeper (Mar 15, 2003)

I would say rank witin an organisation is revokable but your history should not be. deleting all records like you were never there is just wrong, if a student goes an asks if X instructortrainedin Y stystem and the answer from Y system is "no" when instructor X actualy did, it's a lfat out lie.

but my view on the matter is that rank in martial art is genneral only valid within a given organisation, and if an organisation desides that you should be kickicked out than in a sence your rank is void, however you still did have the rank at one time and you of course hae all the knowledge..  so I think if you achived X rank in Y style there is nothing wrong with saying you are X rank even if you have left Y style, unless the situation arises that you should not have recieved the rank in the first place (it comes out a year latter you bribed your instructor).


----------



## ace (Mar 15, 2003)

But i do not Agree with it.
If a person has earned something it's theres
Nothing can change the Fact that they once erned it.

Now a Day's i am seeing experation dates on Black Belt Certifacites as if it were spoiled Milk.

It seems to me that polotics continue to
creep into the Martial Arts World.

Now as for outcasting an individual Who may have discrased
The organization That he/she  may have been apart off.
Is something else. But i don't think That the rank they earned 
can be taken away other wise it never existed.

Just my Personal thoughts.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Mar 15, 2003)

Once a person recieves the rank it is theirs.  No matter what anyone says it can not be taken back.  You may say the person no longer is part of your organisation, or you no longer acknowledge the rank, but the fact remains they where awarded it .
 The only way is if a persons rank is probationary. If they screw up or don't get through the probationary period then they do nmot have the rank. They also where never given that rank and all the papers that go with it.


----------



## ace (Mar 15, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jeffkyle _
> *There seems to be alot of focus when dealing with  a "black belt".  What about other ranks?  A person with an orange belt worked as hard for that rank given the "time and expectations" as a black belt did.  Should a lower rank be demoted for something like being away for a while, and a black belt not be demoted for the same thing?  Are lower ranking people less insignificant than black belts?
> *




Absolutely Not The Belt Cover only 2 inches of the
A$$ The rest is up to U.

I know of a hand full of Lower Belts That
Would Give most Black Belts a Run for there Money.


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 15, 2003)

Paul, 

You are right and you can and will do things how you would like, we all can.  I don't have a problem with that.  I know exactly how you feel about it as I have been in that environment before.  I agree with most of it, but not all.  

But all of what you said doesnt' seem to answer my question.  It doesn't really matter though, I was just throwing it out there for piece of mind and discussion.   

I merely believe in fair treatment, if possible, to ALL human beings, considering the situation of course, regardless of rank.


----------



## Shinzu (Mar 15, 2003)

i don't feel that it can be revoked either.  the person has the knowledge...period.  i feel this way for colored belts too.  the reason why i say this is because i was there.  i quit and went back, quit and went back.  it took me some time to regain all the knowledge, but i felt that i earned the rank no matter what.  

different people will have different view, and different instructors will have different policies.  all i know is that i wouldn't take away what someone eared, no matter where they earned it.  but i would hold them there until they could prove to me that they deserved to be advanced (if needed).


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 15, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Rich Parsons _
> *I agree, what you do day to day is fine, as long as what you do does not affect the organization. It should not cause the organization to loose money or loose face or reputation. IF so, the head of the organization should be able to kick you out. NAd say you have no rank.
> 
> The person kicked out, can then say I am in a differnt organization and still have the same rank.
> ...



Yes I think we are. I left as a brown belt and because of my experience in Karate and the fact he I continued to train was able to start as a brown a couple of other Karate system. But I was not booted though. and my brown belt did not carry over to the arts that were to differant and I had to start oiver in Jun Fan Gung-Fu and Jujitsu.:asian:


----------



## Rob_Broad (Mar 15, 2003)

Rank may be revocable but the knowledge is not.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 15, 2003)

I also have noticed that I am not the only one here that thinks the way I do as far as my opinion and others opinions are not that far away either.


----------



## chufeng (Mar 15, 2003)

Generally speaking, NO...

But, there are certain circumstances where the Organization/Association will no longer recognize someone's rank.
This kind of blends with another topic in this forum, but, the renegade who turns his/her back on the founder to go his/her own way...I've seen it happen too many times.

The individual wants to teach (nothing wrong with that) but doesn't want to do what's required to become certified as a teacher (problems are beginning to build)...then the individual adds stuff, removes stuff, changes certain techniques or stances...and the system is no longer the same...perhaps the person is only a 1st or 2nd level senior and hasn't really learned the whole system (this is OK if they aren't planning on teaching) but...now that person opens a school on his own and calls it the same thing...(Go-o-ong!!!)...this is where the person has crossed the line...

Can we take back the stuff that was taught? NO
Can we legally force someone to change the name of what they are doing? Only if a Trademark has been established (which can happen over time without actually filing for Trademark status).
Can the Association no longer recognize rank? Yes

In our Association, we (the teachers) must renew our license to teach annually...this allows Sifu to weed out those who have taken a different track...Our Association allows some modifications within the forms on an individual basis, but they are always taught according to the standard established by the Association...

So, I guess my real answer is, "It depends."

:asian:
chufeng


----------



## muayThaiPerson (Mar 15, 2003)

The only reason to demote someone is if they came from a McDojo. Otherewise, you cant. Why? Because whatever you have been taught cant be taken away. Your rank is a representation of your skill, if u lower someones rank, their skills are still the same. Its like giving someone an academic F for being mean. Thats stupid


----------



## brianhunter (Mar 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by muayThaiPerson _
> *The only reason to demote someone is if they came from a McDojo. Otherewise, you cant. Why? Because whatever you have been taught cant be taken away. Your rank is a representation of your skill, if u lower someones rank, their skills are still the same. Its like giving someone an academic F for being mean. Thats stupid *



I agree with your post somewhat, but if a person was at a McDojo should they be punished for this? I know some colleges wont take classes you have recieved for transfer credit but that is because it isnt even offered on their campus sometimes.

Having said that if you have an associates most will accept you into their BA/BS programs with 2 years credit. Bottom line is I think most colleges wont nail you for being at a lower class of university.

That being said though I believe it should be across the board. If you are going to demote, issue it across the board not just color belts. You are promoting another double standard if you arent willing to do the same for your black belts. To be honest they should be held to a higher standard because your students are watching their every move and taking notes. i think it goes along the line of enfocing being on time, respect, etc. You should be uniform, you can still have fun behind closed doors


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 17, 2003)

Lets take the Wright Brothers and the invention of the Airplane.  They got that thing they created to fly, thus starting the process of improvement of their idea.  As time has gone on bigger and better planes have been created based of what has been learned since.

A while back I remember hearing about people trying to recreate the plane that the Wright Brothers built, which would seem like a simple thing to do in this day and age.  Well, apparently it wasn't as easy as it seems, because several engineers couldn't get the recreated Wright Brothers plane off of the ground.  They were actually baffled at how those guys accomplished such a feat.

So does that mean that we shouldn't be allowed to continue with airplanes and flight as we know it today, because those guys couldn't recreate something as basic as the first airplane with all of the knowledge of aerodymanics and such that we have today?
Should we stop everything and go back to the beginning until we are able to get the original airplane to fly?  I sure hope not....I am not riding on one of those things!  

Just another example for my thought.    :asian:


----------



## Cruentus (Mar 17, 2003)

jeffkyle: :erg: The Wright Brothers!?!?! And you made fun of my examples!:rofl:  I'm only kidding, it wasn't that bad. 

I do think it's pretty funny how we all try to reach for metaphors, only to fall short on certian aspects because belt ranking in martial arts is a really unique thing in and of itself.

I am still interested in the "history" behind belt ranking.....where it came from, what culture started it, how it was done in different systems and cultures, and the methods, rules, and standards that were impossed, etc. I think a little insight on the history behind belt ranking can help us decide how we should do things today. SInce no one has propossed any ideas on this thread regarding the history behind the belt ranking system, I will start a new thread! So keep an eye out..................


----------



## pesilat (Mar 17, 2003)

> _Originally posted by muayThaiPerson _
> *The only reason to demote someone is if they came from a McDojo. Otherewise, you cant. Why? Because whatever you have been taught cant be taken away. Your rank is a representation of your skill, if u lower someones rank, their skills are still the same. Its like giving someone an academic F for being mean. Thats stupid *



Rank isn't really a representation of skill, per se. It's an official recognition of achievement.

And that recognition can be revoked for pretty much any reason that the person/group who gave it decides. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. Sometimes it's revoked for good reasons (i.e.: the person is found to be dishonest or worse). Sometimes it's done for petty reasons (i.e.: a personal disagreement).

This is a poor analogy, but it's the best that's coming to my mind right now.

A father has a business. He names his eldest son as the heir to the family business (thus conferring a sort of "rank" on the son). Then the son proves to be a horrible manager, have no business sense, or the father is just petty after a disagreement. The father then decides to turn the business over to someone else (maybe another offspring, or maybe a trusted friend, or whatever). The father has thus revoked the "rank" he bestowed on his eldest son as heir to the family business. But, that doesn't mean that the son is no longer related to the father or that the son loses all knowledge of the family business. Just means that he's no longer recognized as the heir.

In an ideal world, rank would be an representation of skill. But this isn't an ideal world. If rank were really a representation of skill, then all the black belts (or equivalent) in the world would be competent martial artists and all the "10th Degree Grandmasters" would be incredible martial artists. As we all know, neither of these is true.

Mike


----------



## SRyuFighter (Mar 17, 2003)

I feel that rank is revokable if you have a reason for doing so. For example if you take away someon's rank because they break the dojo's or style's code severely ( and I mean severely) then I agree. However if you Revoke a rank because you don't like Jimmy then I don't think so. I guess what I am saying is that if someone doesn't know the material once they get under your instruction then you could revoke their rank, or if they do something really bad. Otherwise I don't think one should revoke rank.


----------



## DAC..florida (Mar 17, 2003)

I also agree that once youve earned your black belt its yours no matter what!


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by pesilat _
> *Rank isn't really a representation of skill, per se. It's an official recognition of achievement.
> 
> And that recognition can be revoked for pretty much any reason that the person/group who gave it decides. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. Sometimes it's revoked for good reasons (i.e.: the person is found to be dishonest or worse). Sometimes it's done for petty reasons (i.e.: a personal disagreement).
> ...



So how about your original analogy about college?  What if you get a degree in Math, but you end up working as a construction worker, or you forget all that you have learned, or you somehow even abuse the degree to rip people off?  Does that mean the college comes back and takes away your degree?  Just doin' a little stirrin'. :asian:


----------



## Kirk (Mar 18, 2003)

If someone's b.b. is revoked, then what rank are they now?


----------



## pesilat (Mar 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by jeffkyle _
> *So how about your original analogy about college?  What if you get a degree in Math, but you end up working as a construction worker, or you forget all that you have learned, or you somehow even abuse the degree to rip people off?  Does that mean the college comes back and takes away your degree?  Just doin' a little stirrin'. :asian: *



Well, that analogy kind of falls apart in some scenarios because, generally, a person with a college degree doesn't stay tied to the school. They go out and do their own thing and the school doesn't even know about it. In some professions, though, there are governmental things that can revoke "rank." Lawyers can be disbarred. Doctors can have their licence to practice revoked.

If the person does stay tied to the school (i.e.: becomes a teacher), then the school might still revoke the "rank" for various reasons. Even tenures can be revoked (though this usually involves a pretty hefty reason with a lot of paperwork and red tape to actually accomplish).

Also, the MA tend to be a bit more familial in structure than schools. So I think the family business analogy I used (while I'm still not sure I like its application here) has more bearing on this particular topic.

Mike


----------



## pesilat (Mar 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *If someone's b.b. is revoked, then what rank are they now? *



Depends on the person doing the revoking. They may be busted down to a lower rank. Or they may be completely stripped of rank and not recognized as a member of the school. I've seen both happen.

Mike


----------



## KanoLives (Mar 18, 2003)

I agree that once a Black Belt is earned then it cannot be taken away however any rank below I think is at the instructor's or master's discretion.


----------



## Rob_Broad (Mar 18, 2003)

Rank is nothing more than your position in the hierarchy of your style or system.  It is the knowledge that is important.

Many style's rank certificate state that the rank is revokable if the person does something dishonorable.  Just because someone has had their rank revoked regardless of what level it is does not mean the knowledge is gone as well.


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 18, 2003)

If you are in a large organization, RANK is everything.  If you don't have the rank, then you are nobody, b/c you haven't paid your due yet. Once you have the rank, then you have earned the right to prove your ware. 

If you are in "one-horse town" type of martial art school, where there are only a handful of you and no one else in the world give a rat *** about your art, then your rank is worthless.


----------



## jeffkyle (Mar 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *If you are in a large organization, RANK is everything.  If you don't have the rank, then you are nobody, b/c you haven't paid your due yet. Once you have the rank, then you have earned the right to prove your ware.
> 
> If you are in "one-horse town" type of martial art school, where there are only a handful of you and no one else in the world give a rat *** about your art, then your rank is worthless. *



Or how about if you are out on the street in a confrontation with the average joe.  Your rank doesn't mean anything either.  I am sure that average joe doesn't care...he just wants to kick your butt all over the street.
:asian:


----------



## Johnathan Napalm (Mar 18, 2003)

lol. That is true.


----------



## pesilat (Mar 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Johnathan Napalm _
> *If you are in a large organization, RANK is everything.  If you don't have the rank, then you are nobody, b/c you haven't paid your due yet. Once you have the rank, then you have earned the right to prove your ware. *



A) Rank is only "everything" if you allow it to be 

B) I can "prove my ware" anytime I'm working with someone. If they have a clue, they're going to realize that I have some skill/ability. If they want to get froggy, then I can "prove my ware" a little more painfully. Rank has nothing to do with the "right to prove my ware." 

Mike


----------



## D.Cobb (Mar 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kirk _
> *If someone's b.b. is revoked, then what rank are they now? *



Whatever rank, the head of their system decides to demote them to...

--Dave

:asian:


----------



## CHUNNER (Mar 19, 2003)

In my opinion Dan rank should only be revokable if the holder is convicted of a crime of violence like Rape or Murder.  In this case it would be appropriate to have them struck off and their grade revoked.

I do not think a period of inactivity or changing organisations is justification for reduction in grade.

I have actually seen this happen where a Shodan in wado ryu had to take two years off training because of a life threatening kidney disease.  He re-started training under a different governing body and was reduced in rank to 1st kyu.  I have always thought this was a disgrace.

I agree with what a previous poster said that the Dan is like a University degree, People work long and hard to obtain it and it means that at one point at least they have been achieved the high standards required to warrant that grade.


----------



## pesilat (Mar 19, 2003)

> _Originally posted by CHUNNER _
> *I do not think a period of inactivity or changing organisations is justification for reduction in grade.
> 
> I have actually seen this happen where a Shodan in wado ryu had to take two years off training because of a life threatening kidney disease.  He re-started training under a different governing body and was reduced in rank to 1st kyu.  I have always thought this was a disgrace.*



I've seen this thought (new organization) pop up a couple of times in this thread.

To me, this makes perfect sense. If I go train in a new organization (i.e.: at a different school), and the head of it doesn't think my skill/ability is up to par with their standards for my rank, then I would fully expect to be given the rank that they feel I perform at.

In the case you mention, I would disagree. I think some leeway should be granted for the extenuating circumstances. Someone who's been unable to train for a couple of years due to reasons beyond their control has to be expected to lose some sharpness/crispness. Personally, if I were in charge of the org. he transferred to, then I'd give him a grace period. I'd explain that, currently, he doesn't meet our requirements for 1st Dan. That normally, we'd re-rank him at 1st Kyu because that's where we think he is by our standards. But due to extenuating circumstances, we'll leave him at 1st Dan, but he has 6 months or a year to resharpen his material. Then we'd reevaluate.

Should his rank be acknowledged? Absolutely. But if he's joining the organization and his material isn't up to par for the organization's requirements, then I see no problem with a drop in rank. After all, if he joins the org. then he's going to be representing the org. If he's representing it as a BB but doesn't have the qualifications that they expect from their BBs then he won't be representing the org. well.

It wouldn't be a "demotion" of rank, really. Because if he'd been with the org. the whole time he'd either meet their standards and be a 1st Dan by now, or he'd still be a 1st Kyu.

But if someone is representing me when they visit other schools or events, then I want to make sure that the person's skill is up to snuff so I can rely on him to represent me (and my org.) well.

If, however, he's not _joining_ the org., then there shouldn't be an issue. His rank should be acknowledged and recognized, regardless of whether they think he really exhibits that level of skill/ability.

Mike


----------



## lucifersdad (Apr 22, 2003)

is rank removable?
i think that although once a dan grade always a dan grade the authority, responsibilty and benefits that come with being a senior grade are revokable.
so what if a govening body takes away a bit of cotton or silk, as my instructor told me when i was down-graded, "its not wot you wear round your waist, its what you wear in your heart."
i think that pretty much says it all.


