MattR

Are you saying that anyone that thinks this is simple or easy is likely missing something? If so, I agree. There are some fine lines between helping and hindering. That alone is a good topic. I don't think I understand what you're saying. To me, this sounds like a) there's no point in talking about any of this and b) your troop does it right. So how did you get to the point where your troop does it right? How does the new SM, just in from being a den leader because nobody else will volunteer, figure this out by going to a single source? No need to buy rare books on ebay. I'm looki

The rules can be a pain but they didn't cause any of the mills we complain of. FCFY is not a rule.

I agree with you. Unfortunately that is the go to method. You have to figure it out on your own. Right. A vague description does not explain how to solve typical problems. I like the idea of stories. I remember my wife, way back when, having to read case studies in MBA school. They were very specific dives into a problem that one company had. It wasn't general, but if your problem was close then you could find useful info.

There are certain themes on this forum that keep coming up and recently there has been a group that stands out to me. There's the AOL thread, the OA thread and a discussion about commissioners. And they all have a pattern to them. Some aspect of the BSA program is broken. It can be advancement and bored AOL scouts, how the OA is a "self licking cone" or how commissioners don't do any good. These are the recent examples but others include the merit badge program, rank advancement or patrol method, to pick a few. We talk about what's wrong and eventually it gets to the fact that this part o

A lodge covers a council. Or at least it used to.

This is how scouting urban legends begin. To clarify, no, there is no rule in any BSA documentation that says a scout can't have a cell phone. The shirts used to have pockets to hold phones. If the troop wants to prohibit them that's another issue. However, other than crazies like me who like nice cameras, people use cell phones for cameras. It sounds like a dumb decision from this adult.

Could you please explain some legalese to me. The bankruptcy ends civil action but the MI AG is thinking about criminal prosecution? (I couldn't read the entire first article). I really am clueless about this area. I guess this means we will find out who knew what when?

Welcome to the forum, @TGB.

Put another way, it's foolish to assume there's no sexual abuse in 4-H. It's hard for me to believe that the records the BSA kept had much impact on the situation they're in. There are over 80k cases. If most of those cases were in the records and that's how everyone found out about the cases then sure, the records led to where we are today. But there were only a few thousand cases in those records? Everyone has been surprised by the extent of this problem. Why 4-H doesn't have nearly the number of cases is another question. I can imagine all sorts of reasons why but that's just m

@troop165sepulveda, welcome to the forum!

It's a GIS. That would have explained a lot to me. I think the scouts could enjoy it. I went and found a hike I did yesterday. Now I know how long the hike is. I might have figure out the elevations next.

I've used Google earth to set up compass courses. Getting a USGS overlay would really help for hiking trails.

And how do we know it's an article? Please delineate other's content. It doesn't have to be real rigorous with citations and all, but at least use some quotes. It helps readers.

Yep. Hope it helps. It's been a lousy year. One thing I learned as a new SM is that there are lots more people complaining than helping. As a retired SM I learned that nobody really cared about my opinion so much as whether I helped. As for your old SM swearing at the new SM, that's just an angry old guy that can't find a way to help. Don't let him bother you. Oh, and give yourself a raise of, say, 45%? Does that sound fair? 😀

Since the Ch 11.3 thread is wondering around CO's and their responsibilities I thought I'd try and drag that sub thread over here. The discussion was CO's are not responsible. That's clear to me. The question, however, is what to do going forward. Just changing the wording on the agreement doesn't make anyone responsible. Who takes on the responsibility that the CO no longer will evade? It won't be the DE. It won't be a background check.