Jump to content

Forum Support & Announcements

Forum support and announcements from SCOUTER.com


191 topics in this forum

  1. "Netiquette"

    • 9 replies
    • 1.4k views
    • 7 replies
    • 1.1k views
    • 1 reply
    • 960 views
    • 19 replies
    • 1.9k views
  2. Thread Closure

    • 13 replies
    • 1.5k views
    • 24 replies
    • 3.2k views
    • 12 replies
    • 1.4k views
    • 13 replies
    • 1.4k views
    • 6 replies
    • 1.3k views
    • 30 replies
    • 3.8k views
    • 16 replies
    • 2.9k views
    • 1 reply
    • 1.1k views
  3. Forums Were Offline

    • 4 replies
    • 1.2k views
    • 33 replies
    • 3.9k views
    • 20 replies
    • 3.4k views
  • LATEST POSTS

    • They still have some time to work out a settlement on scouting abuse.   Post 1976 scouting abuse ... Goes to bankruptcy. Pre 1976 scouting abuse ... TBD... They have 12 months to work out a settlement. Non scouting abuse... No protection 
    • That would be the end of "All Scouting is local." It's enough now that I have to make a 4-hour roundtrip for a Commissioner Cabinet or Lodge meeting if no Zoom option is available. And that isn't the worst I know of. An acquaintance of mine in GSLAC travels almost 6 hours round trip from Edgar County, IL. Scouting would become a big city program in my area, where the big cities are not so big. 
    • Does this mean incidents will need to be judged on whether they were "scouting" or "church"?  If scouting, it's part of bankruptcy?  If church, it's not?
    • I have friends who are board members and pros, and though I think of all of them as people of good character, transparency has always been to me a big problem with their decision making.  Just because you have the position doesn't mean you posses all the wisdom regarding the position.  IMHO Board Meetings should all be open to the public, and decisions should all be removed from the Executive Committee and put before the full board and the CORs.  If your reasoning, discussions, and decisions can't stand up to the light of day than they are inherently suspect and probably flawed. , 
    • TCJC deal is removed but they are a participating CO.   Insurance of Archbishop of Agana will not go to trust. Updated plan to address most of the objections. Note they are also removing the $100M fundraising commitment from UMC. They are asking for some specific findings of fact that she didn't mention. I may have missed some aspects, but we may be close to a decision.  TCJC didn't go nuclear and become a opt out CO.  To me, that is big and likely allows this to be confirmed.   
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...