Kudu

This piece "(and dare I say not enough concern to get fully trained?)" says everything. Elitism. Elitism is a bogeyman. It is used in the United States to promote the triumph of airheads over competency. I am an elitist: 1) If this nation needs to be defended, I want it done by our most elite fighting forces. 2) If I need an operation, I want it done by an elite team of surgeons. 3) If I need a BSA Lifeguard, I want an elite natural swimmer and rescuer with position-specific training. 4) If a Patrol wants to hike and camp without adult supervision, I demand that they be an elite team that has elected their most elite natural leader. All of those people (the best soldiers, surgeons, Lifeguards, and Patrol Leaders) tend to have attitude problems sometimes, so what? We could fix their attitudes the same way we fixed Hillcourt's Patrol Method: 1) Get rid of position-specific training for soldiers, surgeons, and lifeguards just like White Stag Wood Badge got rid of position-specific training for Patrol Leaders. That way everybody can learn how to be a "leader" and hold a really cool "Position of Responsibility." 2) Hold six month elections so that soldiers can vote for each other to be commanding officers for six months, nurses can vote for each other to be surgeons for six months, and every Scout can be a BSA Lifeguard for six months. Nobody hates post-Hillcourt Wood Badge more than I do, but the problem with Wood Badge it that it is not elitist enough! White Stag Wood Badge destroyed the life work of Bill Hillcourt (including position-specific Patrol Leader Training) so that every Scout could learn how to be a "leader" by learning business manager theory. More recently Ken Blanchard Wood Badge finished the job by kicking the last vestige of Scoutcraft-based leadership out of Wood Badge so that we could dumb it down to the Cub Scout level and "everybody" could be "fully trained." Business nerds defend the policy of dumbing Wood Badge down to the lowest possible denominator as "modern 21st century progress," and now that stupidity has come around to bite them from behind. Let me be the first to welcome them to the anti-modernism club. Yes, John-in-KC is correct: Wood Badge Beads should be awarded only for Wood Badge, BUT post-Hillcourt "Wood Badge" is NOT Wood Badge any more than NYLT is. The solution is simple enough: Wood Badge should be only for those who train Scoutmasters and Patrol Leaders how to use Hillcourt's "Real" Patrol Method ("The ONLY Method of Scouting"). The reason that most participants come back from Wood Badge feeling they have experienced the Patrol Method (perhaps for the first time in their lives) is not because they learned pop business theory, but because most Wood Badge courses still space Wood Badge Patrols close to Baden-Powell's standard of 300 feet apart. Simply call attention to that physical standard and expect participants to bring it back to their Troops in the same way that they tend to bring the Uniform Method back after experiencing that physical standard for the first time. Likewise for NYLT. Space those Patrols like Wood Badge Patrols, call attention to the physical standard, and expect Patrol Leaders and SPLs to take it home to their own Patrols. Once the goal of "Leadership Development" is defined as a real-world physical standard rather than as a "leadership" state of mind, the working theory that best gets us there will sort itself out. Kudu

If there was a thread Kudu would be on point in, this is it. We renamed "corporate manager skills" to "Wood Badge" to encourage people with no interest in the Boy Scout program to learn those valuable business manger skills. NYLT teaches the same corporate manager skills. The solution is obvious! Simply rename "NYLT" to "Wood Badge." That solves the problem of awarding Wood Badge Beads to participants in a course that is not named "Wood Badge." Kudu

I'm always looking for new and innovative "Team Building" exercises that we can do in our classes. The newest wave of "Team Building" exercises are designed to take advantage of the fresh starts provided to leadership experts by all the recent multi-billion-dollar corporate bailouts. These highly innovative "games" test the leadership skills of business managers immediately upon their return from training. The fresh new idea here is that managers learn the most from Team Building exercises when the games include their own corporate work groups: the workers whom they will actually be managing! The following site has carefully removed all the commercial jargon from these corporate exercises and substituted Boy Scout "Wide Game" terminology in its place. These "Wide Games" provide the latest real-world corporate tests of your Patrol Leaders' scary new leadership skills, but to be most effective a "Wide Game Campout" should be arranged less than a month after they return from training: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/wide/index.htm For an additional new twist, try some of these innovative "night management" exercises, designed to integrate what is now known about Circadian brain rhythms with the need for maximum efficiency in corporations that run 24 hours a day in the new global market: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/night/index.htm Kudu

