fred8033

Eagle application deadline is not when the scout turns 18. BSA Guide To Advancement; section 9.0.1.5. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf The scout has up to 24 months to complete the Eagle Board of Review; BSA GTA section 8.0.3.1. Assuming three months to schedule the EBOR, the Eagle application needs to be submitted within 21 months after the scout turns 18 ... but ... just turn in the Eagle application ASAP. The Eagle rank "REQUIREMENTS" must be completed before the scout turns 18; not the application. https://www.scouting.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Eagle_Rank_Requirements_2018.pdf The key is the Eagle application is not a rank requirement. It's paperwork to get recognized as an Eagle.

I will challenge this one. If your scout is active, scouting has significant cost. If your scout and you are both involved, it's very significant. IMHO when both scout and parent are active in scouts, the cost is at least the same as most sports; if not more.

I hope this works too. Keep these camps teaching adventure to youth. It's too important to lose.

Well said though though I can easily flex on the "provider" view. I know many very feminine women who have strong professional careers earning good money and I know many very masculine men who daily wash dishes, do laundry, vacuum and bathe their kids. I agree though that we scare too many of our young men away from being masculine.

Sounds like a Charles Kuralt Sunday morning TV show.

Twice called to task for showing bad pictures? I agree it's extremely in appropriate, but what 1968 law would have applied? If we look back on 1960s as the era of free love and redefining society, there is way more to this story than can be read here. And it 100% misses the time and context. ... He was expelled when more came forward. Yeah, the system worked. Like so many case law examples, the incidents are ugly and don't show society at it's best. But, it seems to have worked. ... I agree I'd prefer the police were involved. BUT, that was society in the 1960s. I'm more upset with so many groups that kept not reporting even in the 1990s, 2000s and even the last few years.

Ahhh... That's a logical fallacy to change scope when the judgement shifts. I was referring to the earlier use of a specific person that where the poster used that person to argue the system failed. From my reading that specific case file, the system worked. ... Similarly, an earlier poster says many of the files refer to incidents in the vaguest terms is yet another logical fallacy. The same files that contain vague references often also contains very specific details and interview notes. It's an ugly topic that indites society; not just scouting. @skeptic ... I really appreciate the NY Times 1935 article about the IVF files. Amazing how misrepresented details can be.

He was blocked re-registering in the 1970s and 1980s. The 1968 letter had the SE say they could not ignore the accusations and said it was Brock's actions that led to the result. For 1968, this seems like it was handled well ... for 1968 ... before computers ... before modern laws. This sounds like BSA's files worked well. The one thing that surprised me is no police report. So so so many of the files do have police reports. I bet there was not a 1968 chargeable crime. The 1960s were a long time ago and so much has change. A lot has changed.

Me too.

Tangent ... I'm pretty familiar with BSA membership numbers. Does anyone have a graph of GSA membership over the last decade to this year / last year ?

My suggestion is to love the past and the involvement. Then, move on. Find the next place to volunteer. Scouting is not the end-all-be-all of life.

Interesting articles in the last few days. Uri Berliner (NPR editor) published editorial about NPR, bias, DEI and other related topics. Really well thought out. https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-editor-how-npr-lost-americas-trust Uri Berliner suspended by NPR. https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/16/media/npr-suspends-uri-berliner-liberal-bias/index.html I'm a four decade long NPR listener from three different parts of the country. My local channels have absolutely been incredible. But like the article says, I've had a hard time continuing listening recently because of the repetitive and think-this-way news coverage. I highly recommend both articles.

I hate typos in my own writing.

Minor argument that is negotiable. One scout on a campout could be a patrol. We can all agree a patrol is a patrol. Regrouping into adhoc patrols or doing doing things at the troop level subverts the patrol system. When forming long-term patrols at troop meetings, two patrols is not good. Ideally, seven scouts is a good patrol size. ... BUT if on the campout, only one scout from that patrol goes on the campout, then that scout should be given the option to cook by themselves.

Liberal is in the eyes of the beholder. I mainly use it as humor. Political terms are assigned by the observer. My more old-fashioned friends call me a liberal. My new-age friends call me a conservative. I'm pretty sure I'm the same person; just not a simple label.

Ok. So we are raising moderator awareness for something that has not happened as part of silencing those who have different views? And raising red flags about in-person issues that have not happened? This whole discussion has devolved into nonsense.

