Two Entities: ISGC and SGHOF

Fred Layman · From: Springfield, Missouri USA

The posts regarding the SGHOF nomination and induction process sometimes equate and confuse the Iternational Steel Guitar Convention with the Steel Guitar Hall of Fame. Some posters have advocated boycotting the former in order to pressure the latter to achieve desired results. The attendance at this year's convention -- the highest ever -- indicates how little significance these efforts have.

But the incorrect premise here is that the two entities are one and the same. The fact is that the two organizations have two different 501c charters and different purposes. The SGHOF meets at the scene of the ISGC as a matter of convenience and inducts nominees during the awards ceremony, along with other organizations that likewise have no legal connection with the ISGC. Apart from DeWitt Scott, the two organizations have completely different officers, and conduct separate business meetings on different matters.

The criticisms of the Hall of Fame Board run true to form and have become an annual ritual with a small vocal segment of the total Forum group. I have nothing further to say on those issues because past experience indicates that it is an exercise in futility. (If anyone is interested, they can recover those discussions in the archives).

Rather, I only want here to suggest some perspective and to indicate why such efforts have absolutely no effect on board members in their deliberations. The steel guitar community at-large has no conception of the subtle and overt efforts at pressure and intimidation that are directed against the induction board, with a view to forcing the induction of an individual's favorite player, e.g., threats of lawsuits, threats to go after the 501c non-profit status, offers to contribute considerable funds to the HOF if the contributor's favorite player is inducted, fomenting conspiracy theories, raising inuendos of alleged mis-use of Hall of Fame funds, attempts at discrediting and vilifying individual board members, charging the board with not listening (translated,"they won't do what I want done"), etc.,etc.,etc.

The board is always at a self-imposed disadvantage in these debates because of its commitment to confidentiality of discussions as being in the best interests of the nominees involved. (Even MSA, understandably,adopted a procedure of confidentiality in resolving issues with past customers). This procedure is followed by all Hall of Fame organizations that I'm aware of. They, like the HOF board, indicate the reasons that a particular person was inducted, but never divulge reasons, if any, why other possible nominees were not inducted. Such would only be to embarrass the other nominees.

The board knows that going in, and refuses to be swayed, distracted or intimidated by it. It's a sideshow that is merely dismissed from board deliberations. Consider, if you will, the fallout for a nominee if it were ever learned that he/she was inducted under intimidation or the induction was bought. Likewise, the integrity, not to mention the continued existence, of such a board would be forever lost.

Rather, the nominating board goes about its deliberations, giving due consideration to each nomination that is sent in (these nominations are sent to board members to begin their consideration 30 days prior to the board meeting). We don't claim infallibility but attempt to make decisions as best we can in the collective mind of board members, in terms of the nominations sent in, knowledge that board members have of the nominees, and the purposes and goals of the organization, knowing full well that some folks are going to be disappointed.

That being said, colleagues are welcome to respond as they wish, but I'm outta here for the reason cited above, the sterility of the debate.

[This message was edited by Fred Layman on 15 September 2003 at 04:02 AM.]

Eric West · From: Portland, Oregon, USA, R.I.P.

I get it.

Thanks for clearing it up.

It made me remember the ending to "At E's".

Whatever works.

EJL

[This message was edited by Eric West on 14 September 2003 at 11:28 PM.]

C Dixon · From: Duluth, GA USA

To my dear Friend Fred Layman,

Thank you soooo much for risking your "head on the chopping block" to express in an eloquent, informative and professional manner, the differences between the ISGC and the SGHOF. Also thank you for explaining in more detail how a HOF is run.

I am going to put my head on the chopping block also with the following comments.

If I was on that committee (with what I know now) I WOULD vote for Maurice Anderson. However, if factual information were given to me that would not be in the best interest of the SGHOF, I would NOT vote for Maurice.

This goes for any player that I had to vote on, including Buddy Emmons; which the entire world knows how I feel about him. In other words, I would vote yes OR no; depending upon all the facts presented to me; AFTER I had prayed about it; and vote my conscience; regardless of what any human said or thought; under ANY circumstance.

And no body would ever coerce, intimidate or pressure me into voting for any one regardless of the circumstances. Even at the point of a sword.