----------



## Kope (Apr 22, 2003)

> _Originally posted by pesilat _
> Rank isn't really a representation of skill, per se. It's an official recognition of achievement.



I agree with this completely. Which is why it can not be revokable under any circumstances. An achievement is a matter of historical fact. The rank is nothing more than the acknowledgement of that fact.

Earning a rank merely means that on such-and-such a date someone met the criteria. That's a matter of historical record. We can't change history just 'cause we decided we didn't like a person or their actions.

Disassociate someone, fine. But you can't take rank away. Rank is not a thing that is possessed, it's an official recognition of achievement - that achievement doesn't magically not have happened just 'cuase.


----------



## gman (Apr 22, 2003)

Rank shouldn't be taken away. Rank is something that has been awarded based on study and practice. If you get a college degree and then do not work in the field of your study they don't take away your BS and give you an AA. If you return to your study than you should be expected to relearn any knowlede you have forgotten. But I think your position is the same none the less.


----------



## Rob_Broad (Apr 22, 2003)

Rank is your position in a hierarchy, people are promote and demoted all the time in the military.  Your rank is where you fit in the hierarchy of your style/art/system.  Your belt level is a different matter it can not be revoke because they can not take away your knowledge.


----------



## SRyuFighter (Apr 22, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Rob_Broad _
> *Rank is your position in a hierarchy, people are promote and demoted all the time in the military.  Your rank is where you fit in the hierarchy of your style/art/system.  Your belt level is a different matter it can not be revoke because they can not take away your knowledge. *



So what's the difference? At the place I train the Shodans are of higher rank than the lower belts. Greens are higher than whites, so on and so forth.


----------



## moromoro (Apr 24, 2003)

your GM could always revoke your rank in japan a certificate called HAMON was given to Hatsumi sensei from Ueno sensei revoking and cancelling his grandmastership titles he recieved from Ueno sensei


----------



## SRyuFighter (Apr 24, 2003)

> _Originally posted by moromoro _
> *your GM could always revoke your rank in japan a certificate called HAMON was given to Hatsumi sensei from Ueno sensei revoking and cancelling his grandmastership titles he recieved from Ueno sensei *



So he's not a Grandmaster? I'm just plain confused now.


----------



## bdparsons (Apr 24, 2003)

skill is not.

Respects,
Bill Parsons


----------



## moromoro (Apr 24, 2003)

> So he's not a Grandmaster? I'm just plain confused now.



yes he is ueno sensei rovoked his rank because hatsumi studied with TAKAMATSU SENSEI the 33rd Soke so in turn hatsumi became the succesor of takamatsu and not of ueno


----------



## SRyuFighter (Apr 25, 2003)

Oh ok thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## moromoro (Apr 25, 2003)

no problem


----------



## Shinzu (Apr 26, 2003)

unless the person totally disrespects their association, school, or system or causes harmfullness to others, i still stand by my opinion.  rank is not revokable.

it shouldn't matter how long you are away.  your rank is what it is.


----------



## moromoro (Apr 26, 2003)

sometimes instructors give out ranks

and the student thinks he is that level but the instructor knows he is not


----------



## Shinzu (Apr 29, 2003)

giving out rank for the wrong reason shames not only the instructors integrety, but also the association he is affiliated with.  i wish there was some way we could all avoid this but there are too many crooked people in the world.  sometimes it is left for the student to judge.  hopefully he will know the difference between offered and earned.


----------



## moromoro (Apr 29, 2003)

> sometimes it is left for the student to judge. hopefully he will know the difference between offered and earned.



i agree


----------



## loki09789 (Aug 24, 2004)

I haven't read through the other responses so this may be redundent.

Rank should stand because it is based on what you did.  But, I come from a Once a Marine, Always a Marine mentallity on 'rank.'

The distinction I would make would be on the revokable 'titles' that can be associated with authority or administrative positions.

"Senior Instructor"
"Forms Master"


Or other administrative or leadership titles that give the holder decision making/curriculum affecting powers.  If the person has acted outside of a clear code of conduct or not carried out the duties well then they should have the title taken away so that it can be given to someone else.

Rank is like retirement to me.  I left the military at rank X, therefore my rank stands.  Now, title and authority should/can be revoked...with good reason.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Aug 24, 2004)

Don't people lose rank in the military for screwing up?


----------



## Kenpodoc (Aug 24, 2004)

Once you have been awarded a Blackbelt you will always have the blackbelt.  That doesn't mean your any good, a blackbelt is just a piece of cloth unless you have the chops to back it up.

I have an MD. I will have an MD till the day I die.  A state can revoke my license to practice but the MD is permanent.  Just like a blackbelt, some MD's have the chops some don't,

Jeff


----------



## OC Kid (Aug 25, 2004)

I didnt read the entire thread so I dont know if this was mentioned.

A person can/should have their rank pulled by a system for conduct unbecoming, Foolin around with students, be arrested for drugs, selling drugs to students ect picking fights and or deliberately hurting people and other things.

Does that mean they lose the knowledge or skill..No.

 It does mean that their rank is no longer sanctioned by a governing body for obvious reasons.
 Which is why governing bodies have their place.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Aug 25, 2004)

OC Kid said:
			
		

> I didnt read the entire thread so I dont know if this was mentioned.
> 
> A person can/should have their rank pulled by a system for conduct unbecoming, Foolin around with students, be arrested for drugs, selling drugs to students ect picking fights and or deliberately hurting people and other things.
> 
> ...



Exactly the way it *SHOULD* go. In the Modern Arnis world GM Presas gave me the authority to do this very thing.
 :asian:


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 25, 2004)

Yes - however - what if the rank-holder succeeds in nothing  more than pissing SGM off?  Absolute power corrupts absolutely, yes?

 This is where I hesitate in saying rank is revocable.  If you have reason enough to question the MO or character of a candidate, can't one delay the test/promotion?  Then again, we all change.

 This is so variable.


----------



## OC Kid (Aug 25, 2004)

That is why most governing bodies have a governing board. So one egomaniac cannot revoke someones rank because he accidently dented his car in the parking lot.

But FWIW, I did leave a org because of a social promotion(I think he dont deserve the rank or title)  of a guy to master. I dont think this guy deserves it for a number of reasons,

1) He is a idiot makes stupid decisions based on emotion.
2) He has lost all the B/B in his linage because of his nonsense. They quit because of his nonsense. But before they quit they asked the old Shihon now Soke to be placed under another Sensei for test purposes which he refused. They quit and then this guy gets promoted to Shihon in charge of the entire system.
3) He is a egomaniac and has lied to me more than once and others in that org are seeing him for what he is and are ready to leave as well. Its gonna be a blood bath there soon unless something is done by Soke or the Association Board.

Anyway enough crying about that but there should be some oversight to keep emotion out of the decisions.


----------



## TigerWoman (Aug 25, 2004)

I think that the colored belt ranks can have their rank revoked. They are beginning students. But I do think that this has to be serious wakeup call.  Something like not showing respect, calling someone a name; self-control, being in a fight that could have been walked away from. Rank can be suspended until the student changes. Other less serious infractions: penalties, like writing papers, reciting in front of class, like a paper on humility after being heard boasting in class.

Black belt rank can't be revoked. It shouldn't be given unless it is earned and the person is worthy of trust.  Now, if he breaks that trust as in a major break, like cheating, putting a low belt in charge and someone gets hurt, he would be subject to sanctions, not teaching or judging at tournaments, testings. If the black belt misuses his knowledge to hurt someone wrongly, then it is up to the legal system to prosecute him. Then be sanctioned as a teacher, etc.  But he keeps his black belt, IMO.  TW


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 25, 2004)

Good points, TW.  There is a finality of the black rank, isn't there?  Kind of like reaching 18 years of age.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Aug 25, 2004)

> A person can/should have their rank pulled by a system for conduct unbecoming, Foolin around with students, be arrested for drugs, selling drugs to students ect picking fights and or deliberately hurting people and other things.
> 
> Does that mean they lose the knowledge or skill..No.
> 
> ...


 
I agree, also if  a person is a screw up or gets convicted of a felony or disrespects his training and the system  by lieing, misrepresenting his rank or his background (titles in other organisations included)he should be kicked out and that rank no longer reconised


----------



## TigerWoman (Aug 25, 2004)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> I agree, also if  a person is a screw up or gets convicted of a felony or disrespects his training and the system  by lieing, misrepresenting his rank or his background (titles in other organisations included)he should be kicked out and that rank no longer reconised



That is probably what SHOULD happen, but would it?  That person would probably go get a black belt whatever Dan he is and set up school anyway. He is still a black belt with the knowledge of the martial art.  So what if it isn't recognized, he could still show his certificates of dan rank and could possibly not even give the black belt back. The public usually doesn't check that he is still affiliated with his parent organization. He might have slow going getting started but everybody starting a school starts slow. I'm playing devil's advocate here.  TW


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Aug 26, 2004)

Rank is an endorsement by an instructor or an organization. If they choose to take back their endorsement for any reason that is their right and privilege. This doesnt take away from their accomplishments, just what their current status is. A pilot has to log a certain amount of flight hours in a year for their license to be valid, if they dont they lose it. Does this mean they dont have the knowledge or they didnt meet the requirements to keep their status active?

 :asian:


----------



## TigerWoman (Aug 26, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Rank is an endorsement by an instructor or an organization. If they choose to take back their endorsement for any reason that is their right and privilege. This doesnt take away from their accomplishments, just what their current status is. A pilot has to log a certain amount of flight hours in a year for their license to be valid, if they dont they lose it. Does this mean they dont have the knowledge or they didnt meet the requirements to keep their status active?
> 
> :asian:



Well, I do have an instructor who held* a personal reason (his-not related to TKD) reason to not promote me.  And master instructors can also make human mistakes of judgement. No, i again state, I do not think once they have decided to give it, can they unilaterally just take it away -- at least not without a hearing and a panel of other black belts.

Also, what happens to an aging black belt, me for instance. I am nearly 55. I am finding it harder and harder to keep up and don't feel I should jump because of health reasons. However I still want to practice TKD.  So should I get my black belt stripped because I can't jump like everyone else?  A pilot is risking other's lives. An aging black belt is quite different, it is only his/her life.  TW  
*in possible change


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Aug 26, 2004)

TigerWoman said:
			
		

> Also, what happens to an aging black belt, me for instance. I am nearly 55. I am finding it harder and harder to keep up and don't feel I should jump because of health reasons. However I still want to practice TKD.  So should I get my black belt stripped because I can't jump like everyone else?




No. The title of this thread is Is Rank Revocable? not In what cases could rank be revoked? I have never stripped anyone of their rank even though I was given the authority to do so. The reason why I was given this power by the GM is that one of the local instructors was being an A** and needed to go. I would NEVER consider stripping someones rank due to physical issues or getting old.

 :asian:


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 26, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> No. The title of this thread is Is Rank Revocable? not In what cases could rank be revoked? I have never stripped anyone of their rank even though I was given the authority to do so. The reason why I was given this power by the GM is that one of the local instructors was being an A** and needed to go. I would NEVER consider stripping someones rank due to physical issues or getting old.
> 
> :asian:



Very well put.  Yes there probably is reason why a rank should be revoked for things like molesting a student, murder, or doing a great diservice to the organization, but it is very rare and it should be very very rare.  There are some instructors who with a click of the mouse think they have the right to remove a students rank if it suits them.  But at what cost to the art, and the organization.


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 26, 2004)

Rob Broad said:
			
		

> Very well put. Yes there probably is reason why a rank should be revoked for things like molesting a student, murder, or doing a great diservice to the organization, ....


 ...or domestic violence??


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 27, 2004)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> ...or domestic violence??



an instructor doesn't need to have their rank revoked for domestic violence.  They need to be hung by their belt, and then cremate the body using their certificates to help get the fire going.


----------



## Brother John (Aug 27, 2004)

It depends on what "Rank" and "Revokable" mean to you.
I think that if you truly earn your rank, you don't need to 'wear' the rank for it to be real. Conversely...if you didn't earn it, but were "given" it anyway...wearing it doesn't make it real either.

There are political squables all the time and so-N-so's rank is "No longer recognized"...w/in certain circles.
The question remains, do you NEED it to be recognized?

Things to think about.
Still: rank shouldn't play nearly the central roll it does in most martial arts circles.

Your Brother
John


----------



## loki09789 (Aug 27, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Don't people lose rank in the military for screwing up?


Yes they can loose rank. The reason it works there is that rank and authority are one in the same. An NCO's or Officer's rank is directly related to their authority through leadership training and demonstrated technical and tactical skill. The point I was making with the "Once a Marine..." comment was that once you have 'made it', you have made it (in a skill sense). No one can take that aquisition of skill away from you because you have internalized it. If you leave for a while and came back to my program, you might have to take a 'probationary' or 'train up' period to get back to that performance level again, but I wouldn't strip or take away rank from someone who earned it.

The authority track in MA organizations of 'titles' is a different thing to me. 

Most MA programs don't have leadership training directly tied to their rank strucuture (meaning a directly instructed thing just like martial arts technical and tactical skill NOT just 'expectations of conduct and behavior' that are usually implied or assumed).

I made the distinction between the 'rank' which is generally excepted to be a demonstration of a certain level of ability and understanding and the 'title' which is a separate thing from 'rank' because it deals with administrative or organizational authority. There might be 'rank' requirements as part of 'title' requirements, but 'title' usually requires other skills to be either trained or demonstrated as well as 'rank' skill in order to be worthy of it.

Not all "XYZth degree BB's" are "Grandmaster" Materiel but it makes sense that you would probably need to have the skill of an "XYZth degree BB's" level of ability and understanding of a system in order to really be able to make solid leadership/Academic or administrative decisions that affect an entire group/system.

Paul.


----------



## loki09789 (Aug 27, 2004)

Brother John said:
			
		

> It depends on what "Rank" and "Revokable" mean to you.
> I think that if you truly earn your rank, you don't need to 'wear' the rank for it to be real. Conversely...if you didn't earn it, but were "given" it anyway...wearing it doesn't make it real either.
> 
> There are political squables all the time and so-N-so's rank is "No longer recognized"...w/in certain circles.
> ...


Amen Brother,

I think that the misconception that martial arts rank means 'authority' and not 'skill aquisition' is the problem in these issues.

Is a martial arts school a military institution or a skill institutions? Is it a family that "strips" people of their family standing instead of resolving/supporting their Brother/Sister?  There seems to be some mixed ideas about what a system/school is or is not suppose to be.

What 'model' of organization/institution is your school/system based on?  If you can answer that question clearly for yourself, the issue of 'revoking rank' should be a clear one as well.

Unless a school actually has a 'job description' with duties, responsibilities AS WELL AS skill requirements for each rank AND takes the time to directly instruct those skills like they do kicking and punching and forms, there is no real 'authority' in the use of "rank" only a recognition of skill and ability.

OJ Simpson is accused/cleared of murder.  There were discussions in Buffalo about taking his name off of the Stadium because of that.  WHy?  One has nothing to do with the other IMO.  His athletic  performance is legendary and can not be 'stripped' because of something he did off the field.

What can be done is that the institution 'denounces' or 'expresses their criticism/disappointement' and, at the same time, no longer refers to OJ as a great 'hero' of football, but only a great 'athletic example' on the field.

Heck, I am by no means a fan of Hitler as a human being BUT I can respect his public speaking ability, his affectiveness as a leader (at least early on) based on his successes (though NOT by his methods).  I am not for pidgeon holing people into categories (happens too much in education IMO) BUT I do think that some objective, rationale consideration and separation needs to be applied when looking at these revokation of rank/stripping of titles situations.

Can you 'strip' your father/son of his role in your life?  No, but you can either separate them or yourself from the relationship.  There is a difference between "I have no father/son" and "We don't talk anymore."

One denies the impact of the interaction (and ignores ANY positive impacts that may have happend because you are rejecting the whole person) and the second focuses on the status of the relationship.


----------



## Pale Rider (Aug 27, 2004)

I agree 100% with the first post made by Tulisan  Paul Janulis.  That situation hit me over a year ago with my prior instructor who told me that he was revoking my rank.  I said the same thing!  How can you revoke the rank in which I EARNED! How can you take away from me the knowledge in which I spent 4 years obtaining?  Even tho he won't recognize my rank and clearly states to those who he wants to talk to and persuade - he clearly can not take away from me something that I spent blood, sweat, and tears learning.  Since that time I have gone to someone who not only recognized my rank, but has since then promoted me.