If I were to sit in judgement of Dreamer's "Scout Spirit" after he took the above advice, I would want to know why he was in such a rush to associate with a jerk just to get Life signed off while he was still 14. I would ask how it felt to ignore his sense of right and wrong. All the requirements in question here, Scout Spirit, Position of Responsibility (POR), Scoutmaster Conference, and Board of Review, are fake Scouting requirements that were added to the BSA by the YMCA and White Stag just to take Scouting away from the Scouts and give it to the adults. The basic idea is to force Scouts to get their "values" or "character" validated by adults rather than from the innate self-confidence that comes from absolute mastery of the backwoods, as Baden-Powell intended. Even when such adults are on their "best behavior" as in this thread, they simply can not help but undermine a Scout's self-confidence by suggesting that he go associate with an adult with whom at best he does not get along, and at worst is toxic. The whole reason that White Stag destroyed Bill Hillcourt's life work was get Scouts to think like business managers rather than backwoods Patrol Leaders. So that is what he should do: Act like a business manager and remember at all times that HE is the one who will be conducting the job interviews in January. He could interview to find a Scoutmaster that will accept his Life POR and Scout Spirit. But a good business manger also knows how to negotiate. If he really likes one Troop more than the others he could offer to serve six months in a POR at his new Troop as they get to know him. That is certainly a superior moral choice than crawling back on his belly to a bad Scoutmaster just to get to his Eagle six months quicker. If he interviewed me and if he seemed to be a typical indoor Eagle, then I would accept the sign-offs. He earned them. However, if he was obviously an outdoorsman and a natural leader I would ask him what I ask all my "Real" Scouts: "What will it take to get you to ignore the POR requirements and serve as a leader for as long as you feel the Spirit of Scouting rushing through your veins?" A Real leader serves because it is his nature and because it is the right thing to do, NOT to satisfy a stupid POR requirement. Kudu

Your life-lesson here should be: Don't work for a jerk! Hal_Crawford writes: Thank you Kudu for your stunning and insightful analysis. You are welcome, Hal. I am happy that I could be of service to Scouting! Let us review, shall we? CaliDrmr09 "dreams" of his move away from this one-Troop town as an opportunity to rejoin the Scouting Movement. Your advice is: 1) Do not trust your own judgement ("I don't like the SM of the troop"). 2) Do not trust the judgement of your peers ("My friends in my old troop say the SM hates me and talks bad about me"). 3) Go back to your old Troop and allow a jerk one last opportunity to pass judgement on you in the form of a potentially humiliating job interview because "It will be easier for your advancement." My advice to CaliDrmr09: 1) Character is about trusting your own judgement and accepting the consequences. 2) Character is the opposite of sucking up to a jerk because that is the "easier" thing to do. 3) It is YOU who will be conducting the "job interviews" in January. John-in-KC brings up a good point: Part of that process should be to bring your "works in progress" (Scout Handbook, etc.), point to specific sign-offs, and ask the Scoutmasters you interview what "counts." 4) If asked, I would shrug off why I dropped out of Scouting for a while ("I didn't like it anymore"), and I would NOT talk about the old Scoutmaster. Period. New town, new friends, new future. 5) Even if you yourself don't plan to backpack, look for a Troop that is grounded in backwoods expeditions (Baden-Powell's source of character, like it or not); find a Scoutmaster that passes your interview, and you will do OK in 2010. I once took in a Scout CaliDrmr09's age who got kicked out of his previous Troop. I never asked him questions about all that. I could tell just by looking at him that he was what Baden-Powell called a true "hooligan:" constantly in trouble at school and at home. But in the context of Scouting he always lived up to my expectations, and he was the best backpacker and SPL I ever had the pleasure of knowing. Kudu One of our methods in the Scout movement for taming a hooligan is to appoint him head of a Patrol. He has all the necessary initiative, the spirit and the magnetism for leadership, and when responsibility is thus put upon him it gives him the outlet he needs for his exuberance of activity, but gives it in a right direction. --Baden-Powell, from the article "Are Our Boys Degenerating?" circa 1918. (This message has been edited by Kudu)

