FScouter

The national council provides information on how district members are selected. No person is "automatically" selected. OA members have no special distinction. The process is described in the booklets The District, Selecting District People, and the District Nominating Committee Worksheet. Of course local districts sometimes choose to ignore the national guidance and do their own thing.

Pontificating?? It's pretty clear that those of us that refer to the Insignia Guide when insignia questions arise are most assuredly NOT the ones that are in a furor.

The requirement is to go camping, cook food, earn a merit badge, hike a trail, SERVE in a position of responsibility, work on service projects. These are the things that make a boy ACTIVE. I stand by my conviction that if a boy doesnt want to come to meetings or activities, the solution is not to write an attendance rule. Of course for an adult that feels he must DO something about it, writing a rule is the simplest approach. But if the result is a fidgety, disruptive kid warming a chair in a boring meeting, then that only proves that adding an attendance requirement has not worked. The standard for performance must be to PERFORM, not merely sit in a chair to meet some arbitrary percentage number. Attendance is not a goal or a standard, its a byproduct of performing and being actively engaged in the program. Engage the boy and he will attend.

The obvious problem with an attendance percentage requirement is that it does not make a boy active. A boy sitting through another dull troop meeting, playing with his cell phone or poking the kid next to him and being a pest is not being active. Hes just being a pest. Yet, some troop adult can declare he is active because his attendance percentage is over some arbitrary figure. All a percentage requirement really does is prove that the unit has failed to develop a program where boys WANT to be active and ARE active. Of course, if a unit writes a percentage requirement into their bylaws, that solves the problem and makes a boy active, right? Heh heh heh.

The Insignia Guide is quite clear about who is permitted to wear rank badges: "Badges of rank are for youth members. In Scouting, the advancement program is intended for youth members only. Scouters should neither seek awards designed for youth members nor wear them on the Scouter uniform except for square knots ..." The definition of "youth" and "Scouter" may be found elsewhere. Of course if a unit wants to do otherwise, they can justify it by writing it into their "bylaws". Heh heh heh.

Ooops! Seems like I hit a nerve with the Beavah! I too post with the idea of helping out the new folks, and of course providing a counter to notions that home-brew Scouting is somehow better than BSA Scouting. Isnt that really what custom unit bylaws are all about? Bylaws. It sounds so authoritative. This is how WE do it, here in our neck of the woods, where were different and we know better than the rest of the country, particularly better than in Texas. Rather, I look at BSA as tried and true and dont have any notion that round these parts we somehow know better.

The presence of lots of adults could be intimidating to the boy, regardless of their role or why they are there.

No Eamonn, not blind, you see quite clearly. A troop that wants to do their own "thing" and has disdain for any BSA book, guide, policy or what have you, can codify their rejection of BSA by writing their own bylaws. Those folks that get all animated about wantin' to avoid havin' rules and procedures simply write their own rules and procedures bylaws. Makes is easier to justify perhaps? I see no other purpose.

Parent Guide, YES. Standing rules and policies, YES. BSA pubs, YES. Bylaws, NO! Parliamentary procedure, NO! Roberts Rules, NO! There simply is no value in a Pack or Troop.

"Is doing "doin' as little as possible" meant to be another way of saying doing the minimum requirements is not enough?" "You betcha, if the minimum requirement is just to be registered and not kicked out of a position for bullying." Oh, please !!! There are a whole slew of requirements set forth to advance in the program. If you cannot teach "character and values" through the program, then imposing some hard-line "active" requirement isn't going to do it for you. Writing some attendance bylaw or otherwise forcing "active" doesn't teach anything, but it does show that somebody is trying to make up for a failure to motivate a boy from within.

I would suggest that anyone considering bylaws to first attempt to read Robert's Rules of Order. That should stop any notion that bylaws serve any purpose.

Proof once again that a problem is not solved by writing a bylaw.

"People use the word "my" all the time to mean "the one I am associated with". My homeowners association doesn't allow petunias. My town has a monthly town hall. My team won the AFL championship. My church allows women to be pastors. My home country is great, but I have more opportunities in the U.S. A wedding photographer might say My wedding this weekend is going to be a huge event with thousands of guests. Yes, sometimes "my" can mean "the one I own/control/direct/possess", but that's not the only meaning." The term "my" takes on a different meaning when one has an important position in the group: eg - the president of the homeowners assn. The coach of the team The mayor of the town The president or king of the country and ... The den leader, Scoutmaster, or committee chair - Now it takes on a different meaning.

Private Messages go to the e-mail address on file. If you have a new provider, address, or such the system will not know that.

"Thanks! I have no idea what happened there!" The topic is about adult leader training, so I moved it from the generic catch-all "program" forum to this forum.

All together now - The wheels on the bus go round and round ... This message is not a personal attack.(This message has been edited by FScouter)

Ommmmmmmmmmmm ...

I have a friend who feels that every alternative idea or difference of opinion constitutes a "personal attack". It makes it difficult to have a real conversation. We have only one forum member that regularly attacks others; the other one got himself suspended. I too see a lot of what Skeptic has related. Yeah, there are rotten apples in the world, but that is not what spoils the bunch. It's those other apples that quit and don't stand up against rottenness. (this message is not a personal attack)(This message has been edited by FScouter)

Yeah, it always seems to come down to "it's only a patch", and a rude dismissal of anyone that adheres to the norm. These topics always start with someone that knows what is right yet is looking for support from others to buck the system. Why pray, do some folks get so dang indignant about their "right" to do their own "thing", to wear a silly cloth patch from their boyhood? Staple it to your forehead if it makes you feel whole, but don't expect the rest of the world to bless you for doing so. Just DO IT!

I find it sad indeed that it is necessary to formally require that Scouts follow the Scout Law. Too, the idea that adults might resort to keeping track of when a boy demonstrated a particular point. Is our program implementation so weak that we have to check to see if we're actually doing Scouting?

It is my fervent hope that the national council does NOT address this question. Take one minute to read again our mission. How can we teach boys to make good choices in life if we adult leaders cannot do so ourselves? The permutations are nearly infinite: which rank, which requirement, how long ago completed, how many completed.... The national council cannot possible write a law directing how to implement the new requirements in all situations. Imagine the squealing that would ensue! Take two extremes - a 2nd Class Scout has diligently worked and completed all 1st Class requirements before 1 Jan, save one. New requirements come out. Must he start all over?? How fair would that be? The choice is clear. In the other extreme little Billy just joined the troop and completes a 1st Class requirement. Should he be grandfather in over the next 8 years? How fair would that be? The national council must not step in and decide every variation in between. Just do the right thing! If in doubt, ask a Scout what should be done. Teach ethical choices, not how to interpret a rule book.

Anyone can do whatever they want with regards to the uniform and insignia, and they do. There may even be "support" from other Scouters, and justification conjured up too in one's mind. Just don't look for any support from BSA.

Ed, don't start !

What is a "uniform police" and why would anyone care one hoot what someone does with a non-uniform piece of clothing?

The assertion that this is all a "hoax" says a lot more than any analysis of data.