----------



## Kenpodoc (Aug 27, 2004)

Pale Rider said:
			
		

> I agree 100% with the first post made by Tulisan  Paul Janulis.  That situation hit me over a year ago with my prior instructor who told me that he was revoking my rank.  I said the same thing!  How can you revoke the rank in which I EARNED! How can you take away from me the knowledge in which I spent 4 years obtaining?  Even tho he won't recognize my rank and clearly states to those who he wants to talk to and persuade - he clearly can not take away from me something that I spent blood, sweat, and tears learning.  Since that time I have gone to someone who not only recognized my rank, but has since then promoted me.


Agreed. You can revoke a teaching certificate but not the degree earned in aquiring that certificate.  The military can revoke rank because that rank denotes chain of command and not skills earned.

Jeff


----------



## MichiganTKD (Aug 27, 2004)

I don't know how it works for other arts or organization, but this is how it works within the Kukkiwon:

If it can be proven that your Dan rank was obtained fraudulantly, then your rank can definitely be revoked. 
For example, you claim Grandmaster X as your Instructor and submit a testing application to the Kukkiwon signed by him recommending you as worthy to test for 3rd Dan. It is later discovered that not only has Grandmaster X never heard of you, but you forged his signature for the application. Not only would your 3rd Dan be revoked, you would most likely be cut from whatever organization you belong to. Your Instructor would likely be cut as well, since he is responsible for you.
Example 2: Your Instructor claims you tested for 2nd Dan 5 years ago, making you elible to test for 3rd Dan. However, Kukkiwon records show you actually tested for 2nd Dan two years ago, rendering you ineligible due to the time rule. Your Dan rank would then be revoked.
However, rank cannot be revoked for behavior. In cases of disloyalty or criminal offenses, you can be cut from the organization or lose testing privileges. You will, however, retain your rank. If you are a pedophile or rapist, you retain your rank but probably never test again.

This is one reason for governing organization: establishing accepted standards so that 5 different Instructors aren't doing things five different ways.


----------



## TigerWoman (Aug 27, 2004)

MichiganTKD said:
			
		

> This is one reason for governing organization: establishing accepted standards so that 5 different Instructors aren't doing things five different ways.



Good point.  I keep reading the "teaching" thread about different instructors teaching different ways.  Makes it terribly confusing to a beginner in their art.  One way until they become black, then learn all the variations. At least they have a basis.  Same way with 5 different instructors that live in 5 different cities and have schools. They send their students to the master to test but need to be all on the same page. (or backroom arguments shall commence)  TW


----------



## Rich Parsons (Aug 28, 2004)

Like I said before, you cannot take away the skill or knowledge, you can take away the rank.

The military has retired, Honorable, Medical, Other than Honorable, and Dishonorable. You can loose your rank and benefits, yet the knowledge they taught you is still there. Does this prohibit you from going to someone elses's army? No way. The same holds true, you can go to another Martial Art. It is a little bit harder to have your own army, even though you can open your own school.

On the opening your own school, you can do this today with out rank or certs or just print your own up and hang em up on the wall.

In the end those who train with you may learn what you know and do not know. Yet, you may still not be a recognized member or hold/have rank in an art.

Best regards


----------



## SenseiBear (Aug 29, 2004)

For my 2 cents (and as an aside...  didn't there used to be a symbol for "cents" on typewriter keys...  what happened to it?)

Rank is not revokable.  We have codified that concept in our school.  Certificates read (in part) "you have demonstrated mastery of the requirements for promotion to the rank of ________.....  you are hereby promoted to the permanent rank of ________, and are honor bound to uphold and perpetuate the traditions....."

The certificates read the same for yellow belt or Master.  You have demonstrated mastery of that level of technique before a panel of blackbelts (or masters, depending on the level), and rank and a certificate has been issued in recognition of your mastery over that set of skills, techniques, etc.  If after 10 years of not training you lose your skill set, that is to your shame for not living up to your rank, not our shame for bestowing it upon you.

SB


----------



## tshadowchaser (Aug 29, 2004)

> are honor bound to uphold and perpetuate the traditions


and what about the ones who dishonor the traditions or make a mockery of them?


----------



## SenseiBear (Aug 30, 2004)

Well again, that is their disgrace.  We (as a group of students and instructors) can refuse to associate with that person.  They can be prevented from promoting further...  If they were my student, I would likely feel embarassed that I promoted them - but I cannot be responsible for anothers actions. 

If I give a few bucks to a beggar, that is for my karma - if they buy booze or drugs with it, that is their karma to deal with, not my responsibility.

I can control who I associate with, and who I endorse - but as rank is given in recognition of a certain skill set, I can no more revoke it than I can their skills.  (philosophy and personal development are an integral part of our system, and a persons philosophical understanding and beliefs are tested prior to the physical test - again, we hope to weed out the "bad guys")


----------



## Shurikan (Aug 31, 2004)

We train our students to believe that the belt only represents there knowledge and ability in the Arts. I know as an instructor i can take away the belt, but i can not take away what it took to get that belt, it can only be lost by the student who lets it get lost.


----------



## Tgace (Aug 31, 2004)

What does revoking rank really achieve? You arent able to brainwash the physical shill out of somebody, and you dont need a belt (or even skill) to open a school. In the military, when rank is revoked, you are no longer allowed to work in the position that rank afforded. Unlike in MA.


----------



## Flatlander (Aug 31, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> What does revoking rank really achieve? You arent able to brainwash the physical shill out of somebody, and you dont need a belt (or even skill) to open a school. In the military, when rank is revoked, you are no longer allowed to work in the position that rank afforded. Unlike in MA.


While this is true, opening a school without being able to use well recognized affiliations would somewhat reduce the credibility of the instructor, wouldn't it?  I mean, the revocation doesn't necessarily need to be a public thing (humiliation) in order to take something away.  The whole point of having affiliations with other larger groups would be for the added credibility and exposure that can bring someone ($), so I can see a revocation of that being detrimental to one's success ($).  Perhaps not an impasse, but a speed bump.


----------



## Tgace (Aug 31, 2004)

That may be true if you have aspirations to MA notoriety, but Ive yet to see any streetcorner dojo where students even asked to verify anybodies credentials. But yeah, the politics of the thing will bite you if you try to climb the ladder.


----------



## Kenpodoc (Aug 31, 2004)

I think that this discussion is in general about the exception and not the rule.  There are truly bad people who get Black Belts and teaching certificates.  Most squabbles are about personal problems and personal disagreements and respect and not about truly dangerous people.  I think this line of questioning mostly points out that Instructors should be careful about who they promote because if that person goes "wrong" they can never completely erase them from their lineage.

Jeff


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Aug 31, 2004)

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> I think that this discussion is in general about the exception and not the rule.  There are truly bad people who get Black Belts and teaching certificates.  Most squabbles are about personal problems and personal disagreements and respect and not about truly dangerous people.  I think this line of questioning mostly points out that Instructors should be careful about who they promote because if that person goes "wrong" they can never completely erase them from their lineage.



Agreed. Why don't we look at an example that might be appropriate to revoke a persons rank or status.


http://martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2224&highlight=Dino

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/1494272/detail.html

You be the judge. :asian:


----------



## Rob Broad (Aug 31, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Agreed. Why don't we look at an example that might be appropriate to revoke a persons rank or status.
> 
> 
> http://martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2224&highlight=Dino
> ...




The second story form the news site seems real familiar.  Kind of reminds me of a Guy in London ON area, that did teh exacts same things.  Both guys should be stripped of all rank, and removed from society permenently.


----------



## Tgace (Aug 31, 2004)

Strip away...nothing stopping them from teaching though. Unless a court orders it.


----------



## loki09789 (Aug 31, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Agreed. Why don't we look at an example that might be appropriate to revoke a persons rank or status.
> 
> 
> http://martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2224&highlight=Dino
> ...


Unless you have a clear code of conduct/oath of some kind that either clearly states or reasonably implies that there are character/priniciples that are to be maintained, you can not logically revoke rank, even for something like these cases.

Reasonably, if these are instances in your school, you can kick the person out an basically cut off that person from any hope of advancement.  

And, as I have said before, any titles/jobs that have authority/decision making powers can be revoked.

If a teacher is caught in a statutory violation with a student, they don't loose their 'rank' as in degrees that represent the knowledge/skill they attained.  They DO loose their license to do legal business as a professional.  They do loose the institutionally given authority which would give them access to students or opportunity to do more harm.

I can understand the emotional outcry to distance yourself from someone who is guilty of something like this and to demonstrate in a public way your disapproval, but reasonably speaking rank in martial arts is skill and can not be removed.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 2, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Unless you have a clear code of conduct/oath of some kind that either clearly states or reasonably implies that there are character/priniciples that are to be maintained, you can not logically revoke rank, even for something like these cases.



Many orgs do have codes of conduct that DO address unethical behavior. Mine happens to be one of them. I believe that you are innocent until proven guilty, but if found guilty actions will be taken. Ultimately you cant take knowledge away from somebody, but you can pull all endorsement that you or your org has given. 

Paul - Ask your teacher what two people that GM Presas revoked their rank in Buffalo.


Respectfully, :asian:


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 2, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Paul - Ask your teacher what two people that GM Presas revoked their rank in Buffalo.
> 
> 
> Respectfully, :asian:


Already know about them and have even read the letter that started the process on one of them and understand the underlying interaction/personallity issues that were in part the motivation for that one.  I would say that, as in all cases, there are more than one perspective on these as well.

It is too late to be cryptic now Tim, in the archives of past posting, you have told your version of stories about these attempted revokations in far more detail.  Especially the one involving Jerome.  Alluding to, airing or retelling these incidents here (especially after your refusal to accept or set up phone contact, email/pm communication about anything like this stuff) is in poor taste and puts Modern Arnis as a system/family/RP in a bad light that is unnecessary IMO.  

I will not entertaining such discussions here any further because I do believe that we are moving into the are again of talking about someone (ie Jerome) instead of too them.  If you would be willing to set up a phone chat time or accept PM's emails on things like this now, after refusing to do so in the past, to discuss these types of things in private instead of here, that would be better.

In the wise and wonderful words of Forrest Gump:  "And that's all I have to say about That"


----------



## Patrick Skerry (Sep 2, 2004)

Yes, rank is revokable.  But don't forget, the martial arts are not the military.  In the military, if you lose a stripe, you also lose pay, prestige, and privledges.

In the martial arts, you lose your belt within your organization, and that's it.  They can't remove your years of knowledge.

In the martial arts you can have your rank revoked simply over a petty disagreement with your instructor, or a dispute with the organization's policy.  And so what!

That is how so many different schools get started, when senior students have a falling out with their sensei's or sifu's - they start their own school, and start their own ranking system.

Look at all the petty little girly man arguments and dojo politics within styles of ju-jitsu, karate, and kung fu.  And soon to happen in judo over sports/martial arts affiliation.

I am very loyal to judo, whether I lose my rank or not, and intend to practice it for the rest of my life, even if I have to start my own judo dojo and my own ranking system, rather than practice judo as a sport!

So rank is revokable in the martial arts, but the question is - so what?


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 2, 2004)

Patrick Skerry said:
			
		

> So rank is revokable in the martial arts, but the question is - so what?


Thank you!  Though I don't agree with the idea of rank being revokable the idea that "so what" because they can't take the skill or knowledge is where we agree.  To me ALL martial arts rank is based on skill/knowledge predominately so IMO it is not revokable BUT ultimately because you retain the skill/knowledge "So what"

love it.


----------



## dubljay (Sep 2, 2004)

Yes I feel that rank is revokable in certain situations.  For example: if a student recieves a higher rank, and neglects the basics that came before and his/her performace deterorates considerably and refuses to correct the situation I believe that their rank should be reduced at least temporarly.  Or if a student uses their skills in an unacceptable manner then clearly the student has missed basic ethical concepts of lower ranks.  That is provided the student isn't removed from the school.

 As for myself I reached 3rd brown in EPAK, but not having worked out in over 3 months my blue and green belt techniques are in bad shape.  I will not wear my brown belt until I feel, or an instructor feels that I am ready to proceed with new material. However I am slowly starting regular workouts to pollish all my basics.  But thats just me.

 -Josh


----------



## Patrick Skerry (Sep 2, 2004)

dubljay said:
			
		

> Yes I feel that rank is revokable in certain situations. For example: if a student recieves a higher rank, and neglects the basics that came before and his/her performace deterorates considerably and refuses to correct the situation I believe that their rank should be reduced at least temporarly. Or if a student uses their skills in an unacceptable manner then clearly the student has missed basic ethical concepts of lower ranks. That is provided the student isn't removed from the school.
> 
> As for myself I reached 3rd brown in EPAK, but not having worked out in over 3 months my blue and green belt techniques are in bad shape. I will not wear my brown belt until I feel, or an instructor feels that I am ready to proceed with new material. However I am slowly starting regular workouts to pollish all my basics. But thats just me.
> 
> -Josh


Hi Josh,

I think that 'revokable' and 'reducable' are two different things.  I have seen rank reductions all the time.  Mostly when a new student with a high rank in the same style, but from a different instructor, clearly cannot keep up with students of equal rank in his new school.  So a rank reduction is in order.

For example:  A student who earned a black belt from a franchise school in style X, decides to enroll in a formal school teaching style X.  When he gets evaluated and cannot even begin to compare with the other blackbelts of the same level, then he will be reduced in rank (but not have his rank revoked).

Revoking a rank is an extreme action.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 2, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Especially the one involving Jerome.  Alluding to, airing or retelling these incidents here (especially after your refusal to accept or set up phone contact, email/pm communication about anything like this stuff) is in poor taste and puts Modern Arnis as a system/family/RP in a bad light that is unnecessary IMO.



Why do you turn everything into attacking you and camp Barber? There were two people (not Jerome) that had there ranks revoked while Jerome was still with Remy. You can ask him whom I'm refering to.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 2, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Why do you turn everything into attacking you and camp Barber? There were two people (not Jerome) that had there ranks revoked while Jerome was still with Remy. You can ask him whom I'm refering to.


Quite honestly I don't care about that stuff in MA history because I know where I stand on the issue of rank revokation.  I don't agree with your view, end of story.  As far as the rest of the 'history lesson,' you have mentioned this revoking of rank issue in the past in direct reference to Jerome (thus the basis for my 'attack' interpretation).  I know of at least one other.  If there are more, first of all it is in poor taste to 'name names' - even in an implication manner (keeping family issues in the family again) here if it is Jerome you are referring to or anyone else IMO and secondly, RP did not have a clear 'code of conduct' that outlined the parameters for discipline or rank pulling.  He was a strong artist/fighter, but not great at administrative/leadership as we have discussed in the past.  There were times, as has been mentioned in general here, when rank revokations were more about 'insult' perceptions than actual wrong doings - as can happen in any organization with flawed, imperfect human beings in it as we all are.  But that is internal and we can talk about that privately if you like.

You could have just sent it in PM or email as I requested and the Admin's/Mods have requested as well.  If you want me to discuss this stuff with you so you can tell me what you want me to know yourself, then do so via PM/Email or an agreed phone call time.  I would be happy to discuss the topic further but don't want to hijack this thread.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 2, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Quite honestly I don't care about that stuff in MA history because I know where I stand on the issue of rank revokation.  I don't agree with your view, end of story.  As far as the rest of the 'history lesson,' you have mentioned this revoking of rank issue in the past in direct reference to Jerome (thus the basis for my 'attack' interpretation).  I know of at least one other.  If there are more, first of all it is in poor taste to 'name names' - even in an implication manner (keeping family issues in the family again) here if it is Jerome you are referring to or anyone else IMO and secondly, RP did not have a clear 'code of conduct' that outlined the parameters for discipline or rank pulling.  He was a strong artist/fighter, but not great at administrative/leadership as we have discussed in the past.  There were times, as has been mentioned in general here, when rank revokations were more about 'insult' perceptions than actual wrong doings - as can happen in any organization with flawed, imperfect human beings in it as we all are.  But that is internal and we can talk about that privately if you like.
> 
> You could have just sent it in PM or email as I requested and the Admin's/Mods have requested as well.  If you want me to discuss this stuff with you so you can tell me what you want me to know yourself, then do so via PM/Email or an agreed phone call time.  I would be happy to discuss the topic further but don't want to hijack this thread.




I will post some excerpts from what I believe you can find in the "Practical Art of Escrima" Book that does mention Character, Discipline, Etiquette, Respect, ..., . After I get home later tonight (* Maybe 11:00 PM or so, I will quote it. *) 

Yet, Rank and revoking is generic across the arts, not just to Modern Arnis. Hence maybe the location of this thread in the general forum?

******* For everyone on this Thread *************
And remember you can disagree, you just do not have to reply to every single person who does disagree with you and try to prove them wrong. And if you must reply to everyone, then follow the rules and do not bait nor insult and remain friendly. and on topic.

