MattR

I've decided that adult uniforms are really just a test of other adult's patience. Some people like opulence and others minimalism. If it encourages them to keep volunteering then why not? Unfortunately, uniforms are a great trap for people to judge others that are different. "You have to wear your POR patch. How else will anyone know you're the SM?" Honestly, if that's a problem then there are bigger issues, but I digress. People vary, so there will be lots of opinions, all valid to each.

A scout uniform is like a book cover, best not to judge it. Think about it, how uniform is our uniform if there are arguments about what to put on it?

Sounds like you helped someone clear out their garage. That was kind of you.

Seriously, if you can't figure out how to set the tent up, maybe you don't have all of, or the right parts.

18 hours ago, Eagledad said:

If it’s just a matter of meeting the requirements, then why the vote. If getting voted is just a matter of luck, then where is the honor. In our district, 90% of scouts tapped out were no longer active in OA a year later except wearing their sash at COHs.

I apologize for being cynical, but I remember the old days when Arrowmen were held in higher esteem than Eagles.
 

Barry

It was not a matter of luck to be nominated in my troop. It was hard. If you made an early name for yourself of not being helpful, it stuck for a long time. We had fewer OA nominations than Eagles.

As a SM the one thing that brought up the best discussions was along the lines of "how did your actions reflect on the scout law?" So, you're helpful and cheerful? Always? Long pause and then good discussion about how hard it really is for everyone.  So, when the scouts nominated OA candidates maybe they went back to those discussions.

One more observation. Scouts probably don't connect OA with character as much as we think. As a scout in the 70's, to me, it was more about the ordeal and Indian culture than anything else. For me it was sash and dash. Indian culture was fun but not that big a deal. While I was likely missing something, that's what I remember. I see the same thing now.

What was this thread about? Or is about? I've had covid for a week and now that I'm back all I see is the usual arguing. Everyone understands but nobody understands. "30 years ago people should have known better" or "30 years ago was a different time." Is that the argument? That's an argument about how we envision people, not how they are. Just one example, watch the Jan 6th hearings if you want to see how people really act vs how we'd like them to act. Tons of evidence of incredibly poor character over decades by the ex president, who is a pathological liar, has been openly planning for a violent transfer of power since 2015, and yet nearly all the good guys left in power in the GOP didn't have the courage to stand up and say anything. They were afraid of the voters. Now they're trying to save their reputations.

It sounds very familiar to what's going on in the BSA. And Russia, now that we're talking about current events. And Jim Crow, pogroms, Rwanda and plenty of other bad behavior if you go back a hundred years.

Most people don't want to rock the boat so those in power either get overthrown by those with bad character or just refuse to see a problem until a critical mass of pain occurs. That's where the BSA is right now. They're paying for past sins. The same thing happened, and is still happening, in Germany since WWII. People asked how could they not know? Why didn't they do something? The scale is different but it sure sounds familiar.

Bravery is a lot harder than people make it out to be. That doesn't exonerate the guilty. Far from it. But it does make me question why we're still having arguments about human nature. I'm not surprised that the survivors who endured a lot of pain are arguing as a way to confront that pain. On the other side are those that think so highly of at least what the BSA stands for, and can't believe the abuse and cover up was so bad. All I can say is if you're not arguing to strengthen the BSA, based on what can be learned from all of the abuse, then you're arguing for the wrong side of history.

18 minutes ago, qwazse said:

This might not apply to scuba -- or to scouts at Seabase who are coached in LNT, but a lot of snorklers are tempted to walk on reefs. I guess socks would do less damage than fins. Have any coastal folks seen this as problematic? Or, are people wiser about how they behave at low tide?

Have you ever tried walking with fins on? I think that's the making of a great scout game - relay race with fins.

At best (worst?), one might be able to stand on a reef, but I've never seen anyone do that.

Kiwis and Ausies? Too many syllables. How about Koowies? Unfortunately that's too close to Cuey, a delicacy in South America. And a pet in North America. Given that Ausies eat kangaroos, why not?

Don't proper fitting fins work? I've never heard of neoprene socks and the only time I've had sore feet is when the fins had problems. But I never went diving with the bsa.

Do you have a dive shop nearby? They would know.

9 hours ago, physics32 said:

We’ve decided to establish a non-profit corporation, made up of parents, to own most of our troop’s current camping equipment/troop tents/uniform library.  Being a UMC unit, we had foreseen some sort of recharter on the horizon for the last couple of years.  We’ve kept this parent purchased/owned equipment as loaned from individuals rather than seeking reimbursement, in order to give us flexibility and prevent it from being sold off or redistributed.  

At this point, we won’t seek to be the chartered org, but it may be an option in the future, especially if our council doesn’t like the new agreement as appears to be the case with Michigan Crossroads Council.

This might become a very important topic - how to protect a unit's resources and volunteers from nefarious councils and legal fallout from bad things happening. I think the term is due diligence. It would be nice if the BSA had training for this going forward but that will never happen.

