fred8033

Well at least I take comfort in your confidence and affection for the Catholic church. I do appreciate that.

Here's another view. It's just a rank. A youth award. It's not a license to practice anything. Like some many things in life, you get out what you put in. If the scout got Eagle without the work, then the scout will always know the award is mostly hollow for them. An example is that a huge majority of adults have high school diplomas. Yet, many adults have difficulting reading or writing. I'm a good example in many of my posts. Once the diploma is awarded, it's done. We never take away high school diplomas. Some kids are really proud of their high school career. Others are not be

Don't mix issues. Indian lore is a cultural appropriation issue. The bankruptcy YPT topic is about sexual abuse. Crimes. It's a logical falacy to use the anger of cultural appropriation to further incriminate past sexual abuse or current YPT practices. Indian lore ... IMHO, BSA/OA needs to stop using indian lore. Some Native Americans are bothered by it. Others not. But, it's a controversy and offensive to some. Now is the time of change. Washington Redskins changed it's name, but the 2020 Super Bowl winners are still the KC Chiefs. These changes will continue for decades. Ti

It's just a snide mean incindeary post. We have mandatory reporting. IT's THE LAW !!!!! It's 100% absolutely emphasized everywhere. YPT emphasized everywhere. We're out of society's YPT dark ages where parents, police, teachers, doctors and everyone did not believe what was happening. Even saying hiding in the past is a misrepresentation and just #### ####. But what ever. @CynicalScouter ... I appreciate your legal analysis, but your just mean and twisting in so many other posts with ugly misrepresentations of the past. If these postings represent the future,

Arguments are flip flopping on volunteer or paid. When convenient one or the other is used. Isn't the whole case based on paid professional handling IVF records? So is the failure by paid professionals or loosely associated volunteers? The crimes were clearly by both (paid --> camp staff; volunteer --> unit leaders). Too many people equate paid with process and oversight. Sometimes paid is just cost without value. Perhaps paid is needed, but not necessarily if an effective culture and process is established. Equating today's problems against todays practices

Paid does not mean trained or effective or answerable. Volunteer does not mean untrained or ineffective or not answerable. Paid is a financial exchange. Oversight is a responsibility. You can infer a strong link, but it is not an absolute.

Does it have to be a paid professional? This case is about liability of actions by volunteers. Can BSA establish a volunteer system with real effective oversight that breaks unit boundaries? In addition to background check and registration, volunteer can't participate until interviewed in person. Volunteer gets suspended / removed if X number of monthly status meetings. Could start this at the SM/CM/CC level. Feedback ratings on different risk factors that trigger further evaluation. BSA is too adult heavy to get each and every adult that minimally participates, but major improveme

I never went to say BSA should not pay. I agree that BSA needs to pay. The crimes were done under their watch. I disagree with the demonizing as I really don't think that happened as a clandestine effort to hide the truth. CSA is so ugly and inconceivable that everyone was in denial about the reality of the abuse and the potential evil acts of our own neighbors and friends. ... I just don't believe people associated CSA with a common safety initiative.

I like the idea. One year, I had six or seven background checks because of jobs and different volunteer organizations. I didn't care really about the checks as much as all the paperwork I had to fill out. Useful comment about Big Brothers & Sisters.

@CynicalScouter ... Be angry and vote things down if you want. The understanding of CSA has drastically evolved continually in the last 50 years ... including by BSA. Asserting "Conceal" is anger and not analytic. I doubt any youth serving organization in the 1980s or religious or school or government had safety programs that include CSA protections. People did not conceive to link CSA and a safety program. That was a sign of the times. The two were not associated. You asserted Menninger testified that no one told him CSA was a problem in scouting. ... Another view is

It's not a lie. It's a reflection of the times.