Thank you


----------



## Tgace (Sep 2, 2004)

I think we need to clarify the question. "Is rank revocable" in the sense of, can an instructor say "I take away your blackbelt"? (administrative) Or in the sense of once the rank is revoked, something is supposed to prevent the person from teaching/learning somewhere else? Or some other sort "punitive" effect.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 2, 2004)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> I will post some excerpts from what I believe you can find in the "Practical Art of Escrima" Book that does mention Character, Discipline, Etiquette, Respect, ..., . After I get home later tonight (* Maybe 11:00 PM or so, I will quote it. *)
> 
> Yet, Rank and revoking is generic across the arts, not just to Modern Arnis. Hence maybe the location of this thread in the general forum?
> 
> ...


Mentioning it in a text and actually making it a requirement of your rank promotable folks.  Having a written, spoken and practiced code of conduct is what I am referring to here.  Many arts promote good, responsible behavior, but RP and MA system wide NEVER required standards of conduct as part of the rank promotion process.  This is a business of contractual agreements.  If someone kicks a client/student out/revokes rank based on some assumption, ambiguous standard that isn't clearly communicated and (in this age of sue happy people) recorded/documented somewhere you are running the risk of a civil case.  Stupid? Yes.  Smart, accurate and clear business/educational practices?  Hell yes.  Look at the reems of paper that go to printing out all the regs and policies that outline who business AND learning institutions operate.  I think it is ridiculous but you could be successfully sued by someone if you kick them out/revoke rank and don't have your ducks in a row.

As I said before, IMO rank is primarily skill based promotion.  THere are schools/instructors who may be practicing such administrative procedures, but it is not, nor has it ever been a rank requirement.

Again, my point is not that it isn't being done just that I don't think that a rank earned because of work and skill can truly be 'revoked' because it represents that skill and ability earned through demonstrated performance.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 2, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Mentioning it in a text and actually making it a requirement of your rank promotable folks.  Having a written, spoken and practiced code of conduct is what I am referring to here.  Many arts promote good, responsible behavior, but RP and MA system wide NEVER required standards of conduct as part of the rank promotion process.  This is a business of contractual agreements.  If someone kicks a client/student out/revokes rank based on some assumption, ambiguous standard that isn't clearly communicated and (in this age of sue happy people) recorded/documented somewhere you are running the risk of a civil case.  Stupid? Yes.  Smart, accurate and clear business/educational practices?  Hell yes.  Look at the reems of paper that go to printing out all the regs and policies that outline who business AND learning institutions operate.  I think it is ridiculous but you could be successfully sued by someone if you kick them out/revoke rank and don't have your ducks in a row.
> 
> As I said before, IMO rank is primarily skill based promotion.  THere are schools/instructors who may be practicing such administrative procedures, but it is not, nor has it ever been a rank requirement.
> 
> Again, my point is not that it isn't being done just that I don't think that a rank earned because of work and skill can truly be 'revoked' because it represents that skill and ability earned through demonstrated performance.



Paul, that may be so. Yet, there were standards required of those I trained with, learned from, and taught. Maybe it was just one fo those lessons that Americans were too busy trying to learn the next new technique, and not listening. I do not know. Yet, I say I was there. Maybe not in other areas, as I was not in the know for many other areas, I will nto say yes or no. I will just take your point, and hope that our small little area was not the only one.

:asian:


----------



## bignick (Sep 3, 2004)

he who giveth can taketh away...

seriously though, i do believe rank is revokable within your own school, in WTF taekwondo at least, all ranks below black belt are regulated only by the master instructor...anyone who is 4th dan or higher can issue certification up 1st gup...after that certification comes from the kukkiwon itself or it's office in colorado...obviously, there should be an acceptable reason for revocation of rank, but i don't see anything legally stopping them...after you reach black belt...i'm not sure what you can do since the certification is issued from the kukkiwon and not your instructor

i'd like restate the point that revoking rank doesn't take away what you've learned...and i've never seen it done...my thoughts above were merely a "can it be done"...not whether it should be done...that's something i'm not informed enough to comment on...


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 3, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> I think we need to clarify the question. "Is rank revocable" in the sense of, can an instructor say "I take away your blackbelt"? (administrative) Or in the sense of once the rank is revoked, something is supposed to prevent the person from teaching/learning somewhere else? Or some other sort "punitive" effect.




Tom,

Yes Semantics as it seems to turn out with many a discussion.

If you are a Marine and kill someone on the streets you can go to jail (* Military *), and be stripped of rank and when time served, dishonarable discharged. You have no Rank in the Military. You have no right to claim Retired either, even if you were an officer. Yet, you still have all skills taught you, assuming you learned them in the first place and you also kept them active. If a Doctor looses his license, he cannot legally practice, yet many do. If  alwyer does not pas the BAR test for his state, then they cannot practice certain law. And these can be revoked, yet their education is still there.

The issue with Martial Arts is that when you get your black belt or equivalent, you have knowledge (* assuming quality school and willing student *), and the capability of teaching and can go teach. Now, some are going to say the Martial Arts community should have some form of education system or certificate for teaching. Well NY tried to consider such a bill, to address a guy who had taken advantage of children. I do not think it passed, yet their approach was that if teh person had a state license, then the abuse would not have happened. Luckily, I believe, logic won out, and realized that these predators would have preyed on children no matter where they were. Yet the bill called for a board of Masters to review those who wished to teach. You have to be 3rd degree to open and own your own school. I know I wrote and called asking about the arts that do not have 3rd degree, or would every art have a master available on he board? or would it be by country? How would you protect from politics between arts? i.e. the ITF TKD schools have a Master and the WTF and ATA do not, so then who gets to open schools? Only the ITF. I have not seen any proposed legislation that even begins to address the issue.

Which goes back to my comments above, I hope others got the message, and not just a select few.

:asian:


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 3, 2004)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> Tom,
> 
> 
> Well NY tried to consider such a bill, to address a guy who had taken advantage of children. I do not think it passed, yet their approach was that if teh person had a state license, then the abuse would not have happened. Luckily, I believe, logic won out, and realized that these predators would have preyed on children no matter where they were. Yet the bill called for a board of Masters to review those who wished to teach. You have to be 3rd degree to open and own your own school.
> ...


I don't think that rational people (yes, I am referring to politicians/policy makers here ) were/are necessarily following the logic that a licensing process would eliminate abuses or misconduct.  The licensing process in this case would create a licensed/certified professional status much like Security Guards, Bail Bondsmen, EMS personal who have to meet state standards, Teachers, Police, Lawyers, Doctors....

Their will always be those who abuse their power, with a licensing process, there is more power that can keep these people from doing it again if they can not legally practice a profession because the license in yanked.  Also, there would be mandated background checks that would help to screen out known, record carrying child predators, felons and so on.  Though in practice the screening process and background check is not perfect (cases of Licensed LPN's/RN's and Home Healthcare professionals molesting/abusing and stealing from patients/clients are not unheard of here.  Even a case of a licensed guard that had a record of assault and rape of seniors assigned to work at a senior community...wow that was an oops).

The problem with licensing MA instructors is that business insurances categorize us under the same heading as fitness and recreation... so if it is to be fair, all aerobics, yoga, rock climbing.... instructors would have to be licensed as well IMO.  

How do you do much more than have a mandatory "professional teacher/instructor practices" course that outlines moral practices as a teacher and the state laws around it, first aid and fingerprinting?  I don't see how you can.  Each field has so many differences (as Rich mentioned too, each MA has different ranks, standards, time lines....).

I don't see a problem with a minimal licensing requirement like that as long as there are some perks for going through the process (a business organization/support group like a BBB for MA, improved insurance rates/premiums...).

The license would equate to 'authority' that would be recognized by the state through the process.  That can be revoked, since rank isn't a leadership/authority issue it symbolizes skill.  No one can take away my degrees from college because they were based on my meeting/exceeding tested and observed standards.  If I am rusty, I might not 'recertify' because I have fallen short of those standards but that is not the same as revoking rank.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 3, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> I don't think that rational people (yes, I am referring to politicians/policy makers here ) were/are necessarily following the logic that a licensing process would eliminate abuses or misconduct.  ....



In this case, it was about Abuse. A women/mother was upset when a child was assaulted. (* And rightfully so *) The wome was connected, and it became an issue, and a actual bill as proposed, to consider the licensing, by a council of masters, with the minimum of 3rd degree for being a teacher. They built the reaction around the case to address this persons' and communitee' outrage. The Bill did not pass. Maybe that was the reason for the wording of some of it to prohibit it from being passed, yet it would make those feel better that they had tried. Yet, nothing was done to address making laws of abuse or assault on minors a mroe strict punishment. They did not address the the root cause.

So, yes some will always be bad. And Yes, some will be good. There will be instnaces of when there is nothign you could do to stop a horrible event. Yet, you are allowed within an organization to revoke rank, in my opinion, when someone has broken your codes of conduct, or has broken the ethics of  society, or the laws of the land in which you live. This does not stop the person from teaching again, it does stop the relationship from being a two way relationship versus just one person claiming something.


----------



## SMP (Sep 3, 2004)

I believe that even a black belt can be revoked for dishonor. If a Grand Master of a Art or the person who promoted a black belt feel that it should be revoked I believe it is their call. my 2 cents


----------



## rmcrobertson (Sep 3, 2004)

Nope. In the first place, once awarded, the belt is irrevocable---it represents a threshold--or it should--and the door slams behind you.

In the second place, I note the proliferation of disciplinary methodologies and organizations (Michel Foucault would love it) to "Taylorize"--to machineify--an organic decision.

In the third place, oh hell yes, let's open martial arts up to more politics.

In the fourth--speaking as a college professor, it's kind of astonishing to see people advocating fleeing their responsibilities more assiduously than college professors. Or don't instructors have the responsibility to either a) evaluate character before the student gets to that level, or b) facing the fact that they don't think much about the character of the people they give a belt to?


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 4, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Nope. In the first place, once awarded, the belt is irrevocable---it represents a threshold--or it should--and the door slams behind you.
> 
> In the second place, I note the proliferation of disciplinary methodologies and organizations (Michel Foucault would love it) to "Taylorize"--to machineify--an organic decision.
> 
> ...




Robert, 

This reply surprises me.  :idunno:


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 4, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> a) evaluate character before the student gets to that level, or b) facing the fact that they don't think much about the character of the people they give a belt to?



I don't think that people advertise that they are child molestors, alcholics, etc. when they come to our karate schools. :asian:


----------



## Patrick Skerry (Sep 4, 2004)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Nope. In the first place, once awarded, the belt is irrevocable---it represents a threshold--or it should--and the door slams behind you.
> 
> In the second place, I note the proliferation of disciplinary methodologies and organizations (Michel Foucault would love it) to "Taylorize"--to machineify--an organic decision.
> 
> ...


But isn't tenure revokable?

Also, how can a decision be organic?


----------



## Patrick Skerry (Sep 4, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> I don't think that people advertise that they are child molestors, alcholics, etc. when they come to our karate schools. :asian:


No, but as a mature, intelligent, and worldly adult, you should be able to 'size up' an individual when they apply for instruction.

That is why you start off beginners with a series of long boring routines, to separate the bad students from the good students.

And as an experienced martial artist, one should be able to visit a martial arts school and tell if its legit or a 'McDojo', you should soon discern whether a prospective student is of high moral character.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 4, 2004)

Patrick Skerry said:
			
		

> you should soon discern whether a prospective student is of high moral character.



Easier said than done. There was a black belt who was an assistant district attorney that I knew for years. About the fifth year of knowing him I began to hang out with him. It turned out that he was a highly functional alchoholic. No one had a clue. It's amazing what skeletons people can hide in their closets.
 :asian:


----------



## Patrick Skerry (Sep 4, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Easier said than done. There was a black belt who was an assistant district attorney that I knew for years. About the fifth year of knowing him I began to hang out with him. It turned out that he was a highly functional alchoholic. No one had a clue. It's amazing what skeletons people can hide in their closets.
> :asian:


Very true.  My sensei was a cop, yet it turned out several of our students were members of the mafia.

That is why I insist on keeping an eye on all prospective students.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 4, 2004)

Patrick Skerry said:
			
		

> That is why I insist on keeping an eye on all prospective students.




Agreed. :asian:


----------



## ppko (Sep 5, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Agreed. :asian:


In my first organization we had a guy that was under our head instructor recieved his BB and ended up getting arrested for trying to have sex with a 12 year old girl.  Needless to say he is no longer with that organization.


----------



## SMP (Sep 6, 2004)

People can hide a lot of ugly secrets look at the catholic church (no slam intended).  My belief is that if some one promoted you to that rank they can take it away. Or if the grand master of a art believes you no longer deserve to be recognized at a certain rank then it is within their right or maybe their responsibility to decide where you should be recognized or how much respect you shound be given.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 7, 2004)

Patrick Skerry said:
			
		

> But isn't tenure revokable?
> 
> Also, how can a decision be organic?


Tenure is not Rank.  Tenure is a period of probation that gives you the chance to show that you are worth becoming vested in the institution - this could equate to 'authority.'  Tenure cannot be revoked because it is like Seniority in the private sector.  If you devoted x number of years then those years can not be taken away.

The educational equivalent of martial rank is your degrees.  No one can take away the degree. 

NONE of this attempt to make a distiction between 'rank' (please read a representation of skill and knowledgel) and 'authority'(read decision making power or institutionally sanctioned power like "Treasurer" or "Testing Officer") is to say that people should not be held accountable for wrond doings, misconduct or acting outside of the 'corporate culture' of a given group.

I think too many people unconsciously link martial arts rank with a pseudo-military/monkish 'power' with each promotion.  It ain't so.  I had a thread that talked about breaking down your weekly, monthly and rank levels into percentages of topics that are focused on in training (80% Kata, 10% conditioning...and so on).  I would say people really need to pay attention to what is emphasized (by the amount of time spent, volume of what is verbally reinforced during instruction and practice...) to consider what 'rank' really means.

If you just observe what you are tested on and what the majority of training time is devoted to, rank is about skill and knowledge almost 100%.


----------



## Patrick Skerry (Sep 8, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> Tenure is not Rank. Tenure is a period of probation that gives you the chance to show that you are worth becoming vested in the institution - this could equate to 'authority.' Tenure cannot be revoked because it is like Seniority in the private sector. If you devoted x number of years then those years can not be taken away.
> 
> The educational equivalent of martial rank is your degrees. No one can take away the degree.
> 
> ...


Hello Paul,

Thank you for this answer.  Some of my tenured professors have lost their tenure for various reasons, I was wondering what the process of being 'de-tenured' was?   It took some action from the Dean and Chancellor to have one prof lose his tenure for some academic scandal.

Also, in my obsessive research on the genius Dr. Jigoro Kano, he designated judo training to consist of the following ratio: 80% Randori; 17% Kata; and 3% shiai, which I concur (source: 'What Is Rank?' Donn Draeger).  Dr. Kano also warned that "competition should not be too emphasized!"

This is the attitude reflected by the KANO SOCIETY http://www.kanosociety.org which is 'not' Zen Judo, but traditional judo as prescribed by the founder, and not twisted into a sport by the International Judo Association.

Yours in judo


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 12, 2004)

This thread has shared a lot of different opinions on the same topic and as long as we agree to disagree, there shouldnt be any real problems here.  I would like to share some information which may help people understand where I am coming from.  In Modern Arnis, most black belt and instructor certificates have expiration and/or renewal dates on them.  This was to keep the instructors current on their material as well as coming up with a solution for the belt collectors who would earn a belt and then disappear.  

To Professor, black belt and instructor certificates were almost the same thing, which is why there were expiration dates on them.  Under the Inosanto lineage of Jeet Kune Do there are no belts, but levels of instructors.  At one time, having a Jeet Kune Do instructor teaching at my school, I had the opportunity to look at his diplomas.  They, like the Modern Arnis diplomas, had expiration dates on them.  Now in Modern Arnis ALL of the black belt and instructor promotions came directly from GM Presas himself and when rank was suspended or revoked, it was by his hand.  Now the big argument is that you cant take away knowledge or skill, which is correct.  But these two attributes need to be maintained.   Over time we may neglect to train certain attributes or techniques due to injury, time constraints or possibly forgetting the technique itself.  

This policy was there from the beginning of my Modern Arnis training.  So in this discussion, to me stripping of the rank is not unheard of.  Personally I would have like to seen it be stripping of instructor status, but too many people see black belt and instructor as the same thing.  For the record, I feel that this should be done only in extreme circumstances and should not happen on a regular basis.  I only know of a small number of incidents that it actually happened and the in case that I know of, I feel that it was done justly.  Once again, I would like to state that I respect peoples opinions even if they differ from my own.  

Respectfully, :asian:


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 12, 2004)

Mr. Martin-

In this thread you have made comments about policies of GM Presas and Modern Arnis.  I would like to point out to you and anyone who may have read this, that you really have no clue when it comes to Modern Arnis policy.  You have admittedly said that you met Professor Presas only once, possibly twice, in your Modern Arnis career.  You are a second generation student of the Professor and your instructor left the organization around 1992-1993.  Now, there are no guarantees that you were taught any policies in the Modern Arnis world.  There were many updates in both the art as well as the organization since 1992. Now seeing that you had no ties to the governing body, it would be difficult for you to make any comments on what was or was not policy.  By no means am I trying to attack you.  I just want to point out that you are out of the loop when it comes to topic of Modern Arnis policies and procedures and I wouldnt want anyone to get the wrong idea due to misinformation.  

Respectfully,   :asian:


----------



## ARNIS PRINCESS (Sep 14, 2004)

I feel that it may be alright in certain cases.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 15, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Mr. Martin-
> 
> In this thread you have made comments about policies of GM Presas and Modern Arnis. I would like to point out to you and anyone who may have read this, that you really have no clue when it comes to Modern Arnis policy. You have admittedly said that you met Professor Presas only once, possibly twice, in your Modern Arnis career. You are a second generation student of the Professor and your instructor left the organization around 1992-1993. Now, there are no guarantees that you were taught any policies in the Modern Arnis world. There were many updates in both the art as well as the organization since 1992. Now seeing that you had no ties to the governing body, it would be difficult for you to make any comments on what was or was not policy. By no means am I trying to attack you. I just want to point out that you are out of the loop when it comes to topic of Modern Arnis policies and procedures and I wouldnt want anyone to get the wrong idea due to misinformation.
> 
> Respectfully, :asian:


Well, why don't you explain what you do know instead of implying that you 'know what I don't know' (which you don't). Just because you change the language and add disclaimers like "... by no means..." doesn't mean that it the message isn't "Shut up, because you don't know what you are talking about."

Dispute my points. MA was a referencial example only because it was the organization that I was affiliated with. It is by no means the only example.

I never claim to be anything more than what I am. A student of a student of RP. Fine, but that doesn't mean that I don't/didn't keep my finger on the pulse of the organization. Just because I didn't talk to you doesn't mean total ignorance.  AND, official affiliations does not mean that MA members post 92 weren't still associates of Jerome's or mine.  I really wish you would stop trying to undermine folks and just discuss the points.

What 'character standards' were specifically included in RP's (please specify WHICH organization as well) rank/instructor charters/code of conduct... that would be used to justify rank revokation?

You made the point that Rank had expiration dates on it, under which organization and which time? Jerome's rank had no expiration dates from my viewing of the certificates.

Again, if you want to discuss points like this in more detail, PLEASE do so through PM or Email so that we don't end up degrading or hijacking the topic of discussion.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 15, 2004)

Regarding the Modern Arnis sidebar:
Most != All

I have heard many stories on various peoples ranks from many sides.
In the end, the heads of the organizations make the rules.

If Remy revolked the rank, or didn't add the expiration dates, that was his option.
If he did, well, he made those rules.

Those who left the parent group gave up the right for that rank to be reconized, as they were no longer members of the organization.

It doesn't dimininsh their skills, just their right to wear rank, until such time as they can find another group to reconize them.

For example:
I have a blue belt.
A WMAA blue belt.
Can I goto the IMAF and be reconized as a blue there?
I haven't been on the floor in a while.
Is it still even valid?
How about if I quit?
Is it then?

Ranks expire, drop, or are revolked all the time.
1 group does not have to reconize anothers ranks.
Skill however can only be lost, nor revolked.
I lose my skill by not using it, not working it, or through injury.
Saying "You are not a Black Belt" doesn't mean I lose the black belt skills...
just the right to claim that rank.

In the end, for me, rank is just a way to keep score.  One also must know the scoring system in order to properly compare across different systems.

I look for skill, not rank in my teachers.
The sheepskin and sash is secondary.
My opinion. t's all.

Peace.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 15, 2004)

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> Regarding the Modern Arnis sidebar:
> Most != All
> 
> I have heard many stories on various peoples ranks from many sides.
> ...


Bob,

Based on past posts it is pretty clear that I don't agree with this line. This mentallity implies that rank is "given" and not "earned" and that Rank is not symbollic of skill and knowledge but "gang colors and standing in your group" in essence.

I know that organizations do it. I know that they do it with some kind of reasoning, I just don't agree with it philosophically UNLESS the organization (like businesses/professional licensing or military organizations do) clearly and obviously states what constitutes the earning of rank outside of just demonstrating skill and knowledge. Since most martial arts ranks are almost exclusively based on skill/knowledge demonstration (much like passing a grade or degree/trade certification), once you earn it it is yours. Now, expiration dates means that YOU either 'earn it again' or you fail to meet standards. It doesn't mean that you have anything revoked (as in taken away) because essentially once the 'rank date' expires, you are taking a test for a new rank all over again - either you do pass or fail standards. I like the practice of expiration dates and such because it promotes quality standards BUT it is not the organization revoking anything, it is the person failing to earn (even if it is for a second, third time) a 'rank.'


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 15, 2004)

Paul,
 I agree with you, and I disagree.

Let me tangent here.
I am an A+ certified hardware tech.  That cert is a lifetime cert.  I took the test, passed, and now until I die am an A+ tech.  Even if the requirements change, I am still certified.

I hold a Windows 95 MCP (Microsoft Certified Professional) rank, now expired.  Microsoft "End of Lifed" it a while back.  I took the test, passed, but now that my 'rank' has been retired, I'm no longer considered an MCP by the issuing body (Microsoft). I still know what I knew....it just don't count no mo. 

If I earned a blackbelt in 1990, sat on my *** eating cheetos for the last 14 years....
Am I still a blackbelt?

I may have the paper...but the skills would have gone.

Put another way....
would you want to undergo heart surgery from a surgeon who was once the 'best' but hadn't logged any OR time in 5 years?

or get in a plane flown by a pilot who hadn't logged any air miles in the last year?

I see this as all the same thing.
The paper means nothing.
It's the skill level at that time that counts.


The only reason I got the A+ and the MCP was to 'validate' my skill in the eyes of employers. I could right now pass another dozen industry certs if I cared to...but, I don't.  The papers to me are meaningless.
Just like a rank cert.
It's just a way to keep score.
Or, a way to say "I completed the study course", like a high school diploma.
It doesn't mean you really learned or more importantly retained, anything.

It's that day-to-day use and exploration that counts.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 15, 2004)

I guess the point is what the rank stands for or means.  If it is a sign of legitimacy and a ticket to the clubhouse then it can be taken away.  Either fairly or unfairly, based on clear or ambiguous, poorly outlined expectations.

If it is a roadsign of accomplishment and proof of acceptable knowledge and skill that moment, that accomplishment can not be taken away, and therefore nor can the rank.

Organizations, at least in Martial arts, are not requirements to legally open up a shop, so the political 'clubhouse' mentallity really means diddly squat in the grand scheme of things.  Sure it might mean 'insider status' or something but there are some very successful stand alone schools that are not affiliated with any organization being run by people with 'frozen' rank because they don't have a senior or a group that can promote them.  Like you said, the skill is what counts, but he/she can still use their last rank earned (because they own that accomplishment NOT the organization).

If you were awarded a rank under organization Mickey Mouse and they kicked you out/'revoked' that rank, you still earned that rank.  If you open up a martial arts shop and put on your bio that you earned said rank you are not being false.  If someone checks with that organization, they can not say that he/she did not meet those standards, make that accomplishment or else they are being false.  They can say that you are no longer a member of that organization or something along those lines but they can not take away what that rank means or deny that you made that accomplishment.

The confusion is that these organizational groups have NO REAL POWER to stop you from doing business.  They are reputation builders, support networks and mutual admiration societies.  You join them voluntarily and you can leave them voluntarily.  If you leave, they can't stop you from practicing your art, teaching or running a school.  You might have to modify certain market presentations and terminology to avoid copyright or trademark infringement but no one can stop you from running a 'Self Defense' or a "Karate" or "TKD" program as long as you don't use a trademark term like "ATA TKD" or "Modern Arnis" or "Taboada Balintawak" when you are no longer an active member.  You have every right to list on your bio for qualifications to teach that you earned a Black Belt under that system though.

Until there is a professional licensing of Martial arts schools with standards that have to be met, any untrained person can throw up a shingle and run classes.  Chances are it will die quickly, but the point is that it can be done.

I look at rank as a sign of personal accomplishment that is earned, owned and retained by the individual NOT as a reward or sign of recognition for political affiliation with a group.  It is a metaphor for that skill that you mention, so if they can't take the skill they can't take the rank.  Within the AMAA (American Modern Arnis Associates) they use a slogan of "Skill is rank" to make that point clear.


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Sep 15, 2004)

I.M.O.

If a teacher takes the rank away that somene worked hard for they can never take the knowledge away that was carved into this person through blood, sweat and tears of the years.
So I guess im saying it might be possible to take the physical belt color away but the knowledge is here to stay.......

The knowledge does not simply disappear when the rank is removed or taken away.

Chicago Green Dragon

 :asian:


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 15, 2004)

Let me add this:
Since it is -very- debatable how many folks stand for tests past 2nd degree....

What is the real "Skill" value of a 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th or even 9th dan?
What about a 10th?

I've heard the "time in" and "contributions to the arts" bit....How does that equate to things?


How about the people who 'mint their own'?

Would or should my "Martial Talk Black Belt" be seen as the same as a 'real' one?
How about if I can get 4 'notables' to sign off on it?

Rank and Skill are not the same.

Rank is a score card, a medal, an award. It can be given, taken, lost and thrown away.

Skill is a measure of ability, once learned, it can not be taken.
It can however, be lost.

Maybe if people would worry less about keeping score, and just work on self-improvement there wouldn't be so much crap in the arts.
Sadly, egos, etc. permeate all things, this included.

Now, if y'all will excuse me, I have to go write a check to some 'council" so they reconize my 'art' of 'Talkie-do', so I can start charging y'all for those 'ranks' that show up.


----------



## Chicago Green Dragon (Sep 15, 2004)

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> Let me add this:
> Since it is -very- debatable how many folks stand for tests past 2nd degree....
> 
> What is the real "Skill" value of a 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th or even 9th dan?
> ...



Very well put.
I also wonder how many people think Bruce Lee was a great martial artist and worthy of a 10th degree ? 
I think he was one of the greatest, but wait he never had a black belt. Does that make him any less of the great man he was ? I don't think so.

I wonder how many people out there are really legit. I have found a few on the web that were advertising their school but when you look at their credentials they never went very high in rank but they have a 10th deg in their system. 

I guess the proof is in the pudding as they say. Your skill and ability will eventually speak for itself whether you are a white belt with many shades of gray or a 10th deg black belt.

Chicago Green Dragon

 :asian:


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 15, 2004)

Paul,

No disrespect yet I am confused.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I guess the point is what the rank stands for or means.  If it is a sign of legitimacy and a ticket to the clubhouse then it can be taken away.  Either fairly or unfairly, based on clear or ambiguous, poorly outlined expectations.



Where is this statment different from what I and others have said? Only different word are being used. The meaning and intent are the same. The knowledge cannot be removed, the recognition can be.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If it is a roadsign of accomplishment and proof of acceptable knowledge and skill that moment, that accomplishment can not be taken away, and therefore nor can the rank.



I disagree, it can be taken away. As you state below, it can be stated the person X did pass have the rank of Y on a given date. Yet, as of a new date, no association or recognition of rank is noted.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Organizations, at least in Martial arts, are not requirements to legally open up a shop, so the political 'clubhouse' mentallity really means diddly squat in the grand scheme of things.  Sure it might mean 'insider status' or something but there are some very successful stand alone schools that are not affiliated with any organization being run by people with 'frozen' rank because they don't have a senior or a group that can promote them.  Like you said, the skill is what counts, but he/she can still use their last rank earned (because they own that accomplishment NOT the organization).



True, I could open op a CMA school never having had studied CMA other than from Bruce Lee in the Movies.  And, Yes the skill is important, and there are independants with frozen rank. Yet, when was the last show down betwen masters at high noon? In this litigious society, it just does not happen.  So, my skill at teaching and my students skills are also important. Correct? As to using the last earned Rank, I think they can use it in an honest manner. If they state I obtained a Xth degree from Y association on Z date. And if asked, which no one ever does, is it current, or are you still associated with Y? Then you reply honestly and tell them no. Or that Organization Y does not recognize my rank. In the long run honesty and integrity with this skill people talk about, will let everyone know who is who.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> If you were awarded a rank under organization Mickey Mouse and they kicked you out/'revoked' that rank, you still earned that rank.  If you open up a martial arts shop and put on your bio that you earned said rank you are not being false.  If someone checks with that organization, they can not say that he/she did not meet those standards, make that accomplishment or else they are being false.  They can say that you are no longer a member of that organization or something along those lines but they can not take away what that rank means or deny that you made that accomplishment.



I think a person should state that yes I was a Mouseketeer of the 4th order on this date.  All ties to the Mickey Mouse associatation were severed on this date.  I agree they cannot take away the skill, nor the fact that you had rank at one time. The person did earn it. The also could have had it revoked.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> The confusion is that these organizational groups have NO REAL POWER to stop you from doing business.  They are reputation builders, support networks and mutual admiration societies.  You join them voluntarily and you can leave them voluntarily.  If you leave, they can't stop you from practicing your art, teaching or running a school.  You might have to modify certain market presentations and terminology to avoid copyright or trademark infringement but no one can stop you from running a 'Self Defense' or a "Karate" or "TKD" program as long as you don't use a trademark term like "ATA TKD" or "Modern Arnis" or "Taboada Balintawak" when you are no longer an active member.  You have every right to list on your bio for qualifications to teach that you earned a Black Belt under that system though.



I agree 110%, with he addition of what I said above, about being honest and not misleading your students. Tell them where you stand, let them decide if your skill is somethign they truly wish to learn.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> Until there is a professional licensing of Martial arts schools with standards that have to be met, any untrained person can throw up a shingle and run classes.  Chances are it will die quickly, but the point is that it can be done.



Yes, it can be done. Anyone can do it. And your state tried to create legislation which requried a person to be 3rd degree before opening a school and to pass a test hosted by a committee of Masters from different arts. the logistics would just not work out. In my humble opinion.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> I look at rank as a sign of personal accomplishment that is earned, owned and retained by the individual NOT as a reward or sign of recognition for political affiliation with a group.  It is a metaphor for that skill that you mention, so if they can't take the skill they can't take the rank.  Within the AMAA (American Modern Arnis Associates) they use a slogan of "Skill is rank" to make that point clear.



I agree the rank is earned and owned by the individual. Yet, if a person gets there black belt and then leaves for 20 years, and makes claims of association with the organization, this is falsehood. If they have not practiced in thsoe twenty years they cannot hope to be good enough to pass the same requirements 20 years later. 

Also, no disrespect to Tom Bolden, I saw those T-shirts, and the attitudes of the students, and it seem to me to just like any other organization out there. Yet, I have to ask would they recognize my skills? In particular since I am not a part of their group and do not do things exactly their way. I know you cannot speak for him. Just curious though.

:asian:


----------



## Tgace (Sep 15, 2004)

Rich,

I may be wrong, but I think the general point hes trying to make is. Yes, an organization can "revoke" a persons "paper rank". But what is that revocation supposed to accomplish? If you desire to stay in the organization, it is an "administrative punishment" of sorts. If its meant to rein in a "rouge" instructor, I dont think it will make much of a difference unless it means a lot for that instructor to stay a part of the original organization.


Just IMHO...


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 15, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Rich,
> 
> I may be wrong, but I think the general point hes trying to make is. Yes, an organization can "revoke" a persons "paper rank". But what is that revocation supposed to accomplish? If you desire to stay in the organization, it is an "administrative punishment" of sorts. If its meant to rein in a "rouge" instructor, I dont think it will make much of a difference unless it means a lot for that instructor to stay a part of the original organization.
> 
> ...



Tom et al,

And how is this different from what I and others have said? Yes rogue instructors and Adminsistrative punishments do work this way. I have also stated that you cannot take away the persons' skills either. Yet, I believe that an organization has the right to disassociate themselves from someone. Yes, tell the truth, that so and so did obtain a rank. They also lots all rank and association at this time as well. Do not change history and state they never had rank.

For example Tom, if you had a fellow officer who went bad, and took money from the bad guys, and also killed little children and women, and sold drugs, to kids, and also assualted those children, would not the police find it in thier best interest to disassociate themselves from this rogue cop? They do not deny he was employeed from this date to this date, yet he no longer has rank or a job with them, because of these incidents. The officer would still have his/her skills and firearms and working the streets et al. Yet, they would no longer be associated with that police department. Now, this does not stop them from going elsewhere and being a cop, unless they have a real criminal record, in which case then it would be a matter of public record for the new agency. 

