fred8033

From what I've seen lately, camporee non-denominational services have devolved into extremely wishy washy and borderline offensive to those with a faith. Our unit ended up making the scouts aware and encouraging those who's family practiced that faith. BUT, it was always the scout's choice if they went or not. Half went. Half stayed in camp. "can be uncomfortable at times" ... Reminds me of high school pep rallies for the sports teams. I was not on a sports team and not really a sports fan. Sitting thru those events were painful, annoying and offensive.

That is absolutely wrong. Specific plans. Itemized material counts. Board sizes. Number of screws. etc, etc. That's just wrong. There is a balance. Perhaps a foot bridge needs a rough drawing to demonstrate understanding of what needs to be done and install enough confidence in the reviewers that the bridge will be good and safe. Detailed drawings and precise estimates of wood, screws is absolutely NOT required. In fact, I believe it is expressly stated that we can't expect that out of the scout in the proposal. IMHO, this indicates volunteers that need to move on.

Thank you and your other volunteers. I greatly appreciate it. I remember 2010 when I was livid and loud at a district meeting because the district advancement team had bounced our scout's project proposal a 4th time because it did not have a map and directions to the local hospital. 4th review and then asking for a map to the hospital. The project was to rebuild an ushers closet at the church (tear it down to the walls, clean, paint, new shelving, organize, etc). Then, they lost the workbook. The real issue is the reviewers didn't think the project was big enough. They wanted

I'd ditch all the merit badge workbooks. I have contempt for them. The Eagle project workbook though is different. The proposal is very much a contract between all the parties. The rest helps create evidence. The reason I like the workbook is because of what was going on before 2011 when the workbook was created. Councils / districts were requiring large proposal submittals that were effectively large three ring binders of detailed project plans. Way, way, way beyond what was needed. KEY POINT - The Eagle project workbook exists not to force the scout down a path. The Eagle p

Wow. I guess I should have expected some councils don't require a thick packet submitted. Our council collects all paperwork expected for the EBOR. That includes all sections of the project workbook, references, statements of ambition and purpose, etc.

Normal. Beneficiary usually never sees the "plan". If the beneficiary wants to see more, that should be in the proposal. Now, the proposal might result in "we want to be involved in ... " That's the scout's right, but it's also the EBOR's right to then grill the scout to get the planning details. I've told scouts to fill out the plan to create evidence of planning. That's part of the rank requirement: develop, plan and lead. Without it in the workbook, the EBOR at first-glance sees no planning. That will be motivation to dig in to confirm the scout's planning. That's the E

I think that is the right answer. We are all so personally invested in scouting that we forget we are only volunteers. If the situation sours, move on. We only get one life. Enjoy it.

I would have let them attend too. ... BUT ... Pack registration and BSA/council registration are often different. Most packs do their finances school year to school year. So the cub might have been good with the council, but not the pack. I've seen this before where the people are overly watching where their money goes. So, they try to save a few bucks by waiting to register thru the troop or registering early with the troop. ... It saves the family a few bucks. ... BUT, it shorts the pack and the family knew that's how the pack finances the events. It's very self-serving to save the

@skeptic Wishing you the best. It's not easy. I fall on both sides of this. A lone scout has access to council camps and activities. If they were previously a concern, how does the council not know they will be a concern again. My heart goes out to these scouts.

Absolutely. I'd highly suggest you sit down with the CC and SM to have coffee. You might be the COR, but they see the day-to-day issue. Build relationships. Let them do their jobs. If they can't, then it's not just a member of committee issue.

Love hearing your giving it a second chance. I've often described it as needing the magic mix to make scouting great. When that magic mix happens (people, events, experiences), scouting can really shine.

Because it's wrong to use race and gender to claim more knowledge, rights and privileges than others. Go figure. It's fundamental to the political hypocrisy of these issues --> Using the differences of race and gender to justify why the other person is less informed.