Hal_Crawford writes: It might behoove you to complete the SMC and BOR before you move. This probably means your going to need to start being active in your troop again, at least for a couple of months. What a remarkably BAD idea Hal! Hal_Crawford writes: I realize this may cause you some discomfort but think of it as a character building exercise. All bad ideas in Scouting come under the headings of "Character Building Exercises" or "Leadership Development." Hal_Crawford writes: If I were on your BOR in the new troop I would probably ask about why you had not completed the SMC and BOR in your old troop and why you went inactive. If CaliDrmr09 has "got game" with his outdoor skills, his new Troop will be able to judge his character quickly enough in the great backwoods where Baden-Powell designed Scouting to work. If it wasn't for Scoutmaster Conferences and Boards of Review, how would indoor office experts keep a Troop adult-run? Baden-Powell did not use them for a very good reason. Hal_Crawford writes: This is a good experience as you may have to do the same thing in a job interview later in life. Yeah, a job interview, CaliDrmr09. Your life-lesson here should be: Don't work for a jerk! Kudu

Now, I doubt that your SM really hates you. Most adults really don't have much time or energy for hatin' kids, eh? I knew two such Scoutmasters up north, both Eagle Scouts. Both of them loved to talk about "Character & Leadership," and how important it was to earn Eagle. Both were big fans of the BSA's classroom style of Scouting. Both hated back-packing and did everything in their power to stamp it out. Both had already killed a unit, but because they were Eagle Scouts were welcomed into new Troops. Both were serial-haters who would focus on one natural leader at a time and do everything they possibly could to "correct" the Scout until he stopped coming to meetings. When the gaze of the second Eagle Scout fell upon the District Commissioner's son (a class clown whose charisma had convinced a dozen boys to register), the kid hit back. All but the sons of a few adult leaders boycotted the next Court of Honor, in which all the ranks and Merit Badges earned at summer camp were to have been awarded. When I was called in to take over only four active Scouts remained. About 100 badges stapled to rank cards and blue cards still sat in neat stacks on a shelf, bearing the names of boys who had forever dropped out of Scouting. CaliDrmr09, two tests of a good new Troop for you are: 1) How often does the Troop go backpacking? Even if you yourself don't like that, it means that the Troop is grounded on real-world skills rather than on "Character & Leadership" which without a robust outdoor program are just fancy ways of expressing trivial adult opinions. 2) Who does all the talking at weekly meetings? Do the Scouts actually run the meetings, or do you hear mostly adult voices? Kudu

It should be none of our business except, as eisely notes, in backpacking where inexperienced Scouts tend to underestimate just how unpleasant that extra weight will be a couple miles down the trail. 1. Promotes comradery Comradely is created by the Patrol Method not the buddy system. In a Real Patrol, the Scouts are in control. That is what makes Scouting an adventure. Forcing them to have tent buddies is an example of adults who need absolute control, right down to how the Patrol sleeps at night: Webelos III camping. 2. Much of the year in New York we have cold or wet weather. It helps having the kids keep an eye on each other if they get in trouble. If a Scout has the correct equipment he will sleep right through a below-zero night. It really helps with the warmth in the cold weather too. If you live in western NY you should attend the GNF Council's three weekend Okpik course: A good sleeping bag is like a thermos. The idea that two Scouts will make a tent warm enough to compensate for a bad sleeping bag is bogus science. Two Scouts with summer sleeping bags in the winter can share body heat by draping blankets over the two (close-together) bags to form one sleeping system, but that should not limit the freedom of Scouts with the correct equipment. 3. Kids with medical issues (diabetes, asthma, etc) need someone else to keep an eye on them. Just how many of your Scouts are going to expire during the night without constant medical supervision, and why should that limit the freedom of all the healthy Scouts whose medical expertise is not required that night? 4. Young kids need a tentmate Young Boy Scouts do not "need" a tentmate unless they want a tentmate. and I'm not a proponent of special priviledges for the older kids. They should be setting the example. This is an obvious case of using "Scout Spirit" (blind obedience) as an excuse to dumb teenagers down to the ten-year-old level. The "older kids" should be running the Patrols, not us. Kudu