Lie. Hid. Deceived. Incendiary words that I don't buy into. Your words "lack of informing" is not lying, hiding or deceiving. CSA in 1980s and earlier was not viewed as a safe scouting issue. It was just becoming understood as a crime. Just like insurance policies written then did not recognize the massive liability of CSA. People did not think of CSA as a safety issue any more than bank robbery was not considered a safety issue then. This argument will go round and round. Yes, BSA will pay, pay, pay. Thank you for writing that, but it's just mean and spiteful. Most of

We've been thru this argument many many ways. Past incidents did not happen in an vacuum. Scouting is a community structure happening in schools, churches, police stations with parents and other members of the community. Scouting has DRASTICALLY evolved YPT with continual improvements. Improvements before other organizations. For annual reporting of incidents is problematic for many ways. Perhaps, the key improvement is to change voluntary number rollup into a mandatory reporting for roll-up. A national database / structure already exists. https://www.ch

There is nothing in there that is an actual improvement. It claims credit for existing structures and real improvements already done by BSA. It ignores major recent law changes; such as expanded mandatory reporting. "annual reporting" of confirmed incidents collides with mandatory reporting resulting in incomplete, conflicting and confusing status. It's better to get the real measurements from outside sources receiving the reports. Those are pretty words without real change. It claims credit for real progress over the last 20 years. ... It's hot air. ... Worse, it

Well said. At some point, it doesn't ring entirely fair as your statement throws mud just like coalition thru mud at TCC. What real changes to YPT? If there is a reasonable change, I'm sure BSA will adopt. No one is arguing for weak YPT. YPT has drastically changed and nothing like it was 30/40/50 years ago. This just seems like posturing to justify a different argument. Everyone is trash talking and working to subvert each other. The whole process is a tragic farce.

Is the $137M held in trust / not-spent? OR will it be used as up-front cash to continue funding the legal process? Or, to reimburse cash already invested? I fear one group paid first and when everything falls thru, there is neither money to refund nor any value to the victim. I also fear contingent earnings reimbursed more like expense sheets (aka ... you get 30% after we deduct our business expenses) I suspect it will be somewhere in-between. Held in-trust by the trust, but with a very high overhead spend rate that somehow helps advance the legal cases. This is a high-risk

Thank you for all the useful info. Very appreciated. I just don't see how this resolves without becoming BSA only and maybe also being forced. Too many people with too many conflicting interests to get a clean vote. And definitely no chance at a timely conclusion.

#1 I don't understand this fundamental. Voting to accept a settlement of BSA liability where those outside any legal SOL claim can heavily influence the vote. This is a court of law; not general advocacy or marketing. If the majority of states are closed states (and it is closed vs open ... not grey #1, grey #2, grey #??), then the votes and retrieved funds should go to those that have legal right. ... I don't understand how funds are distributed to those without legal standing. I don't understand how the court hears arguments for clients without standing. #2 I'm not sure rejecti

Sad but true.

If #2 is not covered (LDS scout leader doing abuse of scout outside of normal scouting events), then would the settlement reimburse victims of scout leaders where the act was outside of a scouting activity? The two should align. Reimbursement and liability protection.

If 1 & 2 are not covered, why would LDS enter into the agreement. These are major holes in the liability protection that make a person question it's worth.

In many ways, I hope this happens. This case has devolved into a tragic farce. No one will get out of this looking good. No one will be healed. This is extremely expensive (+$100m already???) and looks extremely problematic to close out. Too long. Too many conflicting interests. Can't even cleanly establish who represents who and if they are a real claimant. Time and cash are being wasted. BSA has X amount of assets that it can release and survive. That should happen and soon. Let the trust resolve the paychecks.

You might want to note ... COs & bankruptcy - Eraseing past debts (aka liability for past CSA) COs & previous settlements COs that don't exist anymore. COs that exist, but maybe different entities Good luck doing the research. Good luck finding lawyers who want to take on this large effort. ... The country is filled with churches that have sold / merged / closed / etc. Good luck figuring out if it was a "merger" that has liability for the past or a new church given the building. So United Methodist small town USA doesn't exist anymore. Their buildi

I'd 100% expect this. This seems correct. Zero ethical issue. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the nature of business accounting during huge tort cases. It a real ethical issue to collect new donations as normal to pay past liabilities as if all is good. FOS is about sending a kid to camp; to help families afford scouting. That's the pitch. If most of the money is to pay yet-to-be-understood liabilities of 30/40/50 years ago, you need to tell those families. Same with the big donor. ... KEY POINT ... People donate to make the future better. People don't donate to pay past bills.

Well written ... I'm not sure on the term colluding for BSA's lawyers as their absolute job is to do the best for their client as their client was pulled into court (rightfully or wrongly). Court is an oppositional process ... BSA's lawyers are trying to find the best way out for BSA. I can't really complain about colluding. Other factors yes. Colluding no.