Gunny2862

It looks like fl_mom_of_2 has a solid case for wanting the advancement to move forward. The SM in question may not have been to training or may not understand that 3 months plus 3 months non-concurrent equals six months. An untrained or new SM could be reading "serve actively 6 months in one or more of the positions of responsibility" as allowing the Scout to hold multiple PORS - but requiring six months of consecutive service in at least one of the PORS in order to advance. He'd be wrong, but without training how would he know? It DOES read that way without the amplification provided by training or reading the whole reference. But having picked up all of the facts that have been given; the question of how to approach the issue remains. 1) As a new troop in which fl_mom_of_2 indicates there are problems I would like to make the case for creating an attitude of friendship, trust and SUPPORT among all of the adult leaders. Just having a friendly sit down and non-confrontationaly talking about advancement as a whole and then this issue as a specific might be a better avenue. Is the SM trained? Has the rest of the troop adults taken time to attend training? Are you all on the BSA page or the "this is how our troop is going to do things but we've never really come together to decide how that is page"? If there are untrained adults especially the SM and CC, then this is where you need to apply your focus (rather than on the individual Scouts issue)- as this should solve this problem and prevent many future ones. If the Troop isn't actually following BSA guidelines and are "making it up as you go" then bigger fights are coming - especially if you already have conflict among the adults due to no one understanding how everyone else see it. It's time to decide if you are going to follow the program or at the very least sit down and come together on how you will do things. If the latter then someone else will surely suggest the next things is to rename the organization to something other than Boy Scouts. 2) IMHO, The Scout in question should just engage the SM in question in regular conversation about advancement how it is supposed to work as the SM sees it and (in this way)see how the SM understands it. If the SM is factually wrong and the Scout has done the work to be able to SHOW it to him(and it isn't unreasonable for him to understand how advancement works)(and isn't confrontational about how he does this part) then, if the SM is a reasonable fellow then this situation should work itself out now and for the future. 3) If the SM refuses to discuss advancement with the Scout then there is a problem and the CC needs to have a cup of coffee with him about bigger issues than this one Scout's advancement. But if either/both of them are untrained then maybe even this should happen at a Training event. 4) Given fl_mom_of_2 's comments about issues in the Troop I'm going to have to disagree with John-in-KC (It had to happen sometime... ) about having the non-advancement BOR with the CC if there are training issues that need to be resolved. If training hasn't happened and/or the troop is running it's own show vice doing things the BSA way then backdooring the SM is not going to make other adults want to pick up his hat, and isn't likely to make him want to keep wearing it. Remember that SM's are people too and just talking to them rather than wanting to somehow punish them for not making things turn out the way you see them may get you the result you want and win a friend if they see that you care about helping them do their job rather than cracking on them when they get it wrong. I make mistakes - no doubt about it - but I also seek out training and value constructive input. But, like most, I don't really see "Hey, you're wrong! You really screwed this up!" as constructive.

True Ed, the length of the ceremony doesn't impart solemnity nor dignity and can impede peoples active participation while leading to the "I'm not going to one of those, again." syndrome. I'm all for keeping the public ceremony short.

Look, neither my own son, nor wife can tell you with any degree of certainty whom I'm going to vote for. I'd be having a very serious discussion about politics, getting along with your fellow man, and Scout Spirit if I saw a member of our Troop doing that. There just isn't any call for it.(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

derf, I don't doubt that you heard it but I think your Council Rep. is on the same page (although on a different subject)as my Council Rep. who says neither accident nor liability insurance is in effect when traveling unless the Field uniform(Class A) is worn. But can't produce the documentation. Also if it were true, I've still not ever seen an entire Troop in the complete Field Uniform so the insurance must not ever be in effect for anyone, ever, in this Council. Look, if you can't individually correct a Scout in public, then how does it get done since you can't be alone with them. At the very minimum it would have to be in sight of another adult. If the Scout who did this already had a problem in the past, was counseled, was given consequences, and did this then maybe a little group therapy (accountability to the Patrol/consequences for the Patrol) will help line him out I think others call it positive peer pressure - which is hugely different than hazing.

