Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/23/21 in all areas

  1. Was talking to scout the other day who was lamenting about the polarization of society. He mentioned other adults in his life who cannot even say hi to each other anymore let alone have a civil discussion. We talked about how it is ok to disagree and have discussions. We pondered how much better society would be if folks engaged in these types of discussion had the primary goal of trying to understand why the other person has a different opinion and were not soley focused on trying to convince the other person. Listening to understand, not to respond.
    5 points
  2. More than once I wished for a delete button ... or a "Way Back Machine" button.
    2 points
  3. I didn't take it personally at all -- no apologies necessary. I share what you are feeling. We are all so activated by current events, even the more more level headed among us. It is a struggle to discuss things and not instantly snap into reactive mode. I'm churned up every day despite not wanting to be and trying very hard to hit the pause and edit buttons.
    2 points
  4. Fair enough. I overreacted. Please attribute it to a long day and too many hours between relatives with strongly different political positions. I'm extremely frustrated that we have no middle ground anymore. I was discussing this with my son on the way home. We've lost the ability to keep our emotions out of current events. Me too. For me, I cringe hearing this sort of thing. I believe in vaccines, but then I've got the relatives mocking those who don't trust all vaccines and intentionally demeaning them with anti-vaxxer. Devaluing their thoughts and person. It hurts hearing o
    2 points
  5. I don't think they can do a vaccine mandate. They could do a mandate that in order to be unmasked you have to be vaccinated but I don't think you are legally allowed to ask that question. I am not sure how HIPA rules work for this. So I think you can say this is the rule and people should be respectful to follow it, but you can't enforce it.
    2 points
  6. With respect to the the TCC $103B claim value estimate, it is probably conservative but it is also academic. The BSA's most valuable asset is the insurance. Some councils participated in its insurance program a year or a few prior to 1984 when the national BSA insurance program became mandatory for all councils. Some of the pre-1984 policies named the local councils, troops and camps as "additional insureds." Before the national insurance program was established LC's maintained their own separate insurance. Much less is known about those policies because the LC's have been unwilling or
    2 points
  7. “On my honor, I will do my best, to do my duty, to God and my country…” “Of all the things about scouting that influenced me, the Boy Scout oath did the most,” Colonel Ralph Puckett Jr. said. “Repeating the Scout oath was probably the first time that I realized that I had a duty to contribute something to my country, to give something back to this great land in which we are privileged and fortunate to live.” “Next to my parents, scouting was the most influential action on me while I was a young man,” Puckett said in that speech. “That influence has affected me all my life. Only my fa
    1 point
  8. I think BSA would say ... the HA bases along with other unrestricted assets should be decided at trial. So basically, lets setup the trust and get agreement. If the judge declares some of the assets are actually unrestricted, those could then go to the trust. But there is no reason to hold up the bankruptcy for the trial that will take until 2022. There are actually 2 major players regarding the HA bases. One is National. They profit from the HA bases and believe they help recruit/retain scouts. The other is JP Morgan. JP Morgan loaned BSA hundreds of millions of dollars, using the
    1 point
  9. My view, admittedly biased but trying to be as objective as possible, is the BSA “gets a win” if it exits with some assets and operating capital to ably pursue its mission. That seems to be its perspective, as well , with or without all of its LCs. That last part makes little sense to me. As a victim/survivor claimant, there is no winning for me in this. I was invited to file a claim for “equitable compensation” and I’d like to see BSA do better with YP. I (and we) have lost too much to call even a reasonably successful outcome a victory.
    1 point
  10. To be clear, the claim that MMR vaccines cause autism was published in the Lancet, a peer-reviewed journal, in 1998. It took many years for it to be debunked, and not before the Wakefield study results were all over the evening news. The "anti-vaxxer movement" didn't create the claim, Dr. Wakefield did, and following the publicity of the study, the movement. Only later did we find out he was funded by a law firm looking to sue MMR manufacturers. Those of us who have children with autism, who were of vaccine receiving ages between 1998 and roughly 2004, were forced to make decisions in that
    1 point
  11. I have always looked at this situation as both sides WILL lose out. There is no winning here.
    1 point
  12. That was my second thought. My first was hopeful (that perhaps this is a good sign). My second is that this judge is struggling to make any decision as this is a Sophie’s choice situation. So, she will wait it out and let fate decide. Which could mean both groups lose out.
    1 point
  13. And boy. Those relatives.
    1 point
  14. I don't know what you're reacting to but I haven't seen much specific to scouting other than some COs that are hyper concerned about liability who may require it, at least of their adult leaders. I know some summer camps have required all staff to be vaccinated this summer. Have not seen anything yet about kids. This is just something we're all going to have to navigate in various settings from work to travel to schools and other activities as we (hopefully) head out of the pandemic. Just as I think anyone has a right to be vaccinated or not, I also think individual entities whether businesses
    1 point
  15. Pairing back my comments. My apologies if I write too explicitly. This smells of the over-zealous using their scouting position over others to force a medical choice and medical tracking. It's wrong.
    1 point
  16. It depends on who is asking. HIPAA only applies in the healthcare setting and it merely protects against providers sharing your medical records against your will. An employer, school, business, or anyone who isn't affiliated with those entities can legally ask your vaccine status. They as of now can't mandate it, but they can make decisions based on whatever information you supply on whether or not they want to hire, serve, or admit you. In other threads it has been discussed that while BSA may not require a vaccine for scouting participation, a CO certainly can based on what they think their
    1 point
  17. It seems like a very long time to give them, from my comfy chair. Even my wife was surprised, basically insinuating that the judge is avoiding the tough calls on a wish and a prayer. Hers is not an easy job and who am I to say. Still, lots of at bats and whiffs with precious little wood to leather, imho.
    1 point
  18. I find it very interesting that the judge delayed the trial by almost two weeks. I wonder/hope it might mean she heard there is progress on mediation. Not sure if that is possible. Otherwise, it seems a bit odd to delay as BSA is running out of time.
    1 point
  19. There should not be any issues. You will pay only one registration fee. Just don't stretch yourself out so thin you can't do either position well.
    1 point
  20. With the national annual meeting for the BSA happening now, I actually didn't know it was for Ireland until the last link. Wow.
    1 point
  21. It is like a high stakes game of chicken or he who blinks first....loses.
    1 point
  22. Thank you. This is an excellent post. We have some great, very informative commentators on here but this is the best explanation I have seen of the insurance side of the equation.
    1 point
  23. As cryptic as the judge's comments and questions seemed, I think she will do the following (generally), because there is no alternative for her. She knows there is no support for the BSA plan A. The toggle plan means cram down and she knows she cannot cram down a plan over the objections of 95% of the victims, either politically or legally. A cram down has never been done in a sexual abuse bankruptcy and she won't do it here. First, Kosnoff's/Abused in Scouting's campaign to encourage its 17,000 clients to write to the court has been impactful even if the judge redacted portions of them.
    1 point
  24. FYI, this was already scheduled to continue to next Monday to address everything on the agenda.
    1 point
  25. That sure sounds like it will require a pretty huge pivot by someone in the equation, which I believe has to be the BSA. I feel they have been avoidant, resistant, recalcitrant and less than deserving, for lack of a better word, of another at bat. As you said, “or not.”
    -1 points
  26. I don’t see the TCC, Coalition and counsel as “blinkers,” which comforts me.
    -1 points
×
×
  • Create New...