Let me go one step further to give an example; and this will surely get my head lopped off on this forum.

On several threads concerning this most volatile and most unfortunate issue, the name of Pete Rose has come up.

IF, I were on the baseball hall of fame committee, I would vote NO to electing Pete Rose. Not only would I vote no, I would vote no to the last breath in my body.

I would do this because regardless of his talents and incredible proweress as one of the world's greatest players, he desecrated himself AND baseball, in his chosen field of endeavor.

In my opinion, NO player; regardless of how good they are; or regardless of how popular they are; deserves to be in a HOF with what that man did. And he did it with full knowledge of its crime. He is a disgrace not only to himself; but to the entire world of baseball in my book. So I would give him a "No" now, and always.

And this is also my LAST post on this issue. I would pray that when this thread has run its gamut, that our leader b0b would seal shut forever any future thread on this very bad situation.

May Jesus right all wrongs,

carl

Larry Bell · From: Englewood, Florida

If it were a 'good people' Hall of Fame or a 'nice guy' Hall of Fame, I would agree, but we all know that musicians are known to go through periods of indescretions, such as drug use, philandering, or financial ventures that may not be totally up and up.

My opinion is that MANY of the folks who are in the HOF have also led less than wholesome lives -- or at least for periods of their lives -- and they were allowed in. I guess the question is what is the hierarchy of sin here -- which ones will keep you out of 'heaven' -- no matter what.

Since it is the STEEL GUITAR Hall of Fame, I would favor only looking at their musical accomplishments. But I didn't write the rules or organize the Board of Directors. I am resigned to accept whichever great players they choose to elect.

I had never assumed any clandestine connection between the HoF and the Convention, other than the fact that they're both headed up by Scotty and concern the steel guitar.

I do believe that all involved are human beings and are capable of wonderful accomplishments, but there is always a dark side there somewhere. I choose not to look too hard for it and let my judgement be based on how well the cat can play.

Reece and JooYun (and a few others) would have been there years ago if it were my decision.

Just my opinion.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

[This message was edited by Larry Bell on 15 September 2003 at 07:45 AM.]

Kenny Dail · From: Kinston, N.C. R.I.P.

I agree with Larry's comments. Regardles of a players indiscretions, it does not make him any more or less talented. He could still be the "Greatest Player" in the world.

------------------
kd...and the beat goes on...

John Floyd · From: R.I.P.

Bobbe Seymour · From: Hendersonville TN USA, R.I.P.

Boy, now I'm going to get bashed because I'm going to state one of my controversial personal thoughts that probably I shouldn't state but I have never ever seen anyone give much needed credit to the SGHOF board.
But here goes: I personally feel after watching the SGHOF operate for many many years, that they have made brilliant, well informed decisions in who , what , why and when they inducted the members they have.
This board of smart,good players and great guys has done a wonderful job of making very difficult decisions each year, After looking at their decisions over the past 15 years, I can't fault them in the least.
These guys have the inside track and information and make good choices based on facts and popular informed opinions. Just look at who these guys are! These guys are the cream of the steel guitar crop. I personally hate to see them bashed all the time for the gift they have given us in the form of a Steel Guitar Hall of Fame. Am I alone in this?
I personally like the fact that we have a SGHOF. I like everyone in it and would rather dwell on the great folks in it than fight over who isn't in it. There, bash away.

Bobbe Seymour

Mark van Allen · From: Watkinsville, Ga. USA

I'll chime in with Carl in thanking Fred for a very well stated and reasoned post. If the thinking inside the HOF committee is as straightforward, they're probably doing as well as anyone can. As far as making "open nominations" I can only imagine the flame wars! What, Jerry Garcia overlooked?

Guitar Player magazine's old Reader's Poll was something to watch- whoever had the highest visibility won the polls. When Buddy wrote a monthly steel column, he was a shoo-in. When Jackson Brown was big, David Lindley won "best steel guitar". And the classical, jazz, and blues winners were always the folks who had most recently been featured in the magazine and other media. It didn't seem to ever be about who was the better player, or did more for the music.
And Larry, on the surface I would agree with you about the HOF not being a "nice guy" contest. However, without commenting on validity, allegations of past actions that include finacial ripoffs and outright intimidation of members of the steel guitar community are a far different thing than personal problems affecting few outside immediate family. I'm not on the HOF board and not priviledged to know what they know, and I'm willing to assume from Fred's post that they are on the game.

