fred8033

14 minutes ago, Alec27 said:

Thank you all for the info.  That's awesome !  But I guess our big question is, "Can a Chartered Organization Representative serve as a Merit Badge Counselor" ?  

Thanks again.  This forum has been so helpful for me and our troop!

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.

11 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

How does being COR affect this leader's ability to serve as an ASM?  I understand an adult can only be registered in one position.  However, the training and experience of being an ASM didn't evaporate with the change in primary position.  I see no reason why he can't attend meetings and events with a COR patch and still help and assist Scouts.

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 another ASM or using his COR voice.  

This is very similar to the former SM stepping down to just be an ASM.  It can work.  Troops benefits from lots of experience.  BUT, it also often causes issues for the next SM as leaders and scouts still look to the previous SM for guidance.  Also, the former SM can easily overstep the boundary of an ASM.  

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.  

On 1/27/2023 at 9:48 PM, SiouxRanger said:

And what is the issue if a Committee Member "works like an ASM?"

A scout needs a mentor, a scout learns, a scout passes his requirement, AND THEN some "rule" is offended?" (Yet, the Scout learned the requirement? Mission accomplished.)

An adult is needed to mentor scouts. In 25 years I've never heard a scout complain that he achieved a goal because he was mentored by a "mere" member of the committee.

 

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?

9 hours ago, Alec27 said:

Wow...that's an awesome amount of info (in a good way) and Thank You so very much for the feedback.  It definitely clarified a lot for me, for sure, and I guess my only other question is.....per the GSS verbiage of "2 Adult Leaders" and in some cases in the GSS verbiage of "2 TRAINED Adult Leaders", does the word "Leader" mean to say a registered, YPT certified adult who currently holds a leadership position in the troop?  And can a "Leader" be one that is not IOLS "Trained" ?  

Thank You Again.  You All Are Awesome !

@Alec27 ....  The related question is SHOULD they be camping with you AND what is their ROLE when camping?  

IMHO, rules are to cover guide to safe scouting.  The "should" and "role" is always my main concern.  Committee members are administrative; not scout-facing.  Too often committee members work like ASMs.  That's not "preferred".   Sometimes it's necessary due to number of registered adults.    So on camp outs ... just like troop meetings, etc ... scouts work with scouts first; then with SM and the ASMs.  Ideally, scouts don't work with committee members.

10 hours ago, MattR said:

That's exactly what my son said 13 years ago. What stuck with him was doing the service and the high adventure. If he were to do it again he'd likely stop at first class and just have fun doing things.

You can't change the cub program, scout advancement, the OA or Eagle. But it turns out that just ignoring those things might free you up enough to bring about the things you seem to really care about - the ideals of scouting.

Agree.  I'd  take a scout / troop doing fun things any day over an advancement driven program.  Advancement should come more naturally.

5 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

No, I can attest to these issues as well...  but I am not undecided on the issue of Insta-palms.

"Insta-palms" are not an issue to me one way or another.  IMHO, reward the scout for doing the extra MBs.  But, it's not a big issue to me and definitely does not affect the scouts much.

Big issues are kids / families getting burnt out in cub scouts.  The program is way too long with too little value.  Should have remained as a program that starts in 3rd grade or 2nd grade.  1st grade is way too early.  Kindergarten is ridiculously early. 

Hmmm ... 

@Cburkhardt  --> Cup half full
@Eagle1993     --> Cup half empty ... and cup is broken ... while house is on fire ... during a massive flood.

3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

If our COR demanded our cash, we would pay back all monies deposited by parents and Scouts, and equally distribute all remaining monies and pay tuition for Summer Camp (which should just about wipe out the fund), and start looking for a new COR that we'd go to after Summer Camp.  Since the monies are used for the purposes of Scouting, they'd have no recourse...

That act itself would be morally wrong and legally dangerous.  If the bank account was opened with the charter org's non-profit number and you acted against their explicit direction and effectively disposed of the funds before handing them over, it could get ugly.  Would legal charges happen?  Depends on if you are talking $2,000 or $20,000 or $50,000.  I know our pack checking account had $15,000+ at times depending on fundraising cycle. 

You would absolutely be burning any relationship and reputation and cause a long-term schism in the community.  

Unit leaders represent the CO and need to work in good faith.

4 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

The saddest issue here is "I have a parent who really wants his son to earn the AOL."  Too much to unpack here...

Agree.  It's nice to have the patch on the scout shirt, but it just doesn't matter.  

I'd avoid talking too much about who's money it is or who owns what.  Getting a clean "legal" answer is not what you need and you might not like the answer. 

Troops work mostly on Gentleman's Agreements between groups and individuals.  Most people at a charter and unit understand what that means and it works.  When those agreements are violated, people get upset; relationships are broken; and, people leave both the unit and the charter (usually a church).  No one wants that, usually.

"came to us in December 2022".  So then, the boy effectively finishes six month requirements sometime in May.    Arrived with you Dec 15th means six months on May 15th.  