Won't get skipped over by people who think they know better? Any merit badge can be subverted easily. I often think the Family Life MB where many of the requirements are often subverted. This badge is controversial. Quality might be better now while we have strong focus, but over time it will be subverted because many simply believe the content is political. That's your scout. Few scouts would ever list any Citizenship MB as a favorite. This may be only best judged in hindsight. Twenty years from now ... after focus, intensity and politics reduce ... will this

Very real comments.

Sensitivity is important. Not offensive is important. Being kind and considerate is important. My issue is the yet-another badge that should have been covered in at least one of the Citz of community, Citz of nation, Citz of world or Family Life (Citizen of the family).

I agree with most if not all of what you write. Franchise agreement liability is not clear. Legal sources have argued there is strong separation due to land ownership, taxes filing, etc that has been historically done. But then again, courts often find a nuanced decision. I would not be surprised on any final result.

Agreed, but not all state laws are the same and not every LC had the same number of incidents. A good number of LCs could survive and/or go thru chapter 11 also. ... and then chapter 7 if needed.

Don't be that sure that chapter 7 would kill BSA. LCs could form an alliance to purchase the BSA national trademarks, property, etc and re-open BSA. LC's have a business relationship with BSA national; not a suicide pact. Very similar to a franchise. If the franchise corporation bankrupts, that does not automatically doom the franchise members or transfer franchise corporation debts to the individual franchise members. The one thing Chapter 7 guarantees is re-starting the abuse lawsuits; new massive legal costs; and, years and years to resolve NEW legal questions. We could be l

I am not sure it's that cut and clear. I agree on PBGC priority over lawsuits. To what extent LCs are pulled in, I'm not sure. To what extent that forces LC finances, I'm not sure. It is clear, Chapter 7 would be a massive shift / delay / new cost / etc.

The council vetting has continued to improve. At this point, I'm not sure national even does a review beyond what is done at the council level. In fact, is the council level check done by a registrar, who is a national employee and makes it effectively a national check? If a scout is cleared for an EBOR, pretty much all the national checks have been done. There is very, very, very little that would block the scout.

My tangent - Already discussed probably over a year ago. Chapter 7 now is a path that few would "financially" want as it makes all the money spent to-date on chapter 11 mostly wasted and restarts another legal spending spree with many, many new complexities. Different priority sequence for debt holders. Chapter 11 negotiated third party (insurers, BSA councils, churches) releases that provided a lot of cash become new independent litigation. "I think" (my opinion) is that Chapter 7 would reduce the amount injured parties receive and delay the payments for years.

Yes. One person can be both COR and a MBC. COR is a unit/charter org position. MBC is a council position; not a unit position. They do not overlap.

This is ideal / program design versus what a troop might need to do to succeed. The design and ideal is the COR is above CC/SM/ASMs/MCs. When problems occur, there needs to be a clear chain of command and a clear separation of responsibilities. Similar, the SM is above the ASMs. The SM guides how the program is implemented, guides the ASMs and is the final say in interactions with the scouts. CC guides the MCs and is the final say for the committee. As the COR effectively selects the leaders, it is delicate then for the SM and other ASMs whether the COR is honestly acting as just a

I'm a huge advocate of using the paper handbook. Scouts should always have their paper handbook; campouts, meetings, etc. The online scout book is a nice view, but I am always concerned that is the entry being made by the scout or an overly zealous parent. I'm concerned about expecting to use expensive tech on camp outs. I'm concerned about the handbook narratives being there when needed. Also, scouts should focus on being active. I really have a problem expecting scouts to double enter the data from the paper handbook into the online scout book.

The issue is coordination with the SM. Similar to too many cooks ruin the soup. The MC/ASM needs to follow the vision / guidance / coordination of the SM; not the CC. Too many troops end up with a quirky program because "everyone" thinks they can just step in. So if "works like an ASM" means the MC is asking the SM "how can I help" and "how should I handle XXX", then great. Once the MC/ASM is up to speed with SM vision, then that MC/ASM can more easily "step in". It's the whole reason for adults to declare on their registration. Are you an ASM or a MC?