Re: OA elections -- Adult Role

At 10:01 -0700 on 8/18/98, Bruce E. Cobern mailed Re: OA elections -- Adult
Role:
>
>Sure, it is real easy to "rig" the election by eliminating all the Scouts
>that YOU don't think should be elected, but that is not what it is all
>about.

Couldn't agree more.

>In fact, I don't think that any Scout that a SM would sign off on
>the Scout Spirit requirement for advancement should be eliminated from the
>ballot by the SM. If he doesn't show Scout Spirit, and hence is left off
>the ballot, then it must be a recent phenomenon, or otherwise how did he
>ever advance to First Class?

That's the context in which the conversation would come up.
>
>In summary, I believe it should be a relatively rare situation where the
>SM would refuse to list a Scout on the ballot, just like it should be a
>rare situation where the SM fails to sign the Scout Spirit requirement for
>a Scout seeking advancement.

And in thirteen years as a Scoutmaster, I never had to keep someone off the
ballot, and for that matter, very rarely disagreed with the outcome of the
election. To be sure there used to be times when fewer got elected than I
thought fit, because of the then election rules.

The OA actually functioned usefully as a learning tool. "You see, Sam, this
is an honor bestowed upon those whom the Troop itself thinks are ready.
Sometimes people get elected because they are popular without being a good
leader, but hardly ever does anyone who works very hard and effectively for
the good of all fail to be elected in his own good time. You agreed with me
four months ago that you needed to improve in helpfulness and Scout spirit.
I believe you have, but it can take a while for everyone to decide that
that is a permanent change."

=================================================
mailto:egburton@valint.net

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message
• Previous message