------------------
C'mon by and visit!- www.markvanallen.com
My Bands: Sugarland Kate and the Retreads Kecia Garland Band Shane Bridges Band Dell Conner Blues Band

Ron Page · From: Penn Yan, NY USA

I’m with Bobbe on The Board. But, hey! Let no good deed go unpunished.

The public wrangling here on the forum may not be doing our friend Reece or The Board a lick of good—pardon the pun. Let’s ease up and let The Board continue to do its job.

The SGHOF will never include all players--and only those players-- that we think it should. I’m glad The Board is doing its job and staying above the fray here.

They’ve willingly provided us with access to the nominating process. I don’t believe we can ask anything more.

------------------
HagFan

Larry Bell · From: Englewood, Florida

Mark,
That was exactly my point re: 'hierarchy of sins'. Is there a dollar value on ripoffs beyond which you would be ineligible, or is there some way to compare indescretions like public drunkeness with running a numbers game or importing illegal Cuban (or Mexican

) cigars?

We all have our shortcomings and I know that if you set the bar low enough and don't rig the game, there are several among the HOF laureates that could be called into question.

This is all academic, however. The decision is in the hands of a committee. And I join you in thanking Fred and Winnie and Herb and the others not on the Forum both for serving and for being as open as the rules allow. I believe that the Board consists of conscientious, level headed people who are a credit to our community and agree that the choices have historically been excellent. And as someone else pointed out, there is clearly honor in inclusion but no dishonor in exclusion.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps

Kenny Dail · From: Kinston, N.C. R.I.P.

And again, I agree with Larry.

------------------
kd...and the beat goes on...

Jeff Lampert · From: queens, new york city

Bobbe is right. It's unfortunate that 100 times the energy is used on admonishing the board and the choices not made compared to appreciating that the board exists and the choices that have been made. This years inductions got a small fraction of the press compared to the ones not inducted. It should be the other way around.

------------------
[url=http://www.mightyfinemusic.com/jeff's_jazz.htm]Jeff's Jazz[/url]

[This message was edited by Jeff Lampert on 16 September 2003 at 09:02 AM.]

Paul King · From: Gainesville, Texas, USA

I have to agree with Bobbe Seymore on this one. The board has done a great job in putting those individuals in the Hall Of Fame. There has been too much complaining about what they have not done instead of giving them credit for what they have done. I believe only 2 people are enshrined every year and it will take time before everyone who deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame gets their due. I believe every member of the board are very good men and all of them have my respect. They are trying their best to put members in the Hall Of Fame and yet keep others from being offended. So to all the board members I for one congratulate you for a job well done....Paul King

Bobbe Seymour · From: Hendersonville TN USA, R.I.P.

Paul, Jeff, Retrocop and the rest, I'm appreciative of your concurrence. I'm glad that the positive attitude toward this SGHOF board is finally being stated. Yes, these guys have hit a home run so far and shouldn't be defamed for their endevors.
There are many players that deserve to be in the HOF. And a few that don't. I feel this board and the information they have at their finger tips to make intelligent decisions, has the forwithall to make great choices. No, I'm not in the hall of fame. This proves what I've been saying! They know what they are doing (snicker snicker)!

bobbeseymour

Jody Carver · From: KNIGHT OF FENDER TWEED

Bobbe writes.....

No, I'm not in the hall of fame.

You are in mine

Pat Burns · From: Branchville, N.J. USA

...Bobbe, I have it on good authority that you have already been selected to the SGHOF posthumously...they're just waiting for you to do your part..

...seriously, I second Jody's motion...and I agree that the HOF is working just fine without any suggestions for improvement from me...

Kenny Dail · From: Kinston, N.C. R.I.P.

Jody, Bobbe is in my HOF too.

------------------
kd...and the beat goes on...

Forum Index > Steel Players		Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic

All times are GMT - 8 Hours	Jump to: