emb021

"Mr. Boyce"'s comments were what I was thinking. The person I was 'discussing' this with is a young scout who obviously heard such claims and believed them, then was very rude to me claiming I obviously don't read papers/watch tv, because 'otherwise I'd know it was true'. Yeah, right. Of course, he wasn't able to provide evidence. But what do you expect of some kid who doesn't understand the basics of debate and citing proof of your claims? I even gave the example of Dale. Never heard of him having his Eagle taken away, and he's probably the most well gay to be kicked out in recent years.

Well, we're not too clear on the structure of the national office, or the terms they are using. In the old days, the big groups were called division. You had the 3 program Divisions, but you also have divisions like Relationships, National Supply, Jamboree, etc. I don't think they are using the term 'division' at all now. I do see the use of the term 'team', but I think those are for groups at the 2nd or 3rd level of the org. Maybe 'departments' are used at one level. Looking at the professional chart, what are the "Innovation & Strategy", "Marketing", "Outdoor Adventure" and "Council Solution" groups called below the ACSE? Are they 'departments' or something else. I know there is a "Youth Development Team", but not sure where it is in the structure (either which group or what level).

I got mine at Roundtable, as I wanted it done with my fellow scout leaders. I was also working to get my ticket done and get beaded before I went to the 89 Jamboree. I wanted to be able to attend the WB Reunion there. I was so disappointed when I got there and learned they weren't going to have one (this after seeing the reunion patches from the previous 2 jamborees). We wound up having an unofficial gathering, and there was a small beading ceremony where 3-4 people got beaded by GBB himself, one being the wife of my troop's scoutmaster. Next jamboree, no official reunion. And the unofficial one was sadden by the fact that GBB had just recently passed away the day before he was to travel to Denmark. We haven't even had an unofficial WB gathering at any of the following jamborees to my knowledge...

Earning them as a Venturing leader is a not a requirement for wearing them. The background color just matches the shirt, and does not signify the program you recieved the knot it. National at one time made several knots on khaki, dark green, blue, and white, to make the uniforms of the different programs. They stopped this sometime in the 70s. All that Craig Murray is doing is making available the knots on dark green that National Supply used to wear. You wear them to make your uniform. Sea Scout leaders have their own sources for knots on blue and white for their uniforms.

"But I have to admit that the scout store person did say one of the dumbest things I've heard in a long time." Well, that could probably be a thread in its own right: the dumbest thing said by a scout store person. Or scouting profession. (you figure the volunteers, because we've volunteers, would be less often correct as compared to the people being paid to do this. But I guess since most of us are passionate about it, its the other way around...)

In my area, both the 'action shirt' and the 'activity shirt' would fall into the basic class of acceptable 'class B' (or if you prefer Activity Uniform) shirts, along with any scouting related t-shirts. Atleast around here, I've not really seen any boys wearing the action shirt and only a few adults. Most kids don't wear scouting polos (either the activity shirt or most others). Its usually the adults and some older boys. Main reason is these shirts are more costly then t-shirts. So when it comes time to have an activity uniform/class b uniform, its usually a t-shirt that's worn (plus to got from class a to class b, if you have a t-shirt, you just put on the uniform shirt and you're good to go).

Am sorry, but why is that an issue one way or another? Neither is the scout uniform (what most call 'class A'). Both shirts, along with scout/unit t-shirts, would be considered 'class B' uniforms for use during activities, but not meetings or where a scout uniform is required.

Sigh. Mythbusters addressed the bulls and red capes story. Bulls are color blind, and are attacted to movement, NOT color. Cripes & Bloods are 2 major gangs and have been around for, oh, 10-20 years? Cripes use blue (uh oh, guess the cub scouts need to change their uniform), and Bloods red. But what about the Guardian Angels and their red berets???

See if you can contact Tipisa Lodge of Central Florida Council. They have a very nice Lodge museum at their camp. They may be able to give you some advise on how they did it. I know that one of the lodge leaders has several times spent time at our Section events tell others how they set it up and run their museum.

Looking at the Boys Life page, I only see mention of a Cub Scout and Boy Scout edition. The Wikipedia article mentions 3 editions: one for Tiger Cubs & Wolf Cubs, one for Bear Cubs & Webelos Scouts, and one for Boy Scouts & others.

Not sure what 'rectangular patch' you are refering to. If you mean the 'recruiter strip', which I haven't seen in years, I think the centennial recruiter patch, if its fairly sizable, would be treated like a temporary patch and go on the right pocket.

