fleetfootedfox

Congress passes bills and the President signs them into law. The fact he does the final signing doesn't mean he owns the entire process. I think some people are implying too much from the fact that the CC signs membership forms. I think he's mainly signing to say that to the best of his knowledge the form was filled out correctly.

I remember reading that districts are not a separate legal entity from the Council. They are created in larger councils for practical reasons, but councils don't even have to have districts.

We actually had an e-mail war in our troop that ended with two families leaving the troop. Generally, I really like e-mail, but have seen the following problems: * people who don't read their e-mails * people who send e-mails to an old e-mail address even though they've been repeatedly told of the change * people putting stuff in e-mails that should be related face-to-face * people being embarrassed by their personal e-mails being forwarded to everybody in the world * people accidentally replying when they meant to forward with negative comments added * chain e-mails, junk e-m

It is offensive without being secret because it upsets people. If I do something that I know in advance is going to offend or upset a certain percentage of people, I cannot say it is their fault just because another group of people aren't bothered by it. I could stand up in front of a group and tell dirty jokes. Lots of people won't be bothered by that, but that doesn't mean that I don't have any responsibility to the people who I know will be offended.

The game is an embarrassment which detracts from the overall experience for some people. It should be exposed and eliminated.

Yeah, when I first became a scout leader, it was a long time before I knew our UC. They didn't seem to do much. You've heard the saying, "You get what you pay for," haven't you? Naturally, few scouters are fortunate enough to be paid for what they do (boy wouldn't I love to be a paid scouter... anybody need one?). Those who are paid probably aren't pulling a high salary for the amount of work they are doing, late hours, weekends, travel, etc. Unfortunately, in the units I serve, few adult leaders go to Roundtables. Of course, most of them were reluctant to sign up as leaders to b

Doing what's right is often difficult. That's something that the adults need to set an example on, even when it creates hard feelings. It sounds like you think the right thing to do is to turn down this young man's application. You should not feel you are kicking him out of scouting by doing this, because he could join a venturing crew. Maybe it would also be best for the SM to move on with his son and become a venturing crew adviser.

Yeah, scouting places big demands on people, but not necessarily more than other activities. I know people who complain about there being a meeting a week, but have their kids in sports that practice 2-3 times per week. True, scouting isn't as seasonal as some sports. You can take a break from most sports, but if you're a DL, it's hard to take a break from scouting, because doing so will prevent your boys from advancing. Of course, Karate (which my boys did for years) is all year long, and I know a lot of boys that play soccer all year. Of course, you can't take a break from bei

"Its not abour making your kids what you want them to be, its about nurturing their talents." There are plenty of talented people that don't live by the scout oath and law or any other similar code of ethic.

Beavah, This is from a council website in NJ: "When a Unit Leader accepts an application for a youth to join Scouting, they are acting as an agent of the Boy Scouts of America and collecting a National Registration Fee." (http://www.doubleknot.com/openrosters/ViewOrgPageLink.asp?LinkKey=6547&orgkey=945) I don't see how you get off saying we are not agents of the BSA when we collect money that is target for the BSA, and we get insured by them. Also, at least one court of law has stated that a SM is an agent of the BSA. "The appeals court, therefore, concluded that such con

I had to get a web page up and running fast, so I used a combination of googlepages.com and wikidot.com. We own the domain name troop760.org, so I pointed that to the googlepages site. The front page is mostly static, although it appears more dynamic, because I have some RSS feeds on it. It has links to the wiki and our calendar. Our calendar appears on the wiki, but it's actually using Google Calendar. Similarly, photos appear on the wiki, but they are actually on flickr and picasa accounts maintained by various adults in the troop. The wiki has its own forums kinda like here, although

That's an interesting list of arguments on both sides, but I think the scout law is a better list. When I went to Wood Badge they made a real big deal about following the rules and being trustworthy. They didn't devote any time at all to knowing when you can ignore rules. How about this quote from B-P... "Charged with the duty of teaching self-abnegation and discipline by their own practice of it, Scoutmasters must necessarily be above petty personal feeling, and must be large-minded enough to subject their own personal views to the higher policy of the whole." He goes on to

Didn't mean "old-timer" necessarily in a negative sense, but yeah, I agree sometimes you have to choose your battles, and this isn't one I'm planning to push right now. I don't want to be a thorn in anybody's side, but I figure this is a fairly safe place to rant about these kinds of problems. Actually, our CO is not very involved. In our troop any registered leader gets to vote in the troop committee and be on a BOR kinda like the troop Stosh was talking about. When I first came into the troop they tried to tell me that ASM's were supposed to do the BOR, not committee members, which t

