Jump to content

Equipment Reviews & Discussions

Discussions dealing with equipment topics (tents, lights, packs, boots, stoves, etc.)


388 topics in this forum

    • 9 replies
    • 1.1k views
    • 1 reply
    • 982 views
    • 7 replies
    • 1.7k views
    • 6 replies
    • 1.1k views
    • 11 replies
    • 1.3k views
    • 10 replies
    • 2k views
    • 7 replies
    • 1.4k views
    • 19 replies
    • 6.8k views
  1. Flame War 1 2

    • 18 replies
    • 2k views
    • 9 replies
    • 1.8k views
    • 1 reply
    • 1k views
    • 12 replies
    • 1.3k views
    • 6 replies
    • 2.2k views
    • 2 replies
    • 780 views
    • 17 replies
    • 3.1k views
  • LATEST POSTS

    • @mtgavin, welcome to the forums! Fred answered your two questions (in four parts). His and other replies were making assumptions in the negative. I’d like to frame things positively. As a crew advisor I had been put in similar situations. So, to help bring clarity for scouts, scouters and parents, this is how I describe how to proceed … A BoR can be suspended to give a scout time to rectify deficiencies. In this case, the board should promptly write a letter regarding the perceived deficiencies (i.e., reticence in answering questions) and give the scout an opportunity to complete the review (i.e., as soon as next week). If time is of the essence, a handwritten letter will do. Done is better than perfect. An SM or ASM would then be able to listen to the scout, and coach him/her in how to overcome the problem. What’s not clear is if the SM discussed this with the scout’s troop CC. Working between multiple units, I’ve found that communication on all fronts is necessary. So, in a case like this when different people constitute the reconvened board, I would want the chair of the reconvened board to have the letter that the suspended board sent to the scout. Let’s not assume there’s something interpersonal between MCs and scouts. Sometimes scouts have a bad day. Sometimes that day falls at exactly the wrong time for adults in one party to help in short order. Given multi-way communication between all parties, this is a great model to the scout on how thoughtful and caring adults can work together and provide opportunities for growth.
    • @Jmatt0613, I hope the code of conduct that you propose passes muster. But, the important thing for you to communicate is that beyond oath and law, you shouldn’t need a code of conduct but scouts’ and scouters’ recent behavior betrays that need. Even if the committee doesn’t pass it, you want them to understand that you’re seeing courteous, kind, and cheerful being left behind in the trail. That’s not a recipe for growth.
    • My first take on your latest post: It appears (please correct me if I am mistaken) the SM and PLC are not leading the program? It appears parents are making decisions. If the parents are ASMs, then they are to be following the direction of the SM. In their absence, a specific ASM should be the acting SM, and this person should be chosen beforehand by the SM. Other parents are "observers only" they should not be interacting with the scouts much at all. They should never be interferring with the program, which undermines the SM or the PLC.  Troop committee members are also just observers are not particpants in the program. It appears that the adults in the troop need a reset to understand the specific roles of SM, ASM, troop committee and parent observers. Also, specific training for all Unit positions including how to empower the Scouts to move the troop to Scout-Led. IIRC, it was Barry who recommends training the parents. I agree with this too.
    • Good answers by @fred8033.  In my view, the two main issues were a) the scout should have appealed to the District Advancement Committee, and b) the other unit should never have agreed to examine a Scout they did not know, thus usurping the authority of the Scout's own unit.  Since the Scout has already been told he is a Life, and it's recorded, I don't think District will take it back at this point.  If I were the Scout's CC, I would invite him to continue his journey in the other Unit.  As CC, I would also take @fred8033's point #4 on board and examine the Unit's role in all this.
    • It's the other way around. I came here to come up with ideas and possible solutions to help overcome scouts that are uncomfortable approaching the scoutmaster with the issue. I admit that I shouldn't have brought up the grading policy as it derailed my original question. In the moment I thought it might help to explain other things talked about at the meeting.    I agree that the kids should work through their issues with their peers but it crossed that line a long time ago. There isn't any physical bullying but more verbal bullying than anything. There is a lot of putting others down for various issues, yelling at scouts that are answering too many questions then proceeding to the conversation in a different direction,  yelling at special needs scouts, and at some times yelling at everyone including adult leaders. All of these actions have been done by multiple scouts of various ages, ranks, gender, and troop position. One scout(scout A) had done all of the aforementioned acts in front of adult leaders or their parents. There was a misunderstanding at our last summer camp. We were about to elect the new senior patrol leader but as the scoutmaster had come back later than we all thought it was the consensus among the adults to push it to the next night and have a little party beforehand. As it was just decided we told all scouts in the near area that this was the new plan and to tell the others of it as well. Some time passes by and almost everyone is hanging out in the pavilion that was provided to us when scout A and scout B come up from a cabin we were also provided. Scout A attempted to ask another person what was going but due to the noise, no one heard them so then Scout A proceeds to scream at everyone about its not fair that they were left out of voting in the SPL election. This caused some confusion as we didn't know that Scout A was unaware of the plan change since no one had seen them since coming back from dinner. We try to explain that the plans changed but Scout A wasn't listening to what we said and then Scout A proceeded to walk away angry and almost crying leaving everyone else very confused. The Scout A parent( Parent A) proceeded to discipline everyone there including the scoutmaster, a member of camp staff, the majority of the scouts, and other adult leaders including myself. Parent A said that Scout A was feeling left out when everyone was at the pavilion except them, that they had a bad day, and that we are bullying him by not allowing him to be with us. We made it clear that since this is an open area we can't police who is and isn't there and that if we had made Scout A feel any sort of detachment from the group we didn't mean to do. Parent A then proceeded to attempt to argue that not including anyone in SPL elections is unfair (Scout A was NOT eligible for SPL at all and wasn't close enough to finish within the next day) and I simply said back that we wouldn't Vote for the next SPL without everyone here BECAUSE that isn't fair and that we had changed the plan. That shut Parent A up who then proceeded to walk away and pout. This is one of the stories of this scout from our summer camp week. Scout A had at least one major problem a day where it would be similar to the above. I might have gone a bit off topic but this is a clear example of the bullying in our troop. Something needs to change or else the troop will be forced to close due to lack of youth.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...