Thanks folks for the feedback! I concur with all of the above and insist on the dignity of the proceedings even/especially when multiple flags will be retired. The time between flags I mentioned was largely based on the amount of time it takes a normal household sized flag to burn, I personally don't like to have more than one burning "at the same time". John, I know a ceremony like the one you mention and the reason given(in the version I know it is spoken) is as you state to deconstruct the flag so that it is clear that no disrespect is intended as the material is burned because it is no longer a flag. I have used it for single retirements but think it is way overkill for multiples.

In the same vein but slightly askew, Is it necessary to retire each flag individually? Or can flag after flag after flag be retired on the same fire provided that each flag is given "it's" 90-120 seconds or so(time for a proper salute and individual burn time). For some reason our Troop has acquired through various avenues increasing numbers of flags to be retired, I already have over 150 lbs. of flags. We are already retiring several flags each campout and are still losing ground. I am considering an all day retirement party to "service" the rest of the flags. Any input?

scottmphoto, the rest of us find the same issues for sports and school things even with the extra nights available but I commiserate with your extra work.

evmori, hogwash is not an appropriate/approved medium for flag retirements. Now BS, that might work?! NOT!

Are you backpacking or trailer camping? If trailer camping the cast irons will be great. We use Cast Iron Dutch ovens almost every time the trailer rolls. If backpacking have you considered getting pans from your local thrift store, using non-metallic spatulas etc. and replacing them when they get too bad. They are a LOT lighter than the Cast-iron counterparts. We can often buy pans at the Salvation Army or the Council for the Blind or American Veterans or even garage sales for less than $3 each. Cooking implements are usually 50 cents to a dollar a piece. Also if backpacking, try to find a copy of Woods Wisdom and see the innovative (how old are these?) methods to use all sorts of things besides a pan or using aluminum foil as a folded pan.

Oh, and I forgot; in our council the Tour permit is required to pass the check-in/registration point when you arrive at Council events. No Tour Permit, you get turned around just like not having a physical filled out when arriving at Summer Camp. So if you didn't have two registered members who can sign the Tour permit in the traveling crew you'll be going back or having a Committee member drive out. Weird, but definitely holding the line on Tour Permits.

SR540Beaver, I don't see the laxity here in Missouri and scottmphoto is posting from Arkansas. One way to begin the identification of LDS Troops out here is to see who packs up and leaves Saturday evening. I've yet to see a known LDS Troop still camping on a Sunday except for two Troops that came to Summer Camp on the regular start day rather than coming out early on Monday.

I concur with Gold Winger, how could that possibly be construed as hazing when one applies consequences to improper behavior. asm206 response please?

Sprayed it? Not familiar with that product, permanent damage or just needs cleaning? If permanent then the Scout -not the parents, needs to earn the money to replace it. You could of course choose to let this Scout be the one who is permanently assigned to this tent also, especially if you find it is usable but uncleanable. If cleaning only necessary then you know what to do... Corrective action taken in the previous case whether the same Scout or not? Same Scout in previous incident? Do this correction in public (in front of the Troop-unless he eats up the attention - for some people any attention even negative is better than none). Not the same Scout? Did the Scouts know about the previous incident and the corrective action? If there was none then you are seeing the results of that policy; If action was private then maybe doing this one in public will nip it for the near future?

In our Troop it is expected that the Adult leaders don't deal with their own children (excepting immediate safety issues,)any other adult (registered leader or not) will handle the discipline problems that fall short of when the parent would be called to deal with them. The Scoutmaster/ASM's of course still deals with the SPL and other POR holders of course, but that is in "Scout" mode rather than in "Parent/Child" mode. And is a tough line to walk as my SPL son reminded me this weekend that the same tone of voice I use when mildly displeased at home is the same "corrective/instructive" tone I use when things aren't as they should be at campouts. And so, often he knows the SM is talking but he is still hearing Dad. It is harder than it looks, but taking time to examine the issue helps, as does having supportive ASM's and camping parents.

In our Council if the Camporee were held in your town you might have a case for not filling one out. All others who travel any distance would be asked to fill one out. We did for ours this last weekend.

I'm told that I'm normal all the time... A B normal, that is... I also can't wait till this is over but part of the problem will continue to be the deeply divisive partisanship that has been encouraged, even fostered by the two major parties. The next round of grumbling won't be about the candidates but about how could we have elected such a (insert appropriate derogative term) person to office - no matter which way it goes. Which will then spark the parties to start the campaigns early again. As was said in the Peanuts strips - AAuugh!