Does this mean you have come back to the dark side? Ever since White Stag Wood Badge destroyed Bill Hillcourt's "Real Patrols" (unspervised Patrol Outings), Holders of the Wood Badge have used personal attacks to defend the resulting Webelos III Patrol Method: According to White Stag's own Website, Dr. John W. Larson (the Director of Boy Scout Leader Training for the National Council who wrote the first White Stag syllabus for Wood Badge) accused Hillcourt of having a "vested interest." http://www.whitestag.org/history/history.html The dark side, the ad hominem nature of Leadership Development, continues to this day. Perhaps Hillcourt should not have been so nice to the business nerds who destroyed his life work. If not in 1965, then definitely he should have demanded that Leadership Development be driven back out of Wood Badge before stepping in to bail out these "experts" a decade later. Kudu

Patrol cooking with the Patrols set up as far from each other as possible (anything else is the Webelos III Patrol Method). Patrol-based night Wide Games: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/wide/index.htm http://inquiry.net/outdoor/night/index.htm Kudu

One of the perks of owning your own tent is that you can decide sleep alone if that is what you like. While setting up tents for the first time in the dark, scary woods 300 feet from the nearest adult, however, most of our first year Scouts would change their minds about sleeping solo. We always found piles of unused tents stacked up like firewood Saturday mornings on new Scout campouts. The Guide to Safe Scouting does not require sleeping, peeing, or pooping buddies; although most older outhouses do feature convenient side-by-side pooping holes if your vigilant standards force buddies to remain in sight of each other at all times. You never can be too careful, and the current Webelos III Patrol Method is all about teamwork and bonding, after all! Waking up another boy to take a leak, however, is downright creepy. Why go camping if you can't just pee on the tree behind your tent in the middle of the night? Kudu

uz2bnowl writes: Would a weeklong Patrol leaders course solve the skill and safety question? I would like some scumbag lawyer to write the liability lecture and Kudu to write the rest of the training outline. Bill Hillcourt's step-by-step "how to hike and camp without adult supervision" Patrol Leader Training is already online: http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm It is a six-month course that requires a significant investment of the Scoutmaster's time, energy, and insight so as to train each Patrol's most competent natural leader and witness his strengths and weaknesses over time before sending him out with other's people's children. If you view Patrol Leaders as interchangeable parts that can be replaced every six months so that every Scout gets his turn to be a "leader," then you should stick with our current Webelos III program in which adults keep a close eye on skills that require far less competency: like getting a duty roster to work in a small campground with the Patrols kept close together. Kudu

Only through a rugged outdoor program that requires real responsibility from Patrol Leaders. Baden-Powell dismissed anything less as "Parlour Scouting." Managing real risk requires position-specific training, which White Stag Wood Badge took away from Patrol Leaders in 1972. Kudu

Brent, The primary job of a BSA Lifeguard is to keep order and manage risk so that his lifesaving skills do not get used. Likewise Patrol Leaders. When Baden-Powell writes about giving a Patrol Leader "real responsibility" he is not talking about duty rosters, or supervising cooking and cleanup He means significant Patrol Hikes and Overnights without adult supervision on at least a monthly basis. Every rank includes an unsupervised "Journey" or "Expedition." His King's Scout, the equivalent to Eagle, was 50 miles by water or trail (200 miles by horseback). So the definition of "real responsibility" includes water activities. Likewise for Bill Hillcourt: a "Real Patrol" is a Patrol that hikes and camps without adult supervision. Have your Patrol Leaders gotten there yet? Kudu