Well, its kind of complex. One problem I see is the person who loose track of the fact that they are now an adult. This means that they need to let the kids be kids, and step back. There are always problems when some adults seem to try to 'relive' their childhood, or try to act like they are the SPL or PL, rather then SM, ASM or what have you. It is a good idea that you have a 'child like' outlook or mindset, at least to the point that you understand what DOES attract boys, what doesn't, what works, and what doesn't work. But sometimes you also have to balance that in terms of what works TODAY vs what worked 'way back when'. (This message has been edited by emb021)

Ask Andy over on USScouting Service Project gets this question every so often. He calls it the "bridge to Nowhere". As someone noted, the purpose of the crossover/bridging ceremony is for crossing the boys over to a troop. Not going to a scout troop? then there is no reason to participate in a crossover ceremony. Separate the AOL ceremony from the crossover ceremony. Do them on separate nights or the like. What are these parents thinking????

Do you mean uniforms you wear vs uniforms that you may have outgrown, but still keep around? Of uniforms I wear, that includes: 1 Sea Scout White uniform (including belt, pants, and shorts) 1 Sea Scout Tan uniform (including belt, pants, and shorts) 2 Venturing green shirts for one council I work with. 1 Venturing green shirt for another council I work with. the above 3 have the 2007 WSJ patches on them. I plan on switching 2 of them for the 2010 NSJ sometime soon. I may pick up another shirt so that I have 3 shirts for the 2010 NSJ, but not sure. 2 Venturing green shirts for yet another council I used to work with. Will probably change the CSPs and office patches on these. One of these has the 2001 NSJ patch on it, the other the 2005 NSJ, and both have the 2007 WSJ on the pocket. Those will stay as I always keep 1 shirt with an old Jambo patch I attended. I have several pairs of charcoal gray shorts (2 styles) and a pair of zip off charcoal gray pants and a more dressy pair of charcoal gray pants I wear with them, along with several pairs of Venturing socks. For belts, while I have a Venturing web belt, I normally wear either my Philmont belt/buckle or my WOSM belt. For uniforms I don't wear: I still have several ODL tan shirts I've outgrown and not worn since the mid 1990s, 2 Venturing shirts I've outgrown, and 1 navy crackerjack I have for demo purposes (got off eBay cheap). I got rid of any ODL-related pants. I had outgrown them back in the mid-1990s, and when Venturing came out, went that route. I also collect scouting memoriabilia, so have picked up unused old green Explorer shirts and an sky blue Air Explorer uniform shirt.

"I'd always thought, somewhere in the recesses of my mind, that Scouting for Food was supposed to be a national thing - you know, hundreds of thousands of Scouts from across the country handing out bags and collecting food on the exact same days. Can anyone recall if that was ever part of the program, or did I just make that up? " Not sure what you mean by 'part of the program', but when it first started, it was a National Service Project. It was part of National's '5 unacceptables' or the like. It was a big national drive for several years, and only stopped being a national thing. Councils were, of course, free to continue to do "scouting for food" and MANY councils still do it!

""Put into the bylaws a law that says the program activities must be more engaging and exciting than text messaging." "HAHA excellent! Too bad this was a Council Event! I guess we'll know next time." If it was a Council Venturing Event, the VOA can put together a policies document on 'acceptable behavior' that would apply. I know in my council, due to some 'events' at prior Venturing events, that the youth wanted to put into place acceptable behaviors rules, such as appropriate dress, public displays of affection, and the like. Also, please DON'T put such rules in your bylaws. Create a separate policies document and place them in that.

Checking the calenders of the Regional Venturing websites may help you. I know I add such events to the Southern Region one. There are about a half dozen such events I have heard of in our region. And there are probably twice as many I haven't.

"So if you really think you know more than National emb 21 more power to you." Never said that, never implied that. And I find your statement a bit insulting. We use the term "subject matter expert" in a corporate setting to indicate someone who is very knowledgable about a subject. Are they THE expert on the subject. No. But they are the local expert. Because of my interest in the program, and my efforts to educate myself, I've wound up being the 'venturing SME' in my general area. Nothing more was implied. It's little different then having a longtime OA adult who is the "OA SME", or someone in your council who is the 'cub scout SME'. They become the 'go to guy/gal' when you have a question about that particular program.

