Jump to content

    • Per the Reddit post, this is one of the reasons I favor ‘testing’ a sampling of the claims filed and methods used by the Coalition, et al., through early discovery. Their desire to control the process was clear, which motive doesn’t in any way appear pure. I fear for the survivor claimants overall, if the TCC isn’t allowed the primary role. Just looking at the timing of dumped claims, the thousands of attorney and machine signatures and clearly manipulative advertising leads me to believe some digging is critical. The Coalition & Company may not have legitimate majority. It is disconcerting.  
    • Outside former sperts brought us "The Improved Scouting Program," BSA's last near-death experience.  Happily, Bill was rehired, brought back the outdoor program , and BSA survived.   
    • I get it.  The elites rule and we obey.  It's an old story.  
    • Mock the idea if you want.  IIHS and NTSM focus on failure analysis and recommend improvements.  In engineering, we often model problem patterns with FMEAs.  The key point is too often failures are repeated over and over again across time and across organizations.  We should be step wise learning from such failures to improve youth protection.  Over time, this could only help protect children.  BSA has what I'd often call an extremely good starting basis for youth protection in the G2SS.  Specific points could be added, removed and modified, but it's a good starting point.  Yes there are other failure modes such as oversight, enforement, etc.   That's where the analysis could really be beneficial. The key is I don't see such standards and planned protection in other organizations.  Establishing such analysis and recommendations for youth servicing organizations seems like a very basic idea.  
    • Independent.  Nameless.  Faceless.  Self-appointed.  Unaccountable.  Wait a minute.  Isn't this the BSA National Council?
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Create New...