Mafaking writes: To whom to you cite as the fault of the program running astray, the program designers or the program implementers? You must make that determination yourself or it is just another opinion. Seems clear to me: 1) Take position-specific training away from BSA Lifeguards like we took it away from BSA Patrol Leaders. 2) Open up the selection process for BSA Lifeguards like we did BSA Patrol Leaders by holding popularity contests every six months so that any Scout can use BSA Lifeguard for POR credit. 3) Train these BSA Lifeguards just like we do BSA Patrol Leaders: TLT, EDGE, and NYLT. Now you tell me: If you see a problem with that is it the fault of the program designers or the program implementers? Kudu

The theory that all of the Methods are "equal" was introduced in 1972, presumably to garner respect for the questionable new "Leadership Development" Method. Eagledad wrote: Not true, while many adults incorrectly use the methods equally, there is nothing by National that suggests it was intended that way. The equal importance theory was introduced to use Hillcourt's invention of the "Methods of Scouting" against him by removing Hillcourt's Baden-Powell "Scout Way" Method and replacing it with the fake "Leadership Development Method" which in turn replaced Hillcourt's Scoutcraft Patrols with White Stag business manager Patrols: "The Methods of Scouting. "We have considered the aims of Scouting, and some of the evidence of achieving them. Here are the methods we use to get there. They are not listed order of importance--because they are equally important" (Scoutmaster's Handbook, 1972, page 34, double emphasis in the original, Eagledad). Of course once "Leadership & Character" became the de facto "Aims of Scouting" the equal importance theory worked against turning Wood Badge into week-long business manager school and then kicking Scoutcraft out for the Cub Scouts. So the equal importance theory was no longer convenient for anything except justifying the dress-designer indoor hothouse Uniform during the heated debates of the 1990s. It is significant that from the very beginning, the removal of Scoutcraft skills was justified by the assertion that Patrol Leaders need business manager skills: "The skills involved in leading a patrol do not differ except in complexity from those used in leading a corporation, a labor union, or in doing a foreman's job in a shop" (ibid, page 39). And of course who can forget the White Stag Wood Badge victory slap to the face of Bill Hillcourt: "In general, patrol leader training should concentrate on leadership skills rather than on Scoutcraft skills. The patrol will not rise and fall on the patrol leader's ability to cook, follow a map, or do first aid, but it very definitely depends on his leadership skill" (ibid, page 155). Eagledad wrote: I am not in Kudus camp that natural leaders should be the only leaders of the troop. I have worked with many scouts who in their early years showed no leadership potential and then one day just blossomed into THE leader of the group. In Kudu's camp the same thing happens WITHOUT business theory. Scouts don't jump ahead in time machines; it is easy to see a potential leader blossom as he takes on responsibility. Eagledad wrote: I believe more in that a Troop is the real world scaled down to a boys size, No, Eagledad, "Every Boy a Leader" means a Patrol scaled down to the Cub Scout level. It is easy enough to measure business manager Patrols against Bill Hillcourt's definition of a "Real Patrol." In what percentage of business manager Troops do the Patrols hike and camp without adult supervision? Failing that, how many feet apart do the best Patrols camp on monthly Troop campouts? The Eagledad camp should have the courage of its convictions and take BSA Lifeguard position-specific training away from BSA Lifeguards just like they did to BSA Patrol Leaders! Go ahead, Eagledad, force BSA Lifeguards to sit with the BSA Patrol Leaders through the same stupid TLT and EDGE theory as the Troop Scribe, Troop Historian, and Troop Bugler and then select your Lifeguards through six month popularity contests. There are only two possible outcomes: Either you scale swimming down to the baby pool level (as White Stag Wood Badge did to the Patrol Method) or you accept drowning deaths as a "valuable lesson" that "elections are not popularity contests" as Holders of the Wood Badge are always so proud to chant. Wood Badge theory flunks the Swim Test: Let us translate all this something for nothing theory into what "Aquadad" would write if Wood Badge got its hooks into the waterfront and dumbed BSA Lifeguard down to the Cub Scout baby pool level so that every Scout had a chance to hold BSA Lifeguard as a six month POR, just as White Stag Wood Badge removed managed risk from the Patrol Method and dumbed it down to the Cub Scout family campground level: Eagledad wrote: I am not in Kudus camp that natural leaders should be the only leaders of the troop. Aquadad would agree: I am not in Kudu's camp that the best swimmers and rescuers should be the only Lifeguards at the waterfront. Eagledad wrote: so I dont like the idea of the SM picking and grooming leaders. Instead we went the route of developing leadership skills in all the scouts and letting them pick and choose their leaders based from the experiences of the activities. Aquadad would agree: So I don't like the idea of adults picking and grooming BSA Lifeguards. Instead we went the route of developing Lifeguard skills in all the Scouts and letting them pick and choose their Lifeguards based on the frequency of drownings at the baby pool. Eagledad wrote: Scouting is a wonderful program for providing an avenue for boys to develop leadership skills while not actually having to be the top dogs of the group. Aquadad would agree: Lifeguarding at a baby pool is a wonderful program for providing an avenue for boys to develop business "leadership" skills on the waterfront while not actually having to be the top dog swimmers and rescuers of the group. Eagledad wrote: Simply having some responsibilities that encourage a scout to communicate, delegate, and plan for a future event develops skills of leadership. Aquadad would agree: Simply having the responsibilities of being a BSA Lifeguard encourages a non-swimmer to communicate, delegate, and plan for a baby pool event, thereby developing skills of business "leadership." Eagledad wrote: If done correctly, the grub master and cheer master are great positions of responsibility for a young scout to can gain those skills. Aquadad would agree: If done correctly, the Grubmaster and Cheermaster make great BSA Lifeguards. The problem I see in most Troops is that the Troop doesn't respect those positions enough to use risking lives to encourage business "leadership" development. Eagledad wrote: The whole objective to developing skills is not to develop great leaders, but to give scouts the confidence to be leaders. Aquadad would agree: The whole objective to developing skills is not to develop great Lifeguards, but to give Scouts the confidence to be Lifeguards in ankle-deep water. Eagledad wrote: So I think the answer to the question is complex. Not all boys are natural leaders but they all deserve the chance to become one by learning good leadership skills. Aquadad would agree: So I think the answer to the question is complex. Not all boys are swimmers but they all deserve the chance to become Lifeguards by learning good business "leadership" skills. Eagledad wrote: My simple answer to the first question is A troop should develop a program where all the scouts learn leadership skills naturally through the scouting activities. The scouts will sort out the rest Aquadad would agree: My simple answer to the first question is a Troop should develop a program where all the Scouts learn business "leadership" skills naturally through being BSA Lifeguards. The Scouts will sort out the rest through six month popularity contests in the safety of baby wading pools. Kudu