... Ignoring the past ... 10 yeas ago it was clear what was plain wrong and members would have been silenced. ... Misrepresenting the complaint. ... I see no one advocating taking "actionable" steps against youth anywhere in this forum. We support all scouts and do it with a smile and friendship. Individuals people are not a policy issue. ... Changing the advocated request ... So is the action requested blocking discussion on this forum or blocking people taking actions that I've yet to see people say is happening. Earlier in this forum there was discussion of whether moderators should silence certain posters on this topic.

Scouting is fundamentally about being a member of society. Civil discourse. Acting as part of a community. Discussion is core to scouting. That's not correct. This forum debated membership changes for as long as I've been a member. Both sides have been debated. At least a decade if not 15+ years. Ahhh. The value in one person's eyes justifies their crimes. The ends justify the means. So, it's okay for them to violate the Scout Law because they "believe" their beliefs justify breaking the agreement they signed when they agreed to be scout leaders? ... But, then the policies change and the original advocates now expect purging people who disagree? This is the hypocrisy. As scouters working with scouts, we support all scouts with a smile and friendship. Keep politics out of doing scouting. As for this forum and other public discussion, it's just wrong to silence people. It's just wrong.

Agreeing to uphold the decisions and responsibilities doesn't mean silencing discussion and alternative thoughts. Aren't you advocating for a position that would have prevented BSA from ever moving toward including girls and other orientations 10 years ago? Silencing those leaders and those discussions would have shut down the policy changes. ... This really feels like hypocrisy.

Yeah. Either this is out there stretching the argument or I've missed some fundamental militant issue. Women and girls have been part of scouting for decades. I've never seen an issue or heard of such.

Disposing of those you disagree is wrong. Some call it censorship. I call it a form of sin. People are no more disposable for their beliefs than their sexual orientation. We all need to work together. I've always thought it should be obvious that there is a clear difference between forums like this where we discuss and exist for discussion. In-person working with youth and new leaders is different. That should be completely obvious. ... We as scouters should support all SCOUTS; period. I've seen that happen over and over again even when we disagree or question the situation. ... Heck, I'd even support liberals if they ever wanted to join scouting. We don't purge people because of beliefs.

Not that rare. It happens. District boundaries are not a law or contract. It's just to simplify grouping of units and to balance numbers. If your unit fits better for one of many reasons in another district, work to advocate being in that district. Get the unit assigned to that district. Flexibility - Even if you can't get your unit reassigned to that district, you can still attend roundtable and often even events in the other district. It's all about what works best. For example, all your friends might attend in the other district. Or the other district's roundtable or events conflict with standing troop date commitments. Then, attending the other district might work better long term. Challenges - If not formally assigned to the desired district, your paperwork goes to the other district. Example, advancement and awards would go to the other district.

I really don't understand where these extremist comments are coming from? It's out there. ... Society has been debating major topics for decades and will continue to do so. The "who can hit who and for what" is mid-evil. I pray that's not the frame of mind brought to this forum. ... The topics now are balanced funding for both Women's Studies and Men's Studies departments. Inclusion of women on men's sports teams and inclusion of men on women's sports teams. Mandatory paternal parental leave. Bring your son to work day. Why are more women graduating college than men? ... There is gender discrimination, but it goes both ways. It's a real topic. I just don't think it's a healthy discussion for inside a troop. ... We should be treating each other well. .... Beyond that, I'd rather see scouts spending their time sharpening a stick to cook a hot dog over a fire.

I agree with BSA's membership policies and I support them. If anything, I wish BSA's membership policies would go further. But I agree with your other points and I respect your opinion. Thank you. It's the right way to approach this.

I mostly agree. My fear is BSA does the best when it focuses on adventure and skills. Everything else is about natural learning. BSA sucks when it tries to force what should be naturally learned. Society is debating these bigger topics. I disagree with "start having the conversations", "promote education ... on gender equality" and "empower men and boys ... on gender equality". I fully believe in "creating a safe space" and "build the culture". I believe we can do that very effectively. The trouble with the first is that society is having huge debates still on these topics. If you have conversations, you better be ready to listen to others that don't believe as you believe. If you shut down people that have differing opinions, then you are not having a "conversation". If you promote, you better get ready to receive push back. We do the best by modeling the right behavior. Create the safe spaces. Build the right culture. Be kind to all. Teach everyone. Introduce everyone to adventure. I believe we can do that making BSA a natural part of social change. That's how BSA will be most effective. ... Leave the ugly debates to the rest of society. Let's focus on teaching (all) scouts how to keep the inside of their tent dry and how to paddle a canoe.