IMHO, I would not be overly legalistic with this AOL requirement as the scout won't gain anything with those last few weeks after the rest of the AOL den moves on.  Sometimes I do apply the common sense rule "what does it serve?"  In this case, there will not be any gain.  In fact, the scout could then be out-of-sync with the rest of the scouts that cross over. ... Sometimes you have to be flexible to avoid having the parent damage the scout's journey.

37 minutes ago, Armymutt said:

The problem I see is that if you remove all the stuff that creates the proper setting and mood, you basically have something that isn't much different than the Calvin and Hobbes club. 

Ceremonies are important.  I think there are many ways to do meaningful ceremonies.  If nothing else, Lord Baden Powell would be the perfect fulcrum for ceremonies.  Tell his story.  Tell the vision.  Tell the evolution of scouting.  Tell the meaning.  Tell what scouts have done for others for 100+ years.  OA is about continuing the service and honor fundamental to scouting.  

I've participated in many ceremonies in and out of scouting.  Ceremonies mark achievements and transitions. 

I fully 100% believe OA can have extremely meaningful ceremonies without the uncomfortable use of American Indian culture.

1 hour ago, BlueandSilverBear said:

This is an opportunity to make OA relevant while bringing BSA back to the experience that most of us Scouters want for our kids.  It's not hard to imagine...

I like your write ups.  Perhaps later as arrowmen grow to brotherhood or vigil, the original connection with American Indian lore can be discussed.  I don't see a useful purpose during the original ceremonies.  The arrow has been a world-wide concept for thousands of years and is a good construct for OA.

1 hour ago, johnsch322 said:

I do not think that is exactly true. I think the fact that there has not been anything to discuss is what has kept survivors from posting.

Perhaps your saying "exactly true" is useful.  I suspect it is a mix.  

35 minutes ago, Mrjeff said:

Not being rude simply stating that if you are not a member of the first nation you really don't have a complaint that needs to be the basis of policy.  

I'm just an OA member embarrassed by my organizations practices.  Is it a huge embarrassment?  No.  My embarrassment is more about not wanting to be associated with the practice.

I should be proud of everything about OA.  It's the whole point.  OA is an honor society.  It's about service and fellowship.  Instead, OA has as major area that I'm embarrassed to talk about.  

35 minutes ago, Mrjeff said:

Exactly is the speaker?  Is he a chief, an elder or a fringe radical?  WHO IS PUTTING THIS STUFF OUT THERE?  Why is it so hard to answer this question, doesn't anybody know or is it just made up BS used by people to advance their own agenda?  

https://ictnews.org/news/order-of-the-arrow-is-a-secret-scout-society-in-the-spirit-of-the-lenni-lenape-a-lenape-leader-disagrees

Lenni Lenape elder and tribal pastor John Norwood responded to Indian Country Today in an email, that his view on the Order of the Arrow’s adherence to said traditions and practices are plainly “not authentic.”

“It is my understanding that the original ‘lore and ceremony’ of the Boy Scouts of America, Order of the Arrow was allegedly based upon what was claimed to be Lenape culture, although I am uncertain as to whether that remains true, Norwood wrote in an email. 

The order was “based upon a version of the old Northern Unami dialect of Lenape, called ‘Mission Lenape,’ which was probably gleaned from Moravian missionary documents going back to the 18th and early 19th centuries.

“The BSA/OA's use of Native dress and ceremony originated around the time that other non-Native organizations adopted Native dress, lore, and ceremony for their usage, ironically during a period in history when many Natives were discouraged from embracing our own tribal culture and identity and when government and social forces sought to terminate tribes. Often such groups with a history of using Native dress, lore, and ceremonies will claim that permission was granted by some “Indian” at some point in the past. Whether or not this is true is immaterial. No single individual tribal person has the authority to place the cultural knowledge and property rights of a tribal nation into the public domain.”

Norwood said that no matter the intentions, the wearing of Native dress by non-Native people is appropriation.

"While I respect each tribe’s right to its own perspective on the issue, I believe that no matter the sincerity of the participants, the use of Native dress and ceremonies (even when accurately portrayed) by non-Natives is a misappropriation of our culture. I appreciate the effort to consult with area tribes, as expressed in the OA manual. However, this should be done in order to gain an understanding of, and appreciation for, regional tribal heritage, not in order to mimic it." 

"The problem with gaining permission to use tribal dress and ceremony from regional tribes is that the history of the United States includes the disruption and displacement of tribes to the extent that a region may not contain all of its original indigenous tribes, which would still have a claim to the cultural heritage being appropriated. Moreover, even if one generation of an authentic tribe granted such permission, another generation would still have the right to withdraw such permission. Also, there are some non-historic cultural enthusiast groups that illegitimately claim tribal identity and authority, which would fraudulently grant such permission to those seeking their blessing to “play Indian.”

Norwood says using a drum for "Native" song created by non-Native people is also appropriating culture.