Scout Spirit requirements, along with Scoutmaster Conferences, Boards of Review, "Blue Cards," six month Positions of Responsibility, and regular elections, are all Fake Scouting designed to keep a Boy Scout Troop adult run. They are the very opposite of Baden-Powell's Scouting program. Did you use the Patrol Method at summer camp, where at a bare minimum every Patrol camped in a separate, distinct area and cooked its own food? Probably not. Summer camp is just summer school. Most boys do not like school, and some of them act out. School is the opposite of Scouting. That is why Baden-Powell detested what he called "canvas town" summer camps. I assume that you discussed his behavior with him at summer camp when it happened, but you now realize that you suck at that kind of thing In theory the "Board of Review" is designed to give the Committee a chance to judge your performance. We all know that theory is a pile of crap, and that a BOR is really job interview business school. But you signed off on "Scout Spirit," and you had your "Scoutmaster Conference." Now you are saying that you are a poor judge of character and you want to use the BOR for a second chance to screw with the Scout's Second Class award. In Real Scouting "Second Class" is merely a measure of the Scout's beginning mastery of camping skills. Period. In Baden-Powell's Scouting the Patrol Leaders run the Troop. Adults have no "sanctions" and they keep order through the Patrol Leaders only with the force of their personal example. That is why B-P named the PLC the "Court of Honor." Maybe your personal example is where you should be looking. Kudu