What if you had a student who was hiding the fact that they were on medication, and later in life stopped taking it, and would not seek help. Would you not if asked, tell people that this person had changed or stopped taking their meds? And that you no longer have any association with them? Yes, the student could still go out and teach. I never said that the could not. Integrity would satate they should not, yet if they had integrity most likely they would not be the topic of rank being revoked. (* Unless it was petty polictics *)

Just my opinions. It almost seems like Paul is trying to get somewhere with this, and I cannot see where. Hence, my confusion.

:asian:


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 15, 2004)

I'm not sure where this is going either..... it seems we all agree on most points, yet are still arguing them??

Could someone list the points of contention that still remain?


----------



## Tgace (Sep 15, 2004)

Well, your Police analogy dosent really equate to MA rank. You can revoke a persons LEO status and that will effectively keep him from being able to work, at least in the state of issue. If another agency sees fit to hire and re-cert that person I guess they could but it wouldnt be likely. 

MA rank is different in that it really has no binding "power" beyond the organization from which it was issued....

Im not disagreeing with you or anybody else as far as I can see.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 15, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Well, your Police analogy dosent really equate to MA rank. You can revoke a persons LEO status and that will effectively keep him from being able to work, at least in the state of issue. If another agency sees fit to hire and re-cert that person I guess they could but it wouldnt be likely.
> 
> MA rank is different in that it really has no binding "power" beyond the organization from which it was issued....
> 
> Im not disagreeing with you or anybody else as far as I can see.



Tom, The Police officer analogy was not to be able to get work elsewhere only. It was to show how an organization would wish to no longer have association with an individual.

Let me restate what you wrote:
MA rank is different in that it really has no binding "power" beyond the organization from which it was issued....

If it has no binding power from the organization in which it was issued then, the organization has the right to revoke the rank. There is nothing binding on the individual to stop them from going elsewhere with another group or by themselves. The only binding is the individual to the organization and the organization to the individual. This can be severed for just about any reason.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 15, 2004)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> Tom, The Police officer analogy was not to be able to get work elsewhere only. It was to show how an organization would wish to no longer have association with an individual.
> 
> Let me restate what you wrote:
> MA rank is different in that it really has no binding "power" beyond the organization from which it was issued....
> ...


Yes, I agree with that.


----------



## Flatlander (Sep 15, 2004)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> If it has no binding power from the organization in which it was issued then, the organization has the right to revoke the rank. There is nothing binding on the individual to stop them from going elsewhere with another group or by themselves. The only binding is the individual to the organization and the organization to the individual. This can be severed for just about any reason.


And the flip side of this would be that if I had never before met Rich, but one day walked into his dojo, and trained a bit with him, he could test me and issue me any rank he saw fit, even though he wasn't the one to teach me my skills in the first place.  The only thing standing in my way would be whether or not Rich was in communication with the organization that revoked MY rank.  Hypothetically speaking, of course.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 16, 2004)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> Paul,
> 
> 1. Where is this statment different from what I and others have said?
> 
> ...


1. The difference is in the mentallity of who 'owns' the rank. Philosophically, ideologically, I say the rank as a DIRECT representation of skill or metaphor, is owned by the earner. Therefore NO ONE can take that way. Some are giving ownership of the rank to the organization instead of the earner.

2. Your confusing the 'status' of the rank and whether it ever was earned. You cannot deny that the rank was awarded or that change the records to say otherwise. No longer recognizing said rank and "taking it away" are two different things.

3. Off topic, honest business practices are not the point. I do agree being straight about your resume is a big thing though.

4. same as #3. But this idea only proves the point that the ownership of rank is in the hands of the earner, especially if that rank is skill.

5. The confusion of 'maintenance' or 'quality' of skill because of lack of training, lay offs or what ever. The point is that they still hold/earned the rank. If they let the skill that earned them that rank slip, then we are moving into other topics of discussion and not revokation or earning of rank.

6. If the individual earner owns the rank, how can anyone take it away/revoke it? Making claims or whether that rank/affiliation is still current isn't the topic.

7. I would say that Tom's group is a cut above some groups. Peter Vargas is a top notch artist/practitioner as well as a fierce fighter. That is one tough guy. Tom Bolden can only take credit for the instructional part, but Peter is a product of Tom's system and instruction and he is great. I have known Tom for a number of years and seen many levels of students that he has produced and every student at every level is a solid artist per his/her rank.

His insistence that Rank is a metaphor for skill is a dedication to quality and a rejection of political or favoritism practices in promotions. Is that devotion to quality/skill common? God, I hope so. The slogan "Skill is Rank" or "Rank is Skill" isn't designed to mean that they are the ONLY group that feels that way but to emphasis that it is what they do hold dear philosophically.

Would they recognize your skills? I don't really know what you are asking and I can't really speak for them, but from working with them, I would say that they would respect the rank you earned and treat you with respect/hospitallity because they are good people. 

Skill speaks for itself, so I would guess that they would 'recognize' your skill based on their quality standards (as we all would make assessmentsdo).

If you mean that if someone (not necessarily you specifically) walked in and said "I'm really good" and demonstrated what he thought was "really good" stuff but by their training practices, standards and expectations is was "okay" they would be doing that based on THEIR point of view. Does that mean that you aren't "really good?" No. 

Just means that they are working differently and they don't have any sway over your promotions, rank or survivability in a self defense situation so what does it really matter? To me, not a hell of a lot other than maybe to use for intraspection and examination of what I am doing for affirmation or adaptation. I have 'shown my stuff' in front of Tom at different times and he has given me his honest opinion based on his perspective. I listened, tried his suggestions and so on, but if it doesn't fit the larger systematic goal, I don't keep it - and have said so to him as well. Since he isn't 'my boss' it was no big deal. That is honest sharing and growth IMO. 

If I was a little more insecure I might be constantly comparing myself/system to others in terms of GOOD BETTER BEST and worry about how "I don't move like them" but I am not and neither does Tom, so the exchanges are pretty productive. He has come right out and stolen....I mean adopted  stuff that Jerome, Richard or others have shown him as well because it isn't about Ego or Status but about Art and application for us.

It would be different if you walked in and said that you wanted to join the school and showed them your prior skills and they had to translate where those skills put you in their rank structure. Then you are voluntarily seeking to submit to a different criteria of quality and skill/rank.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 16, 2004)

Paul-  

I think youre arguing for the sake of arguing. I think if you read ALL of the posts youll see that we agree on many of our ideas. 

*	We agree that you cant take away knowledge, but people can forget.
	You cant take away skill, but it can diminish over time.*

What is the difference between have a belt being revoked and having your drivers license revoked? In both cases you still have the knowledge. At a previous job I screwed up and was demoted. I didnt my knowledge and later not only did I earn my position back, I was also promoted beyond my old position. The threads title is Is rank revokable I think we have proved that it is. Now if the thread was Does revoking rank mean anything many of the points that people brought up would fit better. We could also have a thread What conditions do you feel that make you revoke someones rank. 
 :asian:


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 16, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> I never claim to be anything more than what I am. A student of a student of RP. Fine, but that doesn't mean that I don't/didn't keep my finger on the pulse of the organization. Just because I didn't talk to you doesn't mean total ignorance. AND, official affiliations does not mean that MA members post 92 weren't still associates of Jerome's or mine. I really wish you would stop trying to undermine folks and just discuss the points.



I never said you needed to talk to me to know whats going on. The person you would need to speak to was Remy himself. He made the policies as well as implementing them.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> What 'character standards' were specifically included in RP's (please specify WHICH organization as well) rank/instructor charters/code of conduct... that would be used to justify rank revokation?



We are talking about the IMAF while Remy was still alive. He ran the org and made the call on a case by case basis.



			
				loki09789 said:
			
		

> You made the point that Rank had expiration dates on it, under which organization and which time? Jerome's rank had no expiration dates from my viewing of the certificates.



I said MOST not all certificates. 


Paul, this is a sidebar question. When did you start your Modern Arnis training and when did you get your black belt?
 :asian:


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 16, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> I never said you needed to talk to me to know whats going on. The person you would need to speak to was Remy himself. He made the policies as well as implementing them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*Sigh* 

As I have said MULTIPLE times, PM or email/phone call please.  I am not the topic and neither is MA.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 16, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Paul-
> 
> What is the difference between have a belt being revoked and having your drivers license revoked? :asian:


The difference is that a driver operating a vehicle w/o a license can be charged and will get in trouble for doing so because the license MEANS permission and priviledge/right to drive not only the knowledge/skill of driving.

Martial arts rank is skill, if someone has their rank revoked, they can still practice and teach that art without being charged or penalized.  Martial arts organizations are not governing bodies.  They are businesses with no professional standards or regulations that have to be met (like lawyers and other licensed practices) in order to keep the doors open.  As long as you follow the general guidelines of any Rec/Service industry then you can run a martial arts school.

That is the major difference.

Again, my point is that there is no authority or power with rank in MA (on the average). "Revoking rank" or to "annul by recalling or taking back" something that even Rich said 'belongs to the earner' is IMO impossible because it is no longer the organizations. The organization can choose to acknowledge the person's affiliation, kick them out, 'recognize' the rank or anything else but they can not take away something that belongs to the earner.

How can you take way or revoke something that, according to some other posters too, belongs to the earner?

If the basic agreement is that rank is skill, or that rank is symbollic of skill and that it belongs to the earner then the organization can choose to recognize, honor or to cut the earner from the pack. But the rank/skill belongs to the earner of that rank.  

Yup, the thread is "IS RANK REVOKABLE" and my answer is no based on my philosophical position on the topic.

Now, there are obviously those who are giving different answers. The interaction makes clarification and reasoning possible. If, in a debate style, that means back and forth ON THE TOPIC where we clarify, articulate and explain our rationale so be it. So far, I haven't seen any rebuttals that have caused me to change my position on it, but that is only 'so far.'

I am learning from the exchanges  What's the problem?

Let me put this out there.  If we are telling student's in school that "Teacher's don't give you grades, you earn grades" and "You own your success" and other statements about self reliance/direction and credit for accomplishments, how can we say that a 'grade' or rank can be 'taken' from you after you have passed the test, graduated the level or what ever in martial arts?

How can you 'own' your success if someone can revoke it?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 16, 2004)

I believe grades have been revolked in the past, as well as diplomas, etc.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Sep 16, 2004)

> The organization can choose to acknowledge the person's affiliation, kick them out, 'recognize' the rank or anything else but they can not take away something that belongs to the earner.


 

_I disagree with this statement. _
_The rank was earned and given in that organisation for that organisation, therefor if the organisation deems a person unfit to hold that rank they have the authouity to revoke it. By takeing away the rank in their organisation they nullify that rank completly because that is the only place that it was ligitimate._


----------



## Tgace (Sep 16, 2004)

What is the "argument" here??


----------



## Tgace (Sep 16, 2004)

I think I see the divide here...What I think Paul is saying (he will have to say if Im right) is that MA rank "IS" skill in his philosophy. 

For example, say a new student comes into your school and says he has experence in your art. You evaluate him, run him through some tests and see that he has the skills/techniques of a Blue belt so you make him a blue belt. Its just a symbol of what he knows. 

Now say you have a chain of schools that are ran by an organization and you have to be a 3rd degree BB to teach for that org. Now that rank confers something other than skill. All "revoking" that rank does is remove that power (within that org. only). Hes still a 3rd degree BB in that art in terms of what he knows.

I think the debate is... does the Rank represent some sort of Authority or Power within an organization separate from skill. Yes the organization could "revoke" the rank=authority to keep that person from attaining some sort of position within that org. I dont think its possible to revoke rank=skill.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 16, 2004)

Just as a small tangent. As belts are a fairly recent development in the MA (contributed to Judo if I remember right). What happened before there were belts and a practitioner fell into disfavor with his school/instructor???


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 17, 2004)

Hi folks.

I have some opinions on the subject here, and I have a unique approach to the subject. Inspired by this thread, I actually wrote an article titled "Rank, Standards, and Practices in the Martial Arts" that I have submitted to "Sharp" Phil Elmore's "The martialist." If Mr. Elmore feels that the article is something he would publish, then I'll let you all know. If not, then I'll post it on my E-zine so you guys can see how I feel.

So, keep your eyes open and I'll keep you informed. I hope to offer a unique approach to the subject of how to view rank in todays martial arts industry that my fellow self-defense advocates, martial artists, and martial craftsmen might both enjoy and find useful.

Thanks,

Paul


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Thanks Tom.  My point is that ACCORDING TO THE IDEA THAT RANK IS SKILL and not an indicator of title, priviledge or power/responsibility it can not be 'revoked.'

Remember folks that Revoke means to take away.  If your skill is your rank, no one can take your skill therefore no one can take your rank.  I know some are saying that "We are saying the same thing, what is the big deal" but the point is that we are not saying the same thing.  I am saying that because skill is rank and earned, it belongs to the earner/student and can not be taken away.

Others are saying that an organization 'owns' rank and can 'revoke' it or take it away.  So, basically some people view training as something given and others view it as something earned.  I personally 'own' all of my skills and rank that I earned.  Are they all current because of affiliation, status or what ever? No.  Are they still something that I can put on bios, resumes/history sheets?  YES.  If an organization can 'revoke' or take away rank that means that you can't put it on your bio sheet or claim that you made that accomplishment.  Since any of us can do that and do it all the time in conversation (Well I left at Green Belt....) I say we own our rank because we had the skill.

Tom is also correct in the difference between 'authority' that rank might imply (and that is why Instructor certs are great to have as separate things from belt rank) because you can revoke or take away someones 'authority' to do business as teacher, treasurer, administrator.... in your organization.

I used the analogy of a token reward system when I was talking about this before outside of this forum.  If you see rank as an indicator of skill only, then it is a 'token' reward for the man hours, sweat, understanding, sacrifices that you made in the process of earning that rank.  It is like a 'paycheck' that an employee earns for their labor in a business.

If you fire someone, you can revoke their authority/power that they had based on their job description and affiliation with your company but you can not take away the paychecks they earned during that time - at least the fairly earned portions of the money.

So, if the way we 'earn our paycheck' of rank/promotion is based on our labor in the dojo/studio only, no one can take that 'money' from you.

If there is more than rank wrapped up in what the 'rank' means (instructor status, decision making powers...) then yes you can 'revoke' rank because you have combined what that 'rank as skill' with authority.

We are not all saying the same thing, I hope this clarifies what I am trying to say.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> _I disagree with this statement. _
> _The rank was earned and given in that organisation for that organisation, therefor if the organisation deems a person unfit to hold that rank they have the authouity to revoke it. By takeing away the rank in their organisation they nullify that rank completly because that is the only place that it was ligitimate._


If the rank was earned based on skill and knowledge, I would say that it was 'legitimate' in the eyes of the earner as well.

Martial arts Organizations (if you see them as learning institutions and NOT governing bodies) set standards, run assessments/tests, communication expectations, train people as students and instructors.

Again, I think that clarifying what both "rank" means and what a  martial arts organization is would help clarify these issues.

to me, Rank is skill.  You perform to standards and you are awarded the appropriate rank.  We don't even where the belts on the floor.  They only serve as curriculum goals and outline skill progression.  

There was an issue of "Martial Fantasy" and how the belt ranking system was a 'bad' thing and added to the problem of "martial fantasy."  I made the point there that I don't see the problem with the ranking system per se.  I have a problem with people who see it as some kind of status symbol instead of a metaphor for skill.  You are not a better person because of a martial arts promotion, you don't "Get the Glow" when you become a black belt.  You simply have demonstrated the skill and ability (which may but does not have to be an indicator of dedication/maturity/integrity....) to meet the standards of that rank.  I expect the highest standards of cooperation, teamwork, integrity and honor of students at everyrank.  If they grow as people because of that environment AND happen to make it to BB, the growth is probably due to regular and long term exposure to the environment NOT because they got a BB.

We have a separate instructor training track because teaching is a separate skill set that needs to be trained as diligently as the art itself.  To be elligible for certain instructor promotions there is a specific skill level/rank requirement but that does not mean that if you are of that rank you automatically are awarded 'instructor' responsibility.

Martial arts organizations IMO are commercial businesses that operate as learning institutions not governing bodies that regulate behavior or daily practices.  There is no real 'authority' held by the organization that they can give or take away like a Government body.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 17, 2004)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> _I disagree with this statement. _
> _The rank was earned and given in that organisation for that organisation, therefor if the organisation deems a person unfit to hold that rank they have the authouity to revoke it. By takeing away the rank in their organisation they nullify that rank completly because that is the only place that it was ligitimate._




Sheldon, you hit the nail on the head with this one!


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

I gotta laugh at the irony of how much folks who seem to generally take a "Democratic" or "bottom up" view on political organizaiton are arguing and endorsing the more "Republican" or "top down" sort of organization in a martial arts organization....hmmmmmm

This is just an observation not a criticism folks, I know the heat could come from something like that.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Sheldon, you hit the nail on the head with this one!