Since becoming a scouter about 6 years ago, I have often come across areas where people pick and choose which rules they want to follow. The latest has to do with board of review. Our troop bylaws say an older boy can sit on a BOR for tenderfoot through 1st class. I read on one of these forums that is an old way of doing things that changed years ago. I looked it up in the latest Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures and confirmed it says, "For Tenderfoot, Second Class, First Class, Star, Life, and Eagle Palms, the review is conducted by members of the troop committee." I kn

Hi. I have an interesting new challenge with my den. One of the boys has for some time been exhibiting early symptoms of tourette syndrome. He makes funny noises at inappropriate times and has some odd motor ticks as well. Recently, he has begun to curse a lot. The last den meeting it seemed he was constantly doing it and I found it very disruptive and sort of disturbing. Fortunately, all the boys in the den know him from school and are somewhat aware of his problem. So, I just did my best to ignore it and move on. However, I'm wonder what kind of problems it might cause in the future.

Since our pack is at the school where my boys attend, when I was Cubmaster I got out the "buzz book" from the previous year and called the parents of the boys who were in kindergarten the previous year to personally invite them all of them to our School Night to Join Scouting. I introduced myself as the Cubmaster and parent of one of the new tigers coming into the pack. We had a great turn-out and several of my son's friends joined. This is, of course, in addition to the fliers that were sent home with all the boys (thanks to efforts of our district). The new CM made phone calls again

I would say that when visiting troops other than the one sponsored by the same CO as your pack, remember that the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Also, you might be tempted to assume that bigger troops are better, but there are some advantages to being in a smaller troop. Some boys might get "lost in a crowd" in a larger troop.

Gold Winger said: "That's because the courts are a crooked as the government and the corporations." When you said this, I knew the argument was a lost cause, but you asked for numbers, so I provided some. Now you minimize the numbers and accuse our leaders of being "fascist". Scouting is all about citizenship. If you have so little respect for authority, I think you are missing the point entirely. At any rate, clearly you have a point of view that is not going to be swayed by logic or facts, so I'm done. Thanks.

I agree with Beavah that the BOR is supposed to be an enjoyable experience. I looked at the Boy Scout Handbook, the SM Handbook, and the Troop Committee Guidebook. None of them say the boy has to bring his book to the BOR. We've had people in our troop send boys away for not wearing their full uniform, and I think that's wrong too.

According to the New York Times, "About 1,800 Scoutmasters suspected of molesting boys were removed by the Boy Scouts of America from 1971 to 1991, but some simply went elsewhere and continued to abuse Scouts, organization files show." For the full story, see http://tinyurl.com/2u7e8q

The reason the police argument isn't logical is because now you're talking about government employees making a random search. You're comparing apples to oranges. There isn't a court of law in the US that isn't going to uphold a private company's right to ask their employees or volunteers to submit to a background check. The alternative is that you have convicted sex-offenders and other felons being allowed to be Scoutmasters. And why would the police get upset over finding a legal prescription pain-killer anyway? They wouldn't have to look behind the refrigerator at my house. The

I just said sometimes I wonder. The reason I wonder is because I have known some very nice people that had criminal records or that might not always be able to pass a drug test. I've also known people who told me they were molested as kids by people I thought were respectable adults. So, I beg your pardon if you were offended, but we don't live in a "Leave it to Beaver" world. The safety of our kids is worth some minor inconveniences. Regarding the comment about police making a random search, while sort of humorous, that's just not even a logical argument. Of course, if they do w

When I've gone for new jobs, I've had to take drug tests and background checks. When other people complain about these things, I wonder, what do you have to hide? When scouters complain about youth protection or having to submit to a background check, I have the same thought.

Some people just like being a "big fish in a little pond."

Bob White said, "Tap-outs were replaced by call-outs about 15 years ago. While that is long enough that scouts no longer learn about tap outs you would be amazed at the number of adults who still harken back to they youth and still try to do Tap-outs in the OA ceremonies. And while doing tap-outs certainly is a problem, simply calling them tap-outs is simply a generational thing and does not require a correction like you experienced." I have the re-print edition of the 1950 OA Handbook. In that book, they use the term "calling-out", not tap out. Also, check out this photo from 1940'