White Stag destroyed the lifework of William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt, to whom Scouter.Com is dedicated. Reading between the lines of White Stag's side of the story, Green Bar Bill understood just how badly leadership theory stinks, and went down swinging to prevent White Stag's destruction of Wood Badge, Patrol Leader Training, and the Patrol Method itself: Some members were very resistant to the idea of changing the focus of Wood Badge from training leaders in Scoutcraft to leadership skills. Among them was Bill Hillcourt, who had been the first United States Wood Badge Course Director in 1948. Although he had officially retired on August 1, 1965, his opinion was still sought after and respected. Larson later reported, "He fought us all the way... He had a vested interest in what had been and resisted every change. I just told him to settle down, everything was going to be all right." When Bnthy, Perin, and Larson's new anti-Scoutcraft program was implemented in 1972, the Scoutmaster's Handbook declared White Stag's victory over Bill Hillcourt with the following insult: In general, Patrol Leader training should concentrate on leadership skills rather than on Scoutcraft Skills. The Patrol will not rise and fall on the Patrol Leader's ability to cook, follow a map, or do first aid, but it very definitely depends on his leadership skill (page 155). Kudu

OldGreyEagle writes: I never realized that when Kudu talks disparagingly about Wood Badgers and the Wood Badge Culture he was including all the Wood Badge Curriculums ever since 1972. 99% of all of the BSA's problems would eventually be solved if we moved Patrols to Baden-Powell's minimum 300 feet apart. The other 1% are due to poor reading comprehension. Hal_Crawford writes: A wee bit melodramatic, are we? Nope. If Wood Badge ever got its hooks into the BSA's only remaining Position of Real Responsibility, BSA Lifeguard, took away their position-specific training as they did to Patrol Leaders in 1972, and forced them to apply Wood Badge theory to the waterfront, we would either have a pile of dead kids every year or Wood Badge cult members would gloat about swimming in the same way they do about the backwoods Patrol Method as described by Baden-Powell or Green Bar Bill: Children swimming in water over their heads is "old-fashioned," and "modern society" will never tolerate six month "PORs" in water deeper than a baby pool. Hal_Crawford writes: Let's play Clue: It was Mr. Mazzuca in the TV studio: "Camping is not a big thing with them. In fact it is not big at all." Lisabob writes: For a while there, with all your YMCA bashing, I thought maybe you'd lost your grip on Wood Badge. Same thing, Lisabob: YMCA intentionally killed Baden-Powell's Patrol System in 1910. Wood Badge intentionally killed Green Bar Bill's Patrol Method in 1972. Lisabob writes: But now I see all's well as you are continuing to growl and snap at Wood Badge too. Kind of like a terrier. So you wouldn't mind if I compared you to a dog? Lisabob writes: Glad to see you back on form, buddy. The Red Beret is a symbol of the destruction of Green Bar Bill's Patrol Method in 1972. Wood Badge is the Guardian Angel of that destructive force: Leadership Development. Kudu

OldGreyEagle writes: OK, if Wood Badge Holders are responsible for that what we call the Red Beret, and the Red Beret came out in the early 70's then forsooth, Wood Badge is the Uniform Police of snazzy Leadership Development, introduced in 1972, the same year as the snazzy Red Beret. OldGreyEagle writes: Wood Badge has already been hijacked long long long before I took it and probably most of the forum posters. That is correct. Holders of the Wood Badge sold their souls the day that they turned their backs on Green Bar Bill's Patrol Leader Training and embraced the White Stag "11 Leadership Skills." OldGreyEagle writes: Hey guys, the one who took the version of Wood Badge just before Wood Badge for the 21rst Century, did you know your Wood Badge program sucked out as much as the 21rst Century version? True enough: Both are based on fake leadership. Beret-wearing armed forces do not elect their commanding officers every six months any more than Kenneth Blanchard's "One-Minute-Mangers" do. All "Leadership Development" theory is a knife in the back of Green Bar Bill. Kudu

