DugNevius

Hey guys, that was us. The younger boys were those not eligible for philmont ages 11-13

what do you have in mind?

i remember at summer camp as a scout the SM's nephew was always getting in trouble. After one particular incident the SM sat him down at the table and asked "Why are you always causing problems?" to which the kid replied he didnt know. The SM then said that he should sit there and think about it until he came up with a response.

That kid sat there for the entire day. I had to admire his fortitude.

Thats what the Committee Chairman is for, that buffer zone between the logistics and the scouts themselves. Your CC needs to explain to the Committee the proper way to do things.

Committee members need things they talk to CC. He talks to the SM and then its past to the PLC.

Our SPL and PLs are elected. The SPL for one year and the PLs for 6 months.

Elections are held twice a year. The process is made up of four parts.

-Nominations. Any scout may be nominated by his peers and must be seconded by a show of hands by his peers to appear on the ballot.

-Speeches. A prepared short speech of approximately 2 minutes informing his peers who he is and why he should be elected.

-Town Hall. The candidates sit before the troop and answer questions concerning their past and their plans of the future. This is M.C.ed by the current SPL.

-Voting. The troop votes by closed ballot and can vote for as many Pls as there are positions in the troop or as few as zero votes if they do not feel any are worthy of the position. The candidates with the most votes win. In the case of a tie there is a run off election following short speeches. If a second tie occurs the SPL breaks the tie.

Our patrols rebuild every six months following elections. This is the process:

The patrol leader with the most votes picks first. The Patrol name is selected first followed by its members. Scouts being selected can turn down their selection by not accepting, but they can not turn down every PL. If a selection is turned down, the selecting PL gets to pick again until that spot is filled. Patrols must be even, so not accepting a selection does not ensure that a scout will not be in his desired patrol. (If there are 3 patrols and 24 scouts to be placed into patrols, the patrols must be of 8 each.)

Patrol members may have to be moved around during the 6 month period. To do so one must have the approval of the SPL, the PLs involved, the SM and the scouts involved. If any of these parties have a solid objection and state their case clearly, then the change can not be permitted.

The Staff Patrol consists of a Senior Patrol Leader, his assistant and several other scouts in Leadership Positions such as troop Quartermaster and Troop Scribe. The SPL is elected and then appoints scouts into their respective duties pending Scout Master approval. The terms for the Staff members are not specified. They remain on staff as long as the SPL and the Scout Masters all feel they are performing their assigned duties or until the SPLs term is up and a new SPL is elected at which time staff is reselected.

an Election process isnt competitive? Our boys go through a 2-3 meeting process with prepared speeches, posters and a town hall where they have to answer questions thrown at them by the scouts. I would say thats pretty comepetitive. The boys that are prepared and deserving of the leadership get elected as often as they run, they kids not ready to be a leader normally dont. When i was a scout i went through the process 6 times.

I agree, rotating any POR is not comepetitive or benificial in any way.

Our troop is basically the same as Eagledad. Our PLs and SPL are elected, the PLs sign off the requirments up to first class and the BORs are made up of scouts in leadership positions. On campouts and summer camp we adults read our books, sit around the campfire, go fishing. The ASMs and SM deal with the scouts through the SPL and the GreenBar members. Dads just relax. The boys do it all.

im sorry but you will never convince me that having adults chose who gets to be a PL and therefore who makes the program is in anyway a solid form of "Boy Led" and nothing more then adults micromanaging with little faith in the youth.

at summer camp we have our first years go for Camping, Cooking and Swimming first. After that they go for whatever they wish.

I am always shocked how many guys going for eagle around 16-17 still dont have Family Life. That one is made for 12 year olds.

Gonzo, its not like its been much of a stretch for the media to report negative on a war declared won over a year ago yet yeilds more casualties post victory and, as pointed out earlier, a war started on false analysis (or lies?) I think yur anger/frustration/disparagement is misdirected.

as for Westmorland, he would say, if alive, he was handicapped and held back from winning, not that he won.

Tet is well documented. From a Vietnamese military perspective it was a failed offensive and was quickly put down. From a stratigic perspective it did exactly what the NVA and Vietcang leaders intended, it sapped the support from America, Walter Conkite pronounced the war unwinnable and the media jumped on it as an example of the Communist resolve. Without civilian support large scale war is nearly impossible to win.

The Tet offenseive, or "Myth" as you called it, is no evidence that the Vietnam war was in any way close to a success. The truth of vietnam is that the US killed more of the Vietcong or NVA then they lost, by a huge margin, but not a single long term objective was accomplished and therefore the conflict must be seen as a failure.

Gonzo, im curious what would lead you to believe the Vietnam war was in anyway a success.

actually i would make a minimum age requirment of eagle to 15 and a half.

i find the ratio of adults to scouts amazing.

Yu seemed to have dodged my point.

If you are against the "troop method" because as you say, Adults dictate too much, then how can yu be behind a system where the Adults dictate exactly who makes up the program. That would be direclt control over the troop and the patrols.

stosh- please correct me if i am wrong.

It seems to be as if yu are saying that a SM should appoint the PLs.

Now there seems to be a little flaw in yur overall perspective here.

In other topics you state clearly and often that The Patrol Method is the better way of scouting because it puts the power in the hands of the boys, where as Troop Method leads to Adults over controling.

