fleetfootedfox

I have often had people on these forums say that my lodge should change its bylaws because they conflict with things in the GOA. However, regi says it's "just a guide" and the lodge's bylaws are the final authority on how to do the elections.

Actually, the national unit election policy covers elections in pretty much detail.

http://www.oa-bsa.org/programs/ttr/unit_elections_policy.php

The lodge rules should not conflict with these national policy although in my lodge they do, for example by requiring elections at summer camp.

I will concede, however, that the GOA and the policy I just mentioned does not explicitly rule out pre-printed ballots.

Anyway, please keep in mind that if no scouts are elected, it is allowed to have a second vote. So, if you're going to have pre-printed ballots, you'd better have two for each boy in case they have to vote twice.

It says in the GOA that the unit leader provides a list of names to the election team. It does not say anything about the unit leader doing anything with ballots. In fact, the GOA specifically says that the ballots are distributed (p. 27) and counted (p. 22) by the election team.

As you know, one of the biggest problems we have as adults is backing off and letting the boys run things. Especially in the OA, adults are just supposed to be advisers, and that should start with the election process. Let the election teams do their job and trust the process.

Having the boys stand up and tell why they should be voted in sounds like campaigning to me, which is not permitted.

Checking off names isn't the same as listing names. The guide says the voter can list names. It also mentions listing eligible boys on a chalk board, flip chart, or poster.

Maybe there is a reason the guide does not say to have pre-printed ballots. Suppose somebody wanted to stuff the ballot box? If you saw names written out in the same handwriting twice, you might catch the problem. If it's check marks, you won't notice.

The Guide for Officers and Advisers talks about the voter listing names or possibly turning in a "blank ballot". So, yes, there should be ballots, but it is implied that the ballots are just blank pieces of paper, not a list of names with check boxes.

NeilLup has it right. The Guide for Officers and Advisers spells it out on page 22. The 50 percent applies to the number present, not the number voting. That's the whole point of abstaining. Abstaining is covered on page 22 as well. So, if you just convince the boys who don't know the candidates to abstain, you don't have a problem. On the other hand, some of the new boys might know the candidates even though they are new to the troop and might want to vote. I also wonder if some boys will want to vote just so they don't feel left out.

Bayou Beaver, you have missed the point. If you follow is early postings of scorpionace, you know he is just a Committee Member and his big issue is with his SM and with the Council not somehow cracking down on his SM. So, the original issue was not that the Council was being pushy but that the Council was not involved enough or refused to insinuate itself into a unit's problems. So, if you go along with the original poster you would have to be in favor of less autonomy for the individual units, not more.

As it is, you are correct in that the troop should be able to decide to what degree it participates in district/council activities. However, like or not, you are part of your district, council, and the national organization. If you don't like what they are doing, you can choose to just withdraw, which is a good excuse to not make as much of a commitment, because then you don't have to go to training and Roundtables and won't be asked to help with camporees, pow wows, den chief training, etc. You can be less busy and can still provide a program to your boys.

Boys can choose to abstain if they don't know the candidates well enough. I think perhpas this point should be emphasized with the boys. If they abstain, it is as if they were not at the election and it is not as if they voted against the boys.

I like the ballot idea. This is something we have considered in our troop.

Boys can choose to abstain if they don't know the candidates well enough. I think perhpas this point should be emphasized with the boys. If they abstain, it is as if they were not at the election and it is not as if they voted against the boys.

Hate to say, but I think I agree with scottteng to some degree. The process is subjective and open to interpretation, so it could easily turn into a popularity contest. On the other hand, it seems like that is not what we're talking about here. As usual, it is the adult who is causing the problem, not the boys. In our lodge, they have a rule that the scoutmaster can disqualify boys after-the-fact. I am sure that the adult advisers could get that changed if they wanted to.

The district and council cannot micro-manage the finances of individual units. If you really caught somebody stealing, it is a police matter. If you haven't called the police, I am guessing nothing illegal took place and you are just angry about somebody else making a bad decision. However, the council cannot crack down on every Scoutmaster who ever made a poor decision. If they did, there would be none left after a few years

I am not saying there is not a good ole boys club in many cases. However, don't forget that the good ole boys are also often the guys who do the most work and cheerful service for others. Without those guys, you probably wouldn't have a troop to complain about.

In my cub scout pack we have a group of parents that have been accusing the committee chair and treasurer of mishandling pack finances simply because she did not share information with them as quickly as they wanted it or in the manner they wanted. IMHO, they are getting very close to defamation of character.

I do not think you would want to end up getting sued so you should be careful how you go about accusing people.

This definitely changes over the years as people come and go. I found out after we joined our troop that it was more or less a "car camping troop" and not very boy-run. One of them didn't like swimming and another didn't like walking. The latest guy is more physically active, but he's having a difficult time with another ASM and I pushing for it to be more boy-run.

I agree with AnniePoo.

After new boys join a unit, does anybody bring it to a vote whether or not to pay their fees to council? Seems kind of pointless to have to vote when you know you really have no choice.

How do churches do it? Does the treasurer have to get approval from the church's vestry or board of deacons (or whoever runs the church) before paying the electric bill each month? I doubt it.