So the question remains:  Is rank earned or given?  The answer to that can explain who you think is the 'power' in martial arts development.  Are we 'facilitators of martial training and education' or are we 'ruling bodies?'

I tend to work from the 'personal empowerment' benefit idea of martial training.  Based on that, I can't take away something that was earned.  I can kick them out and no longer allow them to affiliate or endorse what they have earned but I can't take it away.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 17, 2004)

Definition from:
Webster's 
New Universal
Unabridged
Dictionary

NOTE: All *BOLD* and _ITALIC_ comments are the same in the book of quote. They are not some attempt to ephasize anything by the poster.

Skill(1): n.
1. The ability, coming from one's knowledge, practice, aptitude, etc., to do something well: _Carpentry was on of his many skills._
2. competent, excellence in performance; expertness; dexterity; _The dances performed will skill._
3. a craft, trade, or job requireing manual dexterity or special training in which a person has competence and experience;_ the skill of cabnetmaking._
4. _Obs._ understanding; discernment.
5. _Obs._ reason; cause [1125-75; ME < ON _skil_ distinction, difference; c. D _geschil_ difference, quarrel. See SKILL (2)]
*---Syn.* 1. proficent, facility. 2. deftness, cleverness,
*---Ant.* 1. inability.

Skill(2) v.i. archaic
1. to matter. 
2. to help; avail. [1150-1200 ME _skilen_ < ON _skilja_ to distinguish, divide, akin to _skil_ (SEE SKILL (1)), OE _scylian_ to seperate, Goth _Skilja_ butcher, Lith _Skilti_ to split]

Rank(1) n.
1. a number of persons forming a sperate class in a social hierarchy or in any graded body.
2. a social or official position or standing, as in the armed forces, _the rnk of captain_.
3. high postion or station in the social or some similiar scale: _a women of rank._
4. a class in any scale of comparison.
5. relative position or standing:_ a writer of the first rank._
6. a row, line, or series of things or persons:_ orchestra players arranged in raks._
7. *ranks*
a. the members of an armed service apart from its officers; enlisted personnel.
b. military enlisted personnel as a group. See Table on next page. (* Table not included in this post *)
8. Usually, *ranks*. the general body of any party, society, or organization apart from the officers or leaders.
9.orderly arrangement; array
10. a line of persons, esp. soldiers, standing abreast in close-order formation (distinguished from _file_).
11. Brit. a place or station occupied by vehicles available for hire; stand: _a taxi rank_.
12. _Chess_. one of the horizontal lines of squares on a chessboard.
13. a set of organ pipes of the same kind of tonal color.
14. Also called *determinant rank*. Math. the order of the nonzero determinant of greatest order that can be selected from a given matrix by the elimination of rows and columns.
15. _Mining_. the classification of coal according to hardness, from lignite to anthracite.
16. *break ranks*
a. to leave an assigned position in a military formation.
b. to disagree with, defect from, or refuse to support one's collegues, party or the like.
17.* pull rank (on)*, to make use of one's superior rank to gain an advantage over (someone). Also, *pull one's rank (on). --v.t.
18. to arrange in ranks or in regular formation: The men were ranked according to height. He ranked the chess pieces on the board.
19. to assign to a particular position, station, class, etc.: She was ranked among the most admired citizens.
20. to outrank: The Colonel ranks all other officers in the squadron.
21. Slang. to insult; criticize. ---v.i.
22. to form a rank of ranks.
23. to take up or occupy a place in a particular rank, class, etc.: to rank well ahead of the other students.
24. to have rank or standing
25. to be the senior in rank: The colonel ranks at tis camp.
26. Slang. to complain. [1560-70; < F ranc (n., obs. OF renc, ranc, rang row, line < Gmc, akin to RING (1)] ---Rank'less, adj.
---Syn.
3. distinction, eminence, dignity
6. range, tier.
9. alignement.
18. align, range, array

Rank(2) adj. -er,-est.
1. growing with excessive luxuriance; vigorous and tall of growth: tall rank weeds.
2. producing an excessive an coarse growth, as land
3. having an offensively strong smell or taste: a rank cigar.
4. offensively strong, as a smell or taste.
5. utter; absolute; a rank amatuer; rank treachery.
6. highly pffensive; disgusting; a rank sight of carnage
7. grossly coarse, vulgar, or indecent: rank language
8. Slang. inferior; contemptible [bef. 1000; ME; OE ranc bold, proud; c. ON rakkr straight, bold] 
---rank'ish, adj.
---rank'ly, adv.
---rank'ness, n.
---Syn.
1. abundant, exuberant
5. complete, sheer, entier.
6. repulsive, repellent, See flagrant.
7. foul.



I personally do not see where one can get the meaning of one word to be the other. Can someone find a defintion or link I am missing.


This is like arguing in two different languages, or worse yet two base languages trying to comunicate in a common third language, where there is no translations. 

No one I know of has said that skill  or knowledge can be revoked.

Yet, by almost ever definition of Rank, I see that it can be revoked. I say almost, as there may be one out there I have no read or seen. So, if someone can find it for me that would be wonderful. Until then I will just assume that Paul Martin and the others stating it is not revokable are arguing just to argue, and or to get the last word. For what reason I do not know.

So, please quote a book, or documented source other than the mentioned "t-Shirt", that has rank equivalent to skill. I will then reconsider my points fo view.

:asian:*


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

What is the point of "rank" in martial arts? What is its purpose?

http://martialarts.about.com/cs/martialarts101/a/Belts_2.htm



> The use of the belt to signify the rank of a martial arts practitioner is not a very old practice, in terms of martial arts history. It can be traced back to Jigoro Kano, the founder of Kodokan Judo. Initially, Kano used only black or white belts to signify rank amongst his students. The most commonly given reason for the belts is to enable recognition of which students could take part in which activities... Best not to throw a student who doesn't have the proven ability to handle being thrown.
> Shortly after Kano introduced this innovation, extra colours of belts were integrated.
> 
> It has proven to be a useful way of telling at a glance generally what level of knowledge and ability a student has. Other teachers adopted the system, or variations on it. Some of these included Tae Kwon Do, Karate, and even teachers of Chinese styles


More details on the origin of MA rank at...
http://www.judoinfo.com/obi.htm


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

Second question. Is the point of this thread to discuss or come to a mutual agreement? I dont think the latter is always possible.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

> Rank(1) n.
> 1. a number of persons forming a sperate class in a social hierarchy or in any graded body.
> 2. a social or official position or standing, as in the armed forces, the rnk of captain.
> 3. high postion or station in the social or some similiar scale: a women of rank.
> ...



As in an orderly arrangement of skill levels.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 17, 2004)

Where does your get rank from?


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

???


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> Definition from:
> Webster's
> New Universal
> Unabridged
> ...


Well the above definitions for skill and rank combine well to explain MY TAKE or MY INTERPRETATION of rank in martial arts.  There is the link that I would use to support my idea.

If you take skills and order or RANK them in a series.  THen your 'rank' is based on 'skill.'  Makes sense to me.

I don't care how many books you quote or I quote.  I am talking about the meanings within martial arts for the specific application of the terms.

Throw a blanket of definitions all day long and it doesn't mean a thing.  Tell me what definitions/meanings and interpretations you are working from IN RELATION to the topic and I might understand better your position.  OR, if you really think this is arguing for the sake of arguing....don't comment.  Drop it.

I have asked sincere questions that, if people were to simply answer them, will help EVERYONE understand what these terms mean to them.  Instead, people are just saying 'yes' or 'no' without substantiation or reason.  I won't bother to rewrite them because they are there for those who care to read them.

What is the big deal?  Is this dwindling down to a "you're wrong, I'm right" discussion?

We don't agree, so what.  Who said we have to agree.

"Last word" Tag your it.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Sep 17, 2004)

> Just as a small tangent. As belts are a fairly recent development in the MA (contributed to Judo if I remember right). What happened before there were belts and a practitioner fell into disfavor with his school/instructor???


1. the practitoner tried to start his own organisation and was eithe sucessful or was shut down by his fomer instructor.
2. the instructor booted him. leaveing him with knowledge but no social standing within the original group and no regonition of skill other than nis physical abilities
3. he joined a nw group and ws evaluated by that group as to his skill and knowledge level


I agree we seem to be debateing between skill and rank.
On rank, I must say that the skill in school "A" may intital you to be a "blue belt" but on school "B" that same skill may intital you to be a black belt.  On the other hand it may be the other way aound.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 17, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> ???



Who issues rank?


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> I agree we seem to be debateing between skill and rank.
> On rank, I must say that the skill in school "A" may intital you to be a "blue belt" but on school "B" that same skill may intital you to be a black belt. On the other hand it may be the other way aound.


Agreed, the standards are independent of each other and don't really have to mean "GOOD BETTER BEST" comparisons, only different.

If someone tells you that they hold a 'black belt' you get a mental expectation, laundry list of skills and abilities and a certain quality of performance in your head based on that term...so the 'rank' equates to 'skill' that is my point.

We don't run around quoting our checklist of skills and abilities to people, we say "I am an xyz" belt and that will connote a certain expectation of skill.   Skill is rank IMO because we DEFINE/EXPLAIN the meaning of the RANK by detailing what SKILLS/ABILITIES are required for that RANK and what level of performance quality is expected to earn that rank.  That is if you are only using it for a curriculum guideline and not an authority thing.

I know folks aren't going to see it my way but oh well.  I am not trying to be a smart ASH with the questions I have asked in the past.  The responses will help the reader AND the writer clarify what ideas they are using to drive comments.

Basically, this idea of Rank revokation is an educational/training philosophical point.  My point with the comments and discussion is to really understand the teaching/training philosophy that others are operating with and maybe, if they have not really articulated it for themselves, let the discussion be a way for people to do just that for themselves.  If they decide to stick to it after they have really looked at it, fine.  If they change, fine... the point isn't attack or 'right/wrong' but learning and growth.....

This was the worst part of the teacher training as well.  We had to outline our educational philosophy and the Prof. critiqued it with questions and examination FOR THE PURPOSE of making us really examine what assumptions, ideas and values we were working from.

I don't presume to be the "teacher" here as much as a "fellow" but the process and purpose is what I am applying.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Who issues rank?


Who earns rank?  Who owns rank when it has been earned?  Once rank has been awarded because of meeting or exceeding the standards set, who sees that rank as legitimate?....

Come on Tim, if you aren't going to address questions that have been put before you (by me or anyone else), why should anyone answer yours?


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 17, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Second question. Is the point of this thread to discuss or come to a mutual agreement? I dont think the latter is always possible.



Well to point is is for the discussion. Yet to have a discussion, usually it turns into an arguement, if both sides do not at least acknowledge the other sides point of view.

To my knowledge, Mr. Martin has never acknowledged any point of view other than his own. Mr. Education; Mr. Should have skill and knowledge in teaching before you open a school; Mr should have some form of psych training. Yet, in all his comments he seem unable to acknowledge anothers point of view. Yet, comments that people should be open to concepts.

We choose to disagree. I acknowledged that I could see how a person could see Rank as skill. Personally I see Skill as rank if you were to make an arguement or proof of the matter. Yet, I acknowledged his point. He just keeps making teh same statmetns over and over again like if you say it wnough, people will believe it. 

Then he demands to know what definition you are using? I quote the definitions I was using. DUH? Guess, I am stupid, I should go back and dissect his post, and counter point each item. This way he has conflict in his life. This way he can be put upon by me or make statements that teh MT Staff is against him. Yet, you see I try to make a point, and stay on topic. I acknowledge his point, I make my point. He restates his point like everyone is stupid for not believeing in his definition. Then he makes comments about how he needs to know what definition I and maybe others are working form. I speak English, I use the English language, and when I am not sure, I go to a dictionary to clarify.

Guess, I need to get a copy of the dictionary that Mr. Martin is using. Do you think he would be so kind as to send me a copy, post a link to it? or at least give me a definition of *EVER* word he posts. I need to know what point of view he is coming from. Since he obviously is so far out there, that he cannot use a definition from a dictionary. He redefines things. Therefor I have no idea what else he has redefined. I need a complete reference for every word and for that matter let us start with letters.

Do you think Mr. Martin is using the standard alphabet? Is here some form of cryptography going on? I do not know. I need to know before I can continue with this discussion with him. 

After the alhpabet, I need to confirm we are using a specific language. I assumed English(Modern or that of Today, used in the U.S.A.). Yet It could be Old English or Middle English. I really do not know.

After the alphabet and then which language and which version, let us begin with the simple words of one, two and three letters. I need to learn this language, that Mr. Martin is communicating in. For you see, obviously we cannot communicate, and it must be a language behaviour. He states he needs the definitions I am working from. I spent 30 minutes reading and typing in mine. Then he states, that no matter what I quote his definition stands for the use with MA, and then asks for mine. This is arrogance in my opinion. This is a person arguing just to argue and to not loose a point. He even will not even consider teh acknowledgement of anothers as this might be considered a whole in his armor and and thereby be considered a loss. 

If you think I am being absurb, I am not. I am 100% serious. I have stated my definitions. He is grasping, and trying to link and draw conclusions. I noted that I could see the relationship, yet beleived that Rank is removable by the organization, and that the skill is owned by the individual. Yet, Mr. Martin continues to state I have not made my case. I need to post defintions.

Very frustrating dealing with someone who claims to be mature, and yet, is acting so childish. Yes my opinion.


 :asian:


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

Cant we all just get along?



"We" all know the problem extends beyond any "issue" or "argument method" here, be honest now. Apparently the buttons are too big and shiny to resist pressing them. (on each side)


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Cant we all just get along?
> 
> 
> 
> "We" all know the problem extends beyond any "issue" or "argument method" here, be honest now. Apparently the buttons are too big and shiny to resist pressing them. (on each side)


"Basically, this idea of Rank revokation is an educational/training philosophical point. My point with the comments and discussion is to really understand the teaching/training philosophy that others are operating with and maybe, if they have not really articulated it for themselves, let the discussion be a way for people to do just that for themselves. If they decide to stick to it after they have really looked at it, fine. If they change, fine... the point isn't attack or 'right/wrong' but learning and growth.....

This was the worst part of the teacher training as well. We had to outline our educational philosophy and the Prof. critiqued it with questions and examination FOR THE PURPOSE of making us really examine what assumptions, ideas and values we were working from.

I don't presume to be the "teacher" here as much as a "fellow" but the process and purpose is what I am applying."

I have asked you NOT to attack or slander me publically and I would do the same. If you don't like me or my methods, don't play with me.

I guess this discussion is reverting to 'right/wrong' instead of 'philosophical position' or 'growth through articulation' or what ever I am seeing it to be.

Now, the question becomes do I continue because I don't want 'them' to think they drove me off or do I just drop it because the intent and purpose is no longer possible given the unproductive environment?

"At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. "

I guess I will drop it.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

Rich,

Please dont take offense, Im not really interested in pointing fingers and hope my "tone" here is friendly....but IMHO things were going along "fairly" smoothly up till this point....

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6706&page=11&pp=15

Not that your ponts were invalid, but from there on things took a confrontational turn...theres too much "fault" to go around to place it all on one persons shoulders here.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 17, 2004)

Rank != Skill.

If Rank truely = Skill then everyone would have to test for their rank.

Not get "Time In" promotions.
Not get "cross ranked".  (Sorry, but a 3rd in Judo doesn't mean you're a 3rd in Kendo, etc)
Not get "political promotions" for ones marketing efforts, or giving the most seminars to the GM, or buying the most books.
Not get the "Ol Boy" promotions from all the Joke'-Soke' boards, and cert mills.

If your 'rank' was just handed to you, it has nothing to do with ones 'skill'.  I know of numerous high ranking folks who had their ranks handed to them, where they jumped levels (like from 3rd to 5th to 10th) in a few short years.

If rank = skill then that 15yr old BB should be comparable to the 30 yr old BB, but they aren't are they?

How many people past 3rd degree actually get on the floor and show their stuff before being promoted?  Almost none from what I understand.  So, if the difference between the 3rd and the 6th is 10 years and 10,000 miles....what does either have to do with their martial skill?

You can buy rank.
You can't buy skill.

I can bribe my way to a pilots licence...it don't mean I have the skills to fly a plane.
I can buy my blackbelt ($15, including cert, $300 to have it 'reconized'), but that doesn't mean I know the difference between a wrist watch and a wrist lock, now does it?)

I can earn my degree in Chemisty...that doesn't mean that 10 years later I can actually still tell you the recipe for water though does it? But, I still have my 'degree'.

Rank is not skill.  I've chased blackbelts off the floor while sparring with them...as a yellow belt. They had 5+ years on me...I still wiped the floor with them. Time in don't mean skill. Rank don't mean skill.  Hell, rank != rank!
Only skill = skill. You will never convinve me otherwise.

You can revoke my paperwork, but it doesn't revoke my ability.
Only I can do that.



> Cant we all just get along?


