Jump to content

Order of the Arrow

Discussions for OA Members and those interested in Scouting's Honor Society. Also includes a private sub-forum for OA Members only.

Subforums

  1. Western Region

    Sections, Lodges and local discussions

    28
    posts
  2. NOAC

    Been to NOAC? Heading there? Chat about the Order's bi-annual gathering

    125
    posts
  3. Central Region

    Sections, Lodges and local discussions

    120
    posts
  4. Northeast Region

    Sections, Lodges and local discussions

    35
    posts
  5. Southern Region

    Sections, Lodges and local discussion

    138
    posts

512 topics in this forum

  1. Why?

    • 116 replies
    • 10524 views
  2. OA "Password"

    • 69 replies
    • 9336 views
  3. The OA Admonition

    • 19 replies
    • 8630 views
    • 66 replies
    • 6732 views
  4. cleaning OA sash

    • 39 replies
    • 6447 views
    • 94 replies
    • 5728 views
    • 15 replies
    • 5595 views
    • 72 replies
    • 4832 views
    • 236 replies
    • 4777 views
  5. Noise At Noac

    • 38 replies
    • 4554 views
    • 30 replies
    • 4327 views
  6. Tap Out Question

    • 53 replies
    • 4274 views
    • 41 replies
    • 3992 views
  7. Scoutmaster O/A Sash

    • 29 replies
    • 3951 views
    • 94 replies
    • 3933 views
  • LATEST POSTS

    • Blockchain sounds like it could be a medieval torture device.
    • I didn't realize there was a difference.  I thought LFL consisted of in-school Scouting and Exploring.  No?
    • I think venturing is the canary in the coal mine for boy scouts. Venturing has it much tougher than scouts. The 14 age limit is hard because kids have a harder time making friends after that age, most girls that join don't have outdoor experience, and worst of all, that's the age where kids start pulling away from their parents. The result is parents are less involved and nobody is around to pass it on to. SMs pass a troop onto the next SM. I never see a crew advisor pass things on to another. It's also hard to recruit because the age is past where a group of kids will easily join. The result is that crews fail, just like girl scout troops, after the adult that started it is done. This is because the adult is typically the real leader. They aren't the advisor. This would all not be an issue if the kids that joined venturing had good leadership skills and they could sustain it. Or maybe even if venturing had a good method of teaching leadership it could work. Let's just assume the BSA really worked on that and got it going. It would also do a ton of good for the boy scout program. The problem is the boy scout program can run with adult leadership. It may not be great but it is sustainable. Last week I was visiting another troop and they also have a crew. I watched that meeting and it is exactly what I described. The adult was running everything. There was zero indication of youth leadership. There was only one adult. It will collapse. My daughter wanted to join a crew years ago, the adults wouldn't let her lead, she walked. After years of the same couple of adults leading they finally folded.
    • I led what I guess would have been a precursor to Venturing which was a High Adventure Explorer post in the 80's.  Had some guys from the troop, then a few sisters, and BAM we had a post.  Ran it for 3 years or so.  Hard part was over 21 females, burned through a few girlfriends dragging them on outings.  Then the ones that started with it become HS Seniors or graduated and drifted away, then we tried recruiting some, and it sort of faded away.  Tough to sustain without a good feeder program (Cubs to Scouts). That is soooo true.  When there are serious audits on membership numbers for LFL and Scoutreach it is comical (in a really sad way).  Yes it can and should be a good program and the councils get a feel good see what we are doing moment.  The best is when professionals who are supposed to be working with the units have no idea where the unit may actually meet.  Members who have no idea they are members.
    • I support the 2nd amendment and the rights therein. However, I believe the Founding Fathers would not have meant this right extends to such weaponry as we have now. I own firearms. I own firearms that have a practical purpose such as hunting or defending my family/property. I do NOT own firearms like an AR-15, sniper rifle or anything like that because I believe they have a military purpose. I think if the Founding Fathers were alive today they would be appalled at the extremes on both sides of this debate. We do need arms and should have them. We don't need arms that can take out a company of citizens in less than 2 minutes.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×