What makes you think all parents are ex officio members of the troop committee? Some troops may have this in their bylaws, but I haven't seen it in any BSA materials. Even if they are, that just means they have the right to show up and vote.

Don't know what kind of trailer you are talking about. I think our troop trailer would be worth a lot more than $2000 new. However, a large purchase like that obviously should have required a committee vote.

jet526, I have never heard of boys running their own pinewood derby. Your comments make me question if you have ever been involved in running one. As with other volunteer jobs, it is a lot of work and you don't get paid. So, we shouldn't be too hard on the people if their implementation is not everything we want it to be.

PACK15NISSAN, people can complain about your enforcing the rules, but they are not your rules. So, all you have to ask yourself is did you follow the rules? Unfortunately, you did not, because they say, "After final approval, cars will not be re-inspected unless the car is damaged in handling or in a race."

The inspection committee clearly messed up, so maybe some change in the inspection process should be implemented. Having more than one person involved in the inspection might be a good solution. The official rules mentions the "inspection committee", which would imply more than one person.

That said, if you thought at the time you were doing the right thing, you should not feel guilty about it. The hardest part of being a leader is having to make tough decisions.

Remind me not to get on your bad side, Gunny2862. Were these people in a troop committee meeting at the time? Or maybe boys who refused to observe lights out?

Yeah, we had some older guys, both past SM's, who over-stayed their welcome. One in particular kept butting heads with the SM. One of our ASM's who had his eyes on the SM job eventually became SM and drove off these two older guys. However, the whole process, which took over a year, created hard feelings which drove other people away too. Now we are left with a very young troop and making it boy-led has become very difficult.

Eagle1982, I cannot think of any reason for choking somebody outside of a tournament situation if it is not with the intention of hurting them.

I am glad you are taking it seriously and recognize that what you do impacts the lives of the boys.

I am unclear how you could be signed up as CC without knowing it. Afterall, you have to fill out an adult application.

Interesting, but Judo teaches choke holds. In competition, they actually choke people until they pass out. That is far more violent than anything I saw at karate tournaments when my kids were taking karate lessons. In the karate tournaments, they had two main activities. One was called "kata", which was almost like a dance competition. No contact at all. Then there was sparring, which was won on points. They wear pads and they can't kick below the belt.

Now, I'm not saying people can't get hurt doing karate, but in karate tournaments they are taking precautions not to get anybody hurt and are never trying to hurt anybody. They are just going for points. There are no knock-outs. So, then why is judo okay but not modern karate as it is actually being practiced (not somebody's idea of it based on watching old Karate Kid movies)?

This seems a very odd situation. It seems like you are talking about a very small pack which means it is difficult to run it the way a pack is supposed to be run.

The way a pack is normally run, as you may be aware, is that you have a monthly pack meeting which the Cubmaster is in charge of, but the den leaders would also be having separate den meetings.

Also, you seem to have a complete misunderstanding of who has the authority here. As the Committee Chair, you are above the Cubmaster. You should be running the Troop Committee meetings, and if things aren't getting done, the buck stops with you.

Unfortunetly, since the Cubmaster is the person out front that the parents see, there is often a misunderstanding that they are the person in charge of everything. That, however, is simply not the way it is supposed to be. The Cubmaster is the face of the pack, but is not responsible for everything that goes on.

You have a good point, OldGreyEagle. However, there is an element of "do your best" and should not be a lot of pressure for perfection.

Also, I am sure that the adults had many of the same problems in the old days which would not be remembered by those looking back on their boyhood as they would have been sheltered from it by the adults.

You can see that the BSA has resisted change more than other scouting organizations around the world. Sometimes the resistance to change might make the program less attractive to the boys. I don't know very many boys past cub scout age who get excited about the uniforms, even the newest design which isn't much of a change really. Socks are green instead of green and red, but now they look like "old man socks" as I heard them described by one person. (In other words, they look like dress socks instead of something made for activity.)

On the other hand, I have to agree that the current scout handbook and field guide, even with all their nice color pictures, are inferior to previous editions. They show a lack of childish wonder and imagination that B-P and Seton would find appalling.

How do I bring this back around to the tap-out terminology discussion? I hear people seeming to be concerned that the terminology might be mis-interpreted by outsiders. However, I think if this was the worst thing we had to worry about the newspapers reporting I would be pretty happy with that.

As a dad of three boys who are all excited about upcoming football and two of whom have been through a couple years of karate lessons, I think that a little shove, push or hard tap at an initiation ceremony would just add to their pride in being called out. They are boys. They hit each other all the time whether we want them to or not. Of course, it can go overboard and we should care about safety, but I can understand people who get upset that the BSA is perhaps getting a little too obsessed with safety and political correctness.

I think there was never any change from one terminology to the other. I have a reprint version of the 1950 OA Handbook and it does not use the term tap-out either but uses the term "calling out". Of course, it is a reprint and I suppose it's possible that somebody edited it kinda like when you read Mark Twain's books these days they have been edited to be more PC. Maybe somebody with the original edition can confirm.

He burned the secret plans, eh? How convenient. Why burn the plans? Why not share them to show off his genius? Don't you think that just maybe he was cheating and didn't want anybody to know?