youth joined Boy Scouts just so they could wear the uniform, would that situation be wrong? Yes, it would be wrong if it attracted boys who collect Eagle Badges without attending a single campout, as was the BSA's goal in 1972, the year after Robert Mazzuca was hired. It would be wrong if it attracted boys who join just to play soccer or sit indoors "side by side with adults of character," as is the goal of anti-camping spokesman Robert Mazzuca now. Kudu

hmm. I am going to have to recontemplate this whole uniform thing again. "The snazziness of one's apparel should be the least of our concerns while presenting the program" Remember that the Red Berets were invented by the same guys who killed the "Uniform Method" (and the "Scout Way Method"). The Uniform was NOT one of the new "Seven Methods of Scouting" in the 1970s: It was literally "the least of our concerns," replaced by the new family campground Patrol theory called "Leadership Development." When the Uniform Method was finally reintroduced at the end of decade, it was in the ultimate form of snaziness: The indoor, hothouse fashion statement of Oscar de la Renta. Reportedly BSA Scout Shops were flooded by women desperate to own an "Oscar de la Renta original." As the "snaziness" of a 1980 dress designer's fashion statement faded, Holders of the Wood Badge used "Scout Spirit" sanctions to force boys into their ugly "symbol of Scouting's deeply held values." The Uniform should be functional in the great outdoors. Period. If Scoutmasters who like Red Berets camp their best Patrols 300 feet apart, and if their Scouts actually want to wear them, then I do sincerely wish them the best. Kudu

Due to the terrain, the adults camped about a 299 feet ;-) away from the scouts. I go down later to check on things, expecting to have to remind them about keeping a clean camp, don't leave your equipment out, store your food properly, etc... so I get down there and... All tents are setup. Equipment is neatly arranged. All food is stored and bear bagged. Kitchen is setup. They are cooking dinner. Not a piece of litter in sight. You can also get the same results on regular monthly Troop campouts if you separate your very best Patrol Leaders by that same "299 feet" That is what Baden-Powell meant when he wrote about giving "REAL Responsibility" to Patrol Leaders: 300 feet. Inferior Patrol Leaders should be kept closer. Start with 1/10th Real Responsibility: 30 feet. Kudu

I do not think the Red Beret was a finger in the eye of real scouting at all, I say it was pretty snazzy headgear introduced at the right time. I think that proves my point: It was introduced at the "right time" to replace GBB's "Real Patrols" with Leadership Development theory. Do the Patrols in the Troop that you serve hike and camp without adult supervision on a regular basis (Green Bar Bill's definition of a "Real Patrol"), or failing that at least camp 300 feet apart as per Baden-Powell's description of his Patrol System? Or do they practice family campground "Leadership Development" theory and look "snazzy"? Kudu

Next time, it may not be an Eagle, but a job. And the boss wont listen either. To add to the "bigger picture life-lessons to be learned" here, this thread is a perfect illustration of the fact that the YMCA added Scout Spirit requirements, Scoutmaster Conferences, and Boards of Review to keep BSA Troops adult-led. These adult brake pedals do not exist In Baden-Powell's Scouting. BSA Troops play at "Scout-run" or "Scout-led" in the same way that Cub Scouts play at imaginary "themes" at day camp. In Real Scouting the Scoutmaster takes a more active role in a Patrol's selection of its very best leader. Once the SM and the Patrol select the best Patrol Leader, adults have no sanctions and the "Court of Honor" (PLC) is responsible for defending the honor of the Troop. The reason that B-P characterized a Scouter as an "Elder Brother" and not a parent, teacher, principal, one-minute-manager, or "boss who won't listen either," is that he has no sanctions like those discussed in this thread. He can influence the Patrols only through his personal example. Of course in Real Scouting, advancement is based on the absolute mastery of Scoutcraft, not personal opinions hyped as "Character." The problem here is not that we don't have "both sides of the story." The problem is that BSA Scouting is adult-led. Get rid of "Once an Eagle, Always an Eagle" and bring back Baden-Powell's fundamental "Current Proficiency" requirement (Scouts submit to regular Scoutcraft retesting by outside experts to wear any badge including the equivalent of Eagle) and threads like this will disappear. Kudu