But, when it comes to patrol leader selection the boys who become leaders are appointed by the Adults.

So how is having the adults hand pick who controls the PLC and the troop any less adult interference? How does the greater chance of nepetism, favortism and a general dictatorship help teach the boys anything.

The problem i see is a lack of confidence in the boys. Yu are basically saying they are not capable of electing quality leaders (But the quality leaders appointed by a SM are capable of making every other decision?) That is not the case. The youth ARE aware of who is a slacker, a bully, a leader and a friend. Our troop holds elections twice a year. There are occasionally winners that have shocked me, but for the most part the strongest leaders, those kids that step up, lead by example and know generally the most about the position, win.

The wiseasses, the slackers and bullies get passed over. I sit them down and explain why. Some of them get it together, act like a leader and eventually get elected. For those boys that werent particularly qualified, they learn as they go with a little coaching from senior staff and adults. For those boys that simply dont get the job done... thats the last time they get elected or its not again for quite a while.

Is democracy a perfect system of government? No.

But a dictatorship is quite flawed.

stosh, who do yu think should do the appointing of Patrol leaders?

stosh, you often state that a "Troop Method" leads to a SM taking over or dictating, but wouldnt an ASM acting inside a patrol to be in someways the PL of 3 boys also be adults dictating and taking away from the leadership experiences of the youth?

anyway, back to the topic.

STOSH: "The other model which is (in my opinion) a reversal of this is where the patrol is viewed as nothing more than a sub-group of the troop. The troop (usually directed by the adult's goals and plans) are mandating down to the patrols what they can and cannot do, how they are to be formed, who they are to associate with, and if only one or two boys from a couple of patrols show up for an outing, they are all dumped into one "no-name" patrol so the troop will be able to compete at the camporee contests.

The real difference is in the flow of authority. In a troop-method program, there never will be any personal ownership in patrols. They will come and go as often as the wind changes. Nothing's going to last very long. Leadership will be whatever with no commitment to anything other than POR requirement fulfillment. Anything they plan on doing together can in a heartbeat be cast aside and changed by the SM and/or PLC at their whim.

The lack of ownership and commitment on the part of temporary patrol members will continually undermine the operation of a true patrol method operation."

I think this statement is way to generalistic and subjective. This is not always the case and i dont think you should post as though it is.

Our troop functions in a way that is probably very different then other troops. The patrols are not for life, or by age and the PLs are elected democratically and the patrols are formed democratically as well.

I know already, you dont have to say it. Not by the book.

But to say that this leads to adults dictating or undermining patrol unity or lack of commitment is simply untrue and not the case at all. We dont tell them how to do things, we dont tell them who is a better leader. We dont change things on a whim. We dont fold the patrols into one if only a few make a trip, the spl doesnt do the job of the patrol leader. Our patrols compete year round, work as a group and have strong unity. They have patrol trips where the PL dictates the program and carries it out with no conflict from senior scouts or adults.

I think you are confusing "Troop method" with over controlling adults. two different issues all together.

haha i apologize. I was in a teasing mood.

JBlake, are yu really (another poster who used to post here)in disguise?

(lets leave the past in the past and learn to love the posters who participate now for their own uniqueness. OGE) (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

so an ASM cant email a parent, the SPL cant EMail a patrol leader and the CC cant email the lot?

Seems strange to me.

Our troop uses email a lot its a great way to remind people of upcomming events, changes or even just for the adults to discuss issues.

Back in the early days of the NHL the goalies didnt wear masks.

i think thats short sighted. Nicknames like "Dirty" of "Snozz" dont always break teamwork and in somecases bring guys together. Holding everyone at arms length the way yu may an employee or employer may get things done but its stiff and lacks chemestry. Scouts dont have to call me "Mr Nevius" or "Mr Assistant Scoutmaster" to show me respect and ive never had any problem getting respect from any scout for the 10 years ive been an ASM.

Maybe its a generational thing. Im still a young guy in my twenties. My guy friends and i rip on each other all the time. I sit at a table or around a fire with the scouts and listen to the banter and im pretty good at judging whats malicious and whats not. The boys tend to as well. Its rare that anything esculates to bullying, ive never had a parent or scout come up to me and complain about it and the boys are very tight knit.

Its all about malice. Sometimes teasing or razzing is simply part of bonding. Its part of male socialization. Guys interact much differently than women, do to agressive instinct and dont emote the same way. Look at any tight knit group of guys, be it in a sports team locker room or a military unit or even in the workforce. The banter is quite different then in a mixed group. In one sentence two friends can put down each other and at the same time make each other laugh as long as its even ground and both parties are participating. I know then when my buddies and i are at a pub drinking a few beers as we watch ESPN we joke around and razz each other and from the outside it may look like bullying but its all equal.

There is a fine line. Sometimes names are terms of "affection." In our troop several of the boys have nicknames that stick so well their real names are forgotton, and when a patrol leader is calling the scouts house he'll ask for him by nickname. We`have an eagle scout that has for 7 years been called "Dirty", another "Tweak" after a South Park character and a third "Bubba" after that guy from Forest Gump, all names they were given as a cross over by older scouts. Sometimes the banter gets outta hand and thats when as an adult i have to step in and change the subject, but its not all bullying because its not all malicious. Sometimes that aggressive banter actually pulls the group together.