"The songs and ceremonies and regalia of our people belong to our people. They represent a heritage that has passed from one generation to the next during centuries of persecution. Some elements of regalia or songs or ceremonies are particular to a clan or family or society within a tribe and require some personal achievement and/or special permission in order to gain the right of use, even for tribal people."

20 minutes ago, Mrjeff said:

Unless you are a tribal member with tribal status and can speak on behalf of First Nation citizens, then you are not one. You are entitled to your ideas and opinions, but really "don't have a dog in the fight."  Since you like to mention sports teams,  why don't you do a little research into the Florida State Seminole and see where they stand on the issue.

No need to be rude.

My "dog in the fight" is being an OA member and my not wanting to be seen as prejudiced.  Cultural appropriation is a hot topic.  Many reasonably view it as yet another form of discrimination.  I'm very conservative, but I see the arguments as reasonable.  

"Speak on behalf" ... I read one of the above articles.  It had a good point.  No one really has the right to speak on behalf of the tribe to "give" permission.  The speaker himself (a tribal member) well represented reasons for not using the Lenapi lore.  

It's time for OA to stand on it's own honor; not a caricature of another culture.

12 hours ago, RobertCalifornia said:

No news at all? After daily posts for over two years, it is strange that all the conversations have ended. 

I guess everyone is just waiting for what’s next? 

There was a strong use of these scouting threads by lawyers and those associated with keeping the case moving.  Now that the case is mostly decided ... except appeals ... except money distribution ... except 1000 other issues, the daily use of these threads does not serve the case.

2 minutes ago, Mrjeff said:

WHO ARE THEY, anyone can right down  anything but exactly who are the complainers?  If it is some Berkly professor who thinks its ok if a boy thinks he's a girl or if a girl thinks she's a cat, then they do need to "shut the hell up."  

I'm one.  I've been called Reagan era republican.  I cringe in hindsight that I'm now associated with about eight years ago bringing in a BSA scout Indian regalia dance team to our cub scout pack for our pack program.  Was it wrong?  Not explicitly.  Do I want to be seen as the guy who brought them in?  Absolutely not.  

It's similar to telling crude inappropriate jokes.  I really don't have trouble with most and will defend a person's right to tell the jokes.  I just don't want to be seen as the guy telling the joke or asking someone else to tell the joke.  

BSA's use of indian lore in scouting has turned into an off-color joke.  Time to change.  Heck, the NFL and MLB made the change.  Time for BSA to clean up.

Rules?  Procedures?  Who can vote?  ... This is cub scouts.  It's about asking parents to spend time with their kids outside and being active.  Leaders change all the time.  The written rule is good guidance, but there is a lot to be said for finding a way to get everyone to work well together.  

There are rules and then rules.  A published budget is a useful baseline, but unless everyone buys into the planning, it's really not agreed. 

Sometimes treading lightly really helps.  I know in the past, our unit has reimbursed some groups more than others "just to keep the peace".  Specifically, some den leaders got reimbursed and I (and a few other leaders) did not submit our expenses because it was our choice to spend that money.  If it was core (advancement, books, etc), I'd always submit expenses.  If it was decorations, food, optional stuff that "I choose", I often would not.  

Is there a path that keeps the peace and that can work toward establishing more clear rules for the future?

Link please?  I did not see anything about OA ordeal / regalia changes.  

It would not surprise me though.  It's been discussed many times.  OA ceremonies make many cringe with over-the-line cultural appropriation with caricatures that border on racism.  I know the ceremonies are to honor native american culture, but obviously not everyone agrees with that view.  Sadly, IMHO, it's time to remove native American references from OA.  

4 minutes ago, Navybone said:

So do we do the same with Personal Fitness?  Kids have to take PE in school. How about swimming -  kids have to know how to swim in our school district.   If a scout takes a class like environmental science in school, should they go ahead and automatically earn merit badges that cover the same topic, Eagle required or not? 

This is a real question that we should discuss.  

If a kid joins scouting and is already in a swim team and is a skilled swimmer, does the "swimming" merit badge add value?  Perhaps scouts should be required to get 21 MBs to show "growth".  We can list "core" (such as swimming), but if the kid is already a good swimmer, they get a badge for effectively no work in scouting.  Perhaps swimming should be replaced with canoeing or hiking or ?????

13 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

In our area students all take a course in HS called "Participation in Government".

22 minutes ago, yknot said:

At the very least, there ought to be some opt out options for information that is covered elsewhere.  

Absolutely agree.   How often do we argue about scouts double dipping on requirements?  Fulfilling two requirements with one activity.   Well, this is worse.  This is about scouts not adding value because it's already covered.  It's an eye roller for the scouts.  

On 12/11/2022 at 9:39 AM, Eagle94-A1 said:

All of them said it would be a waste of a summer because they would not be able to earn any MBs.

When our troop did it, we'd often work in a few MBs during the week.  MBs that would align with the location / activities.  Heck, if a scout wants to earn a MB, there are ways to make it happen.