I hope this works out for you. If so, I hope you come back and share.

On 6/25/2022 at 2:32 PM, scoutlaw74 said:

was told today that he is under investigation at the National level

Told by who? Maybe this is just a misunderstanding. Ask the council exec what's going on.

But back to my job .....

@andrewjchen, welcome to scouter.com.

There are different styles of delineating paragraphs. One is to indent the first line. Another is to increase vertical spacing before the first line.

This forum uses the latter. It is done by using a carriage return.

Just be glad you're not typing on something with a carriage. I still remember taking a typing class in high school and we had typewriters with carriages. We figured out that if you removed one screw that, when you pushed the return lever, the carriage would fly off.

We got in trouble for that one.

1 hour ago, Eagle1993 said:

Having a way that clearly addresses "ownership" will help some organizations accept units.  

But isn't the problem of no ownership what caused this mess in the first place? If COs weren't doing their jobs overseeing units then how will making councils responsible for oversight solve that problem. Now, DEs have the added responsibility of unit oversight? This seems to me like a bandaid.

Welcome to the forum,  @LoganM.

I've never seen loops that color. My guess is some parent made them, either not knowing or having some fun.

Welcome to the forum, @bradintheusa.

That must be hard. At the same time I'm glad you could/can help.

3 hours ago, elitts said:

next round you can only throw through a circle your teammate makes over their head with their arms,

Um, if I make a loop over my head with my arms then my face is right in the middle, kind of like a bullseye. I sure wouldn't want anyone trying to throw anything through that.

But I get your point. Just thought I'd point out the need for safety checks on ideas.

Coming up with a fun and purposeful meeting every week is a challenge for anyone. Just my opinion but this is a big part of the BSA's problem. If youth don't look forward to being at the meetings then they won't go on the campouts and it's over. The meetings don't have to be fantastic but there are easier ways to be bored.

As for the scouts leaving, I'd talk to them and try to fix it, especially during the summer when everything can be outdoors.

7 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

e posted the video to his Snapchat account, which only 44 friends could see, Armstrong said.

Probably 43 now.

I did a lot of stupid things when I was 14 - engaging my mouth before putting my brain in gear type stuff. I think both of these kids are in a hot mess that I'd be in if every stupid thing I did was recorded in perpetuity. Rather than punishment it might be a lot more useful to just have a caring adult sit them down and point them in the right direction. I sure could have used some of that.

Well done. I think that "thingy" is the anus. 😁

5 hours ago, Cambridgeskip said:

A UK scouter writes....

Having a celebrity chief scout is by no means the only factor behind rising numbers in the UK. There was far more to it than that. In the late 90s scouts in the UK was dying on its feet! Broadly because it had stagnated. While there had been the odd tweak here and there there had been no significant changes to the program, uniform, branding, or anything at all really.

In 2002/3 there were wholesale changes inclduing age ranges, uniforms, award scheme, branding. Having a known face is great, but it wasn;t the be all and end all of the turn around.

Yes, I'm more interested in the person that picks the face than the face.

4 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Our Chief Scout ought to be someone who deeply benefitted from the program... an Eagle Scout whose course in life was changed by their experiences in Scouting...someone who realized the "American Dream" and has continued in Scouting because of their success and a desire to give back.  

So, Roger Mosby?

Welcome to the forum, @Dogwood, and good points.

@Spatulate, nobody volunteers to be the hard one that deals with problems yet sometimes it's needed. Remember the scout law, do your best and leave it at that.

While a young, energetic, passionate person or people would make a great face to the BSA, I'd also like a young, energetic, passionate person as a president, CSE, or whatever the title should be. The bsa needs young parents attracted to the program.

Crews, troops, lodges and why each works or fails probably has more to do with the people than the program. My troop was at its best when there were good friendships among the older scouts and they had found their niches. Some wanted to lead, some wanted to hang with their friends, some wanted to work with younger scouts. One, in particular because he now works at Comcast and helped me fix my bill yesterday, wanted to play lacrosse.

In hindsight, my job was ensuring there was a calendar that had enough of the right mix, to aid those friendships. If they had friends they would find something they enjoyed doing to support the troop.

All the rest, the advancement, eagle projects, PLC meetings, training, ... was just support of those friendships. Eagle didn't matter nearly as much as eagle with your friends. Scouts dropped out if they didn't have friends.

So, how to organize crews in troops or lodges doesn't sound as important to me as understanding what it takes to create and maintain friendships. Why a patrol or crew is struggling likely has more to do with the quality of friendships than leadership. OA chapter meetings in my district struggle to get anyone to show up ... lack of friends. Why else would a 17 year old kid put up with the citizenship and 12 week MBs if it weren't for their friends? I watch adults decide patrols for all sorts of reasons other than friendships and it doesn't work very well. That's why I let the scouts decide.