Nope...sadly I don't see that happening.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

All very good points. Goes back to a question posted earlier....what is ranks purpose? Originally (check my posts a page or so back) its intention was just to be a skill marker to aid an instructor in tracking student skills/advancement.

What is its purpose now?


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> Rank != Skill.
> 
> If Rank truely = Skill then everyone would have to test for their rank.
> 
> ...


That is my point Bob! I am not trying to convince you. You are making a stand and explaining it and maybe because of the discourse understanding your own position better because you have had to explain it to someone else and make sure it is clear...just like teaching can make a better martial artist "if you really want to learn something well, teach it to someone else"...

We don't agree, big whoop.

I notice that you are basing your position more on a "historical practice" sort of position. It has been done in the past so it is. I am saying that 'in Paullie land' of values, it is not possible - at least in situations, like martial arts, where skill is the indicator of your rank and promotability.  Under other circumstances and situations 'rank' may have a different contextual meaning that includes authority and power (like military 'rank' would).

It is a shame that the circumstances you describe happen. They definitely cheapen any 'ranking' system when a persons aptitude, skill and talent are not the primary mover for promotion in martial arts.

Now some of the situations/arenas of 'rank' still are somewhat authority or licensure situations and not skill based situations but, even there 'bought' or 'conned' gains only hurt the recievers of the service because they won't get the quality that honest promotion or 'rank' that is skill based would provide.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 17, 2004)

Tom,
  I see it as a way to keep score, and to aid an instructor in knowing where his students are.  It's also good for a student to measure their own progress.

Oh, and for people to endlessly fight over on message boards. It seems to also be less offensive when people whip out their belts and count the stripes, then what they used to do...which involved very small rulers...and a fear of a cold spell....:rofl:


----------



## Tgace (Sep 17, 2004)

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> Tom,
> I see it as a way to keep score, and to aid an instructor in knowing where his students are. It's also good for a student to measure their own progress.
> 
> Oh, and for people to endlessly fight over on message boards. It seems to also be less offensive when people whip out their belts and count the stripes, then what they used to do...which involved very small rulers...and a fear of a cold spell....:rofl:


Well, Im off work today and marking time till I have to leave for my "second front" job.......its is kind of chilly now that you mention it. 

But to the point...in your deinition, what would revocation accomplish?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 17, 2004)

Revocation, IMHO is a punishment.

For the student, revoking a rank says 'You have done something wrong'.
It can be that they didn't meet the requirements any longer. (Ie got the belt, but stopped going to class...therefore they must prove they still qualify at that level before being allowed to resume training)
It can be that they violated a requirement.
(Keep in mind that many arts include ethical standards in their ranks, Kenpo for example has color belt 'sayings' or 'pledges')

In the case of Black belts, 
- They left the reconizing body
- They stopped being active
- They violated the ethics of the reconizing body.


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> Revocation, IMHO is a punishment.
> 
> For the student, revoking a rank says 'You have done something wrong'.
> It can be that they didn't meet the requirements any longer. (Ie got the belt, but stopped going to class...therefore they must prove they still qualify at that level before being allowed to resume training)
> ...


There are still punitive actions that can be taken within my "Paulie Land" view of Rank revokation even.

If they violate some conduct clause they are at fault because they knew the rules and broke them anyway (people sign a "class conduct" sheet as part of the initiation package) so they are kicked out (if it is bad enough) and will not be reimbursed for any advance payments because they breached the agreement in the form of a conduct agreement.  That hurts.

They will not recieve any favorable endorsement from me for future teachers that may ask about them.  I will be confidential because of my own values, but I will also not say "Yeah, great!"

Honestly, beyond that there really isn't much that can happen unless the situation warrants civil or criminal action.

And, even within the 'rank revokable' school of thought, what does that really do?  THey can still run their own business, practice what they know and do what they want with what they have.

I don't care so much about 'Punishment' as keeping quality people in and removing the poor quality people from my program.  I will distance myself (by kicking out) people who are not going to be good representations of what the group stands for.  Beyond that I don't have any real power over other people.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 17, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> RANK IS SKILL.


Rank is skill? No, it is only part of the equation. Rank is Skill, Knowledge and *Character*. If you think that rank is only skill then you must have missed something during your training. If character is part of rank then what haves when people do things that are lacking character?


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 17, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Rank is skill? No, it is only part of the equation. Rank is Skill, Knowledge and *Character*. If you think that rank is only skill then you must have missed something during your training. If character is part of rank then what haves when people do things that are lacking character?


*Sigh*

Again, let me say that my position on RANK IS SKILL is that RANK requirements are usually outlined or defined by demonstration of certain techniques/drills or what ever to an acceptable level of quality appropriate to the skill that you are attempting to earn.

IF character requirements are part of rank, then they need to be clearly outlined in the curriculum along with the skill, they need to be evaluated/tested just like techniques and SCORED just like techniques.  I am not saying that there are not schools that do this in some way, only that for me, Skill is RANK and CHARACTER IS EXPECTED OF EVERYONE REGARDLESS OF RANK.

You still have not answered the questions posed to you Tim.  We are obviously defining 'rank' differently and there will be no consensus let alone agreement if we are talking about "Cars" and I am talking about a Porche and you are talking about an Expedition...

Do you require some evaluation of "Character" during a belt test?  How do you measure or assess a passible level of "Character" for a given rank?  If you do that, then you can say that they 'lost' their rank because they failed to meet the requirements.

If someone signs a clearly outlined Conduct agreement and breeches that agreement, then they can be kicked out of the class but you CANNOT ethically touch their rank IMO (see that I am not speaking for everyone here) because the outline for rank/promotion is a skill/knowledge test.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 17, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Rich,
> 
> Please dont take offense, Im not really interested in pointing fingers and hope my "tone" here is friendly....but IMHO things were going along "fairly" smoothly up till this point....
> 
> ...




Tom,

My Tone is just fine. You all think I have something to griind.  I do not.

I do try to keep things running here smoothly. I was confused.

I could easily point to any one of Mr. Martin's restatements and state it was going fine until here.

We disagree. That is fine. You make the point and statment. Paul Martin Does not.

Paul Martin makes comments about how I need to define my meaning, after I wrote down my definitions from a dictionary. Yet, he asked me to redefine it like I am some child he attempts to teach. He states people should have Psych and teaching skills, I personally think he should not teach. Everyone should be requried to have a math minor, it requires the person to think in a logical format. Also I think a Philosophy minor with Logic should be a mandatory requirement.

He has made some unlogical statements, and I asked for clarification. 

So, once again I am the bad guy.

Fine I am and always will be bad the bad guy. My Tone  is the Evil ADMIN out to get you.

Is this what you and Paul want?

And before you state I say I took it wrong, Paul Martin, took comments like this wrong and so did you, when I tried to give feedback. I was told to shut up and go away, I had no right to make such comments, and then the negative rep and the reports began towards me and about me.

I asked for clarification. I got none.

I gave definition. I was told to supply my definitions. I already had. Still confusing and not logical.

I asked for a definition from Paul Martin, since obviously he is using another language or dictionary then I am.  I am still waiting for his reply.

Sorry, for the tone, it is only what I have ben given in the past. I tired to be nice. I was ignored. I tried to get clarification, and I am told it is Bad Admin.

Do you really want to draw the line in the sand?

Here is the crux. Paul Martin and Tom Gerace, do not wish to ever look weak or like they may have lost a point. They also enjoy conflict. I believe you are not happy unless you are in conflict. I saw a thread bouncing back and forth, in circles.  Instead of just locking the thread, I asked a question, and for clarification. So you are right. I should not have opened up and wrote the question.

Next time I see a thread going in circles, I will lock it. I will give negative rep to all those who continue to argue the same point back and forth and not add any new ideas or information, and this does not include just asking the other person to what about, and retating what they said in reverse or what you said before.

If you all want a bad Admin, and you think Seig is not the man for the job, no problem. You got him. It is all me fault. From now on you will have something to complain about.

So, your choices are:

1) Apologize

2) Not apologize and continue the way we are.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 18, 2004)

I never thought it was about winning or loosing. Im sorry if you think that it is... but you are projecting something (at least upon me) that dosent exist. Either debate/discuss the philosophical issue at hand, or ignore it completely. I dont think that either Paul or I were saying anything that requires this level of agitation. 

My point was that nobody thought any of this was a huge problem and were discussing things nicely (minus a few barbs traded here and there) until that point. For some reason things got ugly from there on out.


So we disagree about what rank means....big deal.

btw:What do you believe needs to be apologized for?


----------



## Tgace (Sep 18, 2004)

As to character being part of rank. Thats even more of a subjective measurement than skill. If that were measurable and gradeable, there would be reasons to strip many people of their rank.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 18, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> As to character being part of rank. Thats even more of a subjective measurement than skill. If that were measurable and gradeable, there would be reasons to strip many people of their rank.



Don't officers in the military have a code of conduct (character) that they have to follow? Since I have several ex-military people training in my school, we have talked about how people get rank stripped or even kicked out of the military with dishonorable discharges.  The common theme is how they behaved (character). If people can lose their rank, status, positions, license, etc everywhere else in life then why not the martial arts?


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 18, 2004)

As the President of the WMAA I reserve the right to promote, demote or revoke the rank of our members based on several things: Skill, Knowledge and Character. I make it a point to personally get to know ALL of our Black Belt candidates.  When someone tests under the banner of the WMAA, they are seeking our endorsement of their rank.  Seeing that each member is a reflection of our organization, their actions in public can come back on us.  We encourage our members to have a will of their own and a right to express they way they feel which is quite evident here on MT.  But if we are informed of our members partaking is questionable actions or breaking the law, we then look at possible actions by our organization.  

We have been very fortunate in not having to strip anybodys rank in our group.  This probably has something to do with the application process within our organization.  This was a standard set by Grandmaster Presas while he was alive.  Following his lead, we are improving on the process to keep from having repeat problems.  There are rules in society that we have to follow and a martial art organization is no different.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 18, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> Don't officers in the military have a code of conduct (character) that they have to follow? Since I have several ex-military people training in my school, we have talked about how people get rank stripped or even kicked out of the military with dishonorable discharges. The common theme is how they behaved (character). If people can lose their rank, status, positions, license, etc everywhere else in life then why not the martial arts?


MA is nothing like the Military. MA rank is nothing like military rank. Military rank is (primarily) a method of organizing command. That organization is for the purpose of carrying out a mission. MA rank is simply to signify "who knows what". I agree with Bob when he said his concept of rank was...



> I see it as a way to keep score, and to aid an instructor in knowing where his students are. It's also good for a student to measure their own progress.


Thinking that MA rank possesses some sort of real "power" over anybody is fantasy IMHO. Thinking that a bunch of folks taking MA classes has any more than a passing similarity to the military is erroneous IMHO.


To address the "people can lose their rank, status, positions, license, etc everywhere else in life then why not the martial arts?" question. I would say...because in all those instances, those "ranks, etc." confer some sort of privilege/power. They arent simply a measurement tool. I think it would help me understand your point if you defined what you think "Rank" means and is for in your school.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 18, 2004)

That being said I also think that demanding your students to adhere to a set of ethics standards is admirable. However if they break those standards I (personally) dont think you can do much more than boot the person out of the school. You cant really "revoke" the rank if rank is just a measurement of skill.

Once again this is just a philosophical difference....not saying "your wrong! You cant do that!"


----------



## loki09789 (Sep 18, 2004)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> As the President of the WMAA I reserve the right to promote, demote or revoke the rank of our members based on several things: Skill, Knowledge and Character. I make it a point to personally get to know ALL of our Black Belt candidates. When someone tests under the banner of the WMAA, they are seeking our endorsement of their rank. Seeing that each member is a reflection of our organization, their actions in public can come back on us. We encourage our members to have a will of their own and a right to express they way they feel which is quite evident here on MT. But if we are informed of our members partaking is questionable actions or breaking the law, we then look at possible actions by our organization.
> 
> We have been very fortunate in not having to strip anybodys rank in our group. This probably has something to do with the application process within our organization. This was a standard set by Grandmaster Presas while he was alive. Following his lead, we are improving on the process to keep from having repeat problems. There are rules in society that we have to follow and a martial art organization is no different.


And within your philosophical stance, you see that as reasonable.  I personally don't see how you can take away 'rank' based on character actions if you are not requiring them as part of your promotion process.

I DO see it as reasonable to either freeze, suspend membership or simply eject people if they act 'out of character' regardless of rank because the character issue is not linked to skill IMO.

Comparing military rank, licensure or other 'power' rank structures to martial arts rank IMO is wrong.  If you are a Brown belt, you are not a better person by virtue of your rank than a white belt.  If you are a BB IN SKILL (again teaching priviledges/authority changes things here) that does not make you a better person than the newbie walking in the door.  AND you have no more 'right' to judge anothers 'character' because you are a BB.

Character expectations need to be clearly outlined as a membership requirement IN GENERAL regardless of rank.  Anyone who could be seen or recognized as a representative of your group should be expected to conduct themselves as basically a decent, contributing member of society (Specifiy how ever you want).

If you are not including 'character' in your rank requirements then you can not 'revoke' rank based on 'character' issues.  You CAN still take actions to ensure top notch people stay and deadbeats leave, but rank is earned based on performance of skill and knowledge IN GENERAL and really can not be touched.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 18, 2004)

Hey rich, if you want to discuss things about this thread, PM me or start a new thread. The rep point games are childish.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Sep 18, 2004)

loki09789 said:
			
		

> I personally don't see how you can take away 'rank' based on character actions if you are not requiring them as part of your promotion process.


I think you may have missed this in my post, Paul.  I *DO* make character a requirement.



			
				Datu Puti said:
			
		

> As the President of the WMAA I reserve the right to *promote*, demote or revoke the rank of our members based on several things: Skill, Knowledge and Character.


This will be my last post for a while because it a gorgeous weekend in Buffalo for a change and I am going to enjoy it while I can!  I'll check back in later in the week.  

For everyone else, have a nice weekend.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 18, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Hey rich, if you want to discuss things about this thread, PM me or start a new thread. The rep point games are childish.




First, neither you nor Paul apologized to me.

As I went through the old FMA and Modern Arnis section and gave people positive rep for posts that contributed, I have now started goign through and giving negative rep as well for non value added posts, and posts that are contributing to the downfall fo a thread or posts that are nothign more that someone repeating their point of view over and over and over.

Rich

* Staff Note:
If you so choose you can contribute to Martial Talk and become a supporting member and then turn off reputation if it bothers you to get feedback and to know that I have signed it.

Rich Parsons
Martial Talk
Assistant Adminsitrator
*


----------



## Tgace (Sep 18, 2004)

Seems like abuse of power, authority and "rep point harassment" to me. If I could do that Id probably be booted. Lead by example huh?


----------



## Tgace (Sep 18, 2004)

Rich Parsons said:
			
		

> First, neither you nor Paul apologized to me.


You have problems.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 18, 2004)

Tgace said:
			
		

> You have problems.



Paul, demanded an apology of me befire, and asked for me to be on his ignore list.

So I cannot reply in kind?


As to abuse, it is balance, as I abused in the positive now I am using it to balace with negative as well.

My Opinion. And yes I will restate it just like other restate their opinion, until you either stop or go away. 

My opinion


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 18, 2004)

*
This thread is locked pending review

Rich Parsons
Martial Talk
Assistant Administator
*


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 18, 2004)

Just a late note:
Mike and/or I will review this thread shortly.
In the mean time, I highly suggest everyone step back, take a deep breath and go enjoy the weekend. Everyone involved in the 'heat' here lives in an area that all too soon will be under snow, and here in Buffalo it's a Beautifl summer day.  I myself will be heading out shortly to enjoy it, as I get away from the PC all too infrequently.

We will look at this particular mess shortly.


----------



## Seig (Sep 21, 2004)

In light of recent events within this thread, it has been decided within the upper Admininstration that action needs to be taken.  
The staff of Martial Talk walks a fine line between being a regular posting member and being staff. As staff, we are held to a higher standard than the normal member. This line can become blurry at times, especially when people make comments like, "You can't have an opinion, you're a moderator." Being on the Martial Talk staff can be and often is demanding; however, this does not justify some of the actions taken, most notable and recently within this thread. As the Ops Admin, I often have to make decisions that I personally do not like. For Rich Parson's recent actions, he is being suspended for two weeks. Upon his return, some of his administrator privledges will be reduced.

To this end, I would like to address the subtle and not so subtle sniping in this thread. Once again, I find myself refereeing a urinary olympiad among the Modern Arnis crowd. So that it is not said that I am picking on any one person, effective immediately, the following is Martial Talk Policy. _Any continuation of the constant and/or subtle sniping will see not only the thread locked but the perpetrator(s) immediately suspended, without warning._ Take your personal issues elsewhere.

Seig
MT OPS Admin


----------