Our is also a one day event and caters to the new Scout leader who may not have experience (insert Scouting activity i.e. backpacking) and needs some borrowed experience with what is/isn't allowed, what does/doesn't work well locally. And lots of other classes on other various topics i.e., how the Life to Eagle paperwork flows. Single block classes are the rule lasting about an hour per but upcoming NLE etc. sessions are usually heavily publicized. At $20/$25 ours is an excellent value for new leaders(for at least 4-5 years worth of sessions based on the one I have attended), especially those who don't have a youth Scouting Career to draw on.

I've not yet seen a malfunction of a white gas stove or container(knock,knock), but have seen many of the small propane canisters of various brands (typically used with small Coleman stoves and lamps) fail due to poor seals or improper attachment(occasionally rather spectacularly). Disclaimer, most of the above did not occur around Scouting. As to the campfire incident related above - did the Scout just walk up and dump the gas with no warning, why didn't he get an adult if he was going to use a liquid fuel? Where were the adults?

True, a real 3rd option that people would actually vote for would be a great way to "send a message". But to me, in my provincial, backward mindset the REAL problem is that everyone in the elected government positions, forgets that politics is how you get there but you were sent to govern, not position yourself for the next round of politics or to play politics in the elected arena(which far too many think IS the job). How about elected officials actually looking out for the people and the nation they are governing rather than continually politicking?

Ours do the same as mikecummings157's, they use it to heat water for hot chocolate, oatmeal, other cook prep, etc., rather than an open pot, safer easier to pour, heats faster, with less heat(fuel) waste. If trailer camping we adults have a nice Coleman drip pot. If backpacking, the teabag coffee in your camp cup isn't as bad as dipping the grounds... BTDT2.

All good points above, in my very limited experience in this area, locally, our Eagle advancement coordinator/s for the DAC will ask the Scout to provide adult references if he has solicited references from minors. I believe he sees it as a way to keep Scouts from glad-handing each other with good references and taking the force of the reference out. I think he might consider and forward to the EBoR references from "The SPL of your your NYLT course, The Lodge Chief of your OA, "Gunny 2862 deleted reference", the president of your Student Council, the captain of sports team you play on." unless they were members of your Troop but would probably still ask for the adult references. It MAY not be the way BSA writes it but it is the way he/they choose to implement it.

Wasn't allowed to be a Scout as a youth, my brothers were forced to drop out. SM issues. Grrr. As a current SM my first candidate holdover from the previous SM failed to have/ ask for/ schedule his EBOR. (Yes, there was nearly constant reminders/ contact from the SM and various Committee members) I'd much rather see a 14.5 year old Eagle candidate(whether he "gets it" at the time or not) then go through that again, especially since not all "deathbed" Eagles "get it" that it is anything but a college app/work app enhancement. I WOULD, however, really prefer that all Eagles stayed involved in Scouting rather than dropping out the instant their ECoH is over. But - that's just my preference.

Still rumor mongering w/o calling the number... My predecessor as SM and former CC e-mailed me with the information about HH closing just this morning...

From the cheap seats in the Boy Scout side of the program... While a Crossover situation where several Webelos come over together is what seems to work the best, there isn't any reason a Troop shouldn't accept a Webelos who has completed his AoL or aged out what ever time of the year he does so. However, I do see your thinking of keeping them as positive examples..., and wish that some Eagle Scouts who finish up with some time left before turning 18 would also stay around and mentor the younger Scouts. But, that's also only in some situations. In some cases they need to go form Venturing crews to keep the pipeline open for the Scouts in the Troop to continue to grow and not get hemmed in by the older Scouts taking up leadership positions.

Sometimes familiarity breeds contempt... often people see these notices and don't even open them because they'll read them later when they get time (which means they never get read). Occasionally try and sneak in a reward that will be meaningful to the reader, that will increase their likelihood of reading it. What that reward might be? a Paid adult or Scout weekend coupon, free entry to an OA event, a weekend where they don't even have to drop off their Scout you'll pick them up? But only if they reply with in x time frame. If there isn't a way for you to see that they at least opened the message then there is no communication - broadcasting yes, communication no.