Well, here's the thing. The purpose of the current WB (21stCWB) is NOT to "turn out Scoutmasters" per say, but to provide ALL Scout Leaders of any program with leadership training that they can apply to their program. Its expected that those who come into WB already know the basics of how their program is run (whether Cub Scout, Boy Scout, Varsity Scout, Venturing or Sea Scouts). Its taught in the forum of being a new scout in a troop, but its not intended to make you an expert on how a troop (or pack, team, crew, ship) is run. Now, is that the best way to do it? I'm not sure it is. Part of the reason for the new WB, is that many scouters in the past were denied a chance to go to WB. Prior, we had 3 WB courses: * Boy Scout Leader Wood Badge * Cub Scout Trainer Wood Badge * Varsity Scout Leader Wood Badge If you were a 'regular' cub scout leader, or an Explorer or Sea Scout Leader (21CWB came out around the time Venturing replaced Exploring, keep in mind), you were SOL in regards to getting to take WB. Soooo, the solution was to merge all the courses together and make WB available to everyone. I've felt that prehaps a better solution would be to create a 'core' WB course, but then deliver it in different format for different programs: (as a Pack for Cub Scout leaders, Troop for Boy Scout leaders, etc). I do see some issues with that idea: 1) some councils may not be able to deliver the course for certain programs (Venturing/Sea Scouting), 2) many cub scout leaders are very short term, usually moving to boy scouts with their boys, 3) if you move to a different program, do you take the WB for that program after you took it at the previous level? But I do see some of the lose of these more unique WB. When I went thru BSLWB, it really pumped up alot of people about the program. I see that same level of enthusiasiam in people who go thru Seabadge (Sea Scouting) and Powder Horn (Venturing).

I wouldn't be overly worried if you have not gotten a position by now. I've have to check previous Jamborees as to how early I was told I had a position. Those who already had something lined up with specific staff groups are pretty much the ones who have been picked. (this was true in my case). I think that back in 97, I didn't get picked until about 5 months out. And that was when my first choices fell thru, was tossed in the 'pool' and got picked by Trading Post. I would like to think that most people who get picked this year.

Someone needs to make them understand that what they 'do' on Facebook can have repurcusions. Am dealing with that now with a group I advise. A couple of members of the group went drinking and posted pictures of themselves doing some stupid stuff. Got themselves in a lot of hot water with the university, and their association with our group has been a source of problems. A lot of college groups are getting themselves in trouble when members post pictures of the group (or members of the group) doing stuff they shouldn't. I've also heard of employers looking at people's FB info and turned people down because of it.

sdcc57- The BSA has always been a little too tight lipped for my me on its organization, etc. Wasn't always that way. Most organizations (certainly all the ones I'm a part of) provide or give access to its operating documents (bylaws, etc) to all its members. The BSA no longer does that. Most organizations provide or give access in some way to is members of its internal organization (officers, committees, etc), including means of contacting them. While this may not be publically available, its certain available internally to its members. the BSA has for a long time not done this. Why does the BSA do this? Some have said they do so to prevent the 'wrong people' (ie certain outside groups) from getting this info. There is also the attitude that people should go to their council for information, forgetting that many times our councils don't know jacksh*t or are part of the problem we're trying to solve. Like sdcc57, I'm involved in the Venturing program. I've become a sort of 'subject matter expert' on the program, but I did so by being proactive about getting the literature, chatting with people on-line, etc. If I had relied on the info coming from the councils, I would be lost. It gets a little tiresome of getting involved with 'discussions' in person or on-line with people who have been misinformed about this or that and try to correct their misinformation. I've had to do this recently on 2 other forums, and its a pain.

Buffalo Skipper lists all the defunct knots that I am aware of, only missing the Spurgeon Award knot (gold knot & border on a forest green background). The Skipper's Key is just like the Scouter's Key, except the green rope is navy blue (not to be confused with the Silver Beaver knot, which used a light blue rope).

You're not alone in wanting to see further detail in terms of what groups are under the ones we see in the chart. I'd like to see that myself. I'm not holding my breath for them to appear. The BSA has always been pretty bad about making it know how they are organized. Its taken me years to kind of figure some things out. Then they went and re-orged and I'm totally lost. :

I believe the recent article in Scouter about knots showed many of the defunct knots. There aren't that many. Also, regarding the restrictions on OA flaps. MANY years ago, National OA asked lodges to stop doing that. This was before the more recent ruling to stop having separate flaps for the different levels: "The National OA Committee recommends that no restrictions be placed on the purchasing of lodge flaps." There is also the OA ribbon, that every member may purchase and wear.