Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/16/20 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Good for them. Now, just call it a patrol based summer camp and they might just have a great new program model.
  2. 1 point
    Family camping is not a option for our troop and agree too many adults make it harder to have the scouts lead. We do what now seems to old school - Patrol Mathod, 100yrds away, 1 SM and 2 ASMs and maybe 1 other adult with 25+ scouts. SPL checks in on the Patrols and provides updates to us. We keep an eye and ear open for any signes of danger. I can't recall anything our council has done for us. We would be just fine without them or national. If we could order our badges online we would never set foot into a scout shop. They only time we talk to our DE is to get them to fix whatever they screwed up in scoutbook.
  3. 1 point
    Sadly the quality of council rise and fall with the leadership of the SE. I have seen great SEs, and mediocre SEs, and unfortunately poor SEs who should be behind bars for some of the shenanigans they were doing (some have been caught, but not all). Lately I am seeing more and more of the latter 2 categories. I wish that instead of focusing on money, they would focus on service. I wish they would provide a quality, challenging summer camp programs instead of summer school where MBs are given away. I wish national would focus more on the number of camp outs a unit does rather than how many are earning advancement
  4. 1 point
    Yeah, 7+30 drive time from Philly area, plus stops for meals/restrooms and gas? 35 Scouts? No, thanks 😵
  5. 1 point
    Sorry you are having a bad day. My unit and I will continue our work to deliver the Promise, with or without help from up the chain in spite of Chapter 11, GSUSA trademark suit, covid-19, ticks (bumper year), weather, ... Never said they were "evil". If I could get Council to do their part with EBOR and paperwork for our end of year, even answering our email beyond replying with a donation form...something. My $0.02,
  6. 1 point
    This is a garbage take. I'm sorry people were dying and we closed our offices, like almost every other business did, because there was a tangible danger to Scouts and Scouters. This is a really far reach to push the "professional evil" idea. We were trying to come up with every virtual idea out there because almost all of our units decided themselves that it was too dangerous to meet. It that was BP envisioned for the BSA program? heck no. But I'm sure he also didn't envision a global pandemic shutting down the country either. Virtual meeting are a heck of a lot better than no meeting at all. you're basically saying "The volunteers were out there saving scouting while the professionals were cowering and destroying the program because they didn't wait for the proper guidelines that came out 2 months too late". I think that is one of the most silly things i've read on this website. Can you imagine the liability lawsuits we would face? Moderate yourself.
  7. 1 point
    The virus and its victims seem to get the bad press. Biogen the "superspreader" of the corona virus in Boston and then elsewhere did not get the bad press I would have expected whereas some of their employees did. Personal responsibility of those who failed to notice or report symptoms?
  8. 1 point
    Scouting will continue with or without National, Councils, or the BSA. While National became an uncommunicative legal and financial burden, local units remained trustworthy and thrifty. While Councils responded to covid by closing offices and camps before the CDC and state health guidelines were released and attempting virtual quick delivery of the advancement and the outdoors, dedicated volunteers waited for those health guidelines and planned smaller, safer summer adventures. Smaller as in patrol or family hiking and camping - perhaps part of our new normal. Virtual did not deliver the program nor will it sustain membership come September for those units which have had no adventurous outdoor program for the past five months. Rapid, easy advancement is no substitute for awesome, challenging adventure. My advice to National, get your backpack together .
  9. 1 point
    Part II: Let's talk turkey: is the BSA an organization that values outdoor adventure or isn't it? Scratch the surface--right below the rah-rah school talks, glossy summer camp flyers, and our high adventure base advertising--there are very few units that have an outdoor program that resembles anything that Baden Powell or Green Bar Bill would recognize. Or anything that would inspire an outdoor-minded boy or girl to join. Or stay. If the BSA is primarily concerned with "character building" via constant adult supervision, virtual meetings, badge collection, backyard camping and merit badge fairs, let's drop the pretense of adventure entirely and advertise truthfully. Every day, there is someone trying to kick dirt over the last, glowing ember of the campfire.
  10. 1 point
    These National committees, and many at council level, operate in a vacuum. As stated earlier, there are no organizational charts, no rosters, no contact info. The committee members solicit minimal input from the field at large (but perhaps from select like-minded sources), and when a poll is conducted, it is almost always ignored. Yet these committees make recommendations and decisions that impact the entire BSA, publish no minutes, and offer no explanation for their actions. And I'd go so far as to say that until recently, said committee members experience no accountability for their actions. Most egregious of all, no matter how unreasonable and poorly implemented many of these decision have been, National is impervious to feedback from the field. National, and some councils, seem to be operating in a different BSA than those adults serving in packs, troops, crews, and ships.
  11. 1 point
    Yes, it would be nice if there was some transparency with the BSA. Who made the "InstaPalm" decision when 94% of those polled were either against (18%) or strongly against (76%) enacting that policy? What were the poll results of the membership policy change? And who decided on the most inconvenient time for the poll, i.e. announcing it right before a National Scout Jambore and shutting down polling about a week after the NSJ? And whose idea was it to mortgage Philmont without telling the Philmont committee about it? Why do 18 to 20 year old ASMs and MBCs no longer count towards Youth Protection? Why can 2 registered females over 21 work with boys by themselves, but 2 registered males over 21 cannot work with girls by themselves? Why the double standard? And those are the ones within the past 5 years that I can think of.
×
×
  • Create New...