MattR

Put another way, it's foolish to assume there's no sexual abuse in 4-H.

10 hours ago, fred8033 said:

What I am betting is there is a definite difference in that 4-H doesn't have a 70+ years of records of volunteer incidents . 

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 me pondering.

@troop165sepulveda, welcome to the forum!

3 hours ago, qwazse said:

And @MattR, that is precisely where CALTOPO says, "Hold my beer."

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.

14 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

Article is dated June 12, but who knows when the reporter spoke to them.

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. 

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.

On 5/1/2021 at 6:10 PM, clivusmultrum said:

The kids in this troop just hate the uniform. If they designed their own I bet it would look like a soccer uniform.

Maybe they're right. A jersey would make a lot more sense to me.

Let the scouts decide. 

@MGinLA, I agree with most of what you said but I did things slightly differently. I still ran the elections. First, I had a couple if scouts that did find their place in the OA and they never would have known about it if I hadn't run the elections. I agree with you that the scouts know more about the scouts than the adults and our elections were much more about character than popularity as the popular scouts took longer to get elected than the quiet, helpful scouts. That said, I can also see certain personalities, if there were enough scouts like that, that would turn it into a popularity contest.

Oddly enough, I think the election process itself was really beneficial. It forced the scouts to evaluate all the other scouts. Would they be someone I want to go camping with? It was a tough lesson for a few that were real jerks when they were younger and that just stuck with them. It wasn't just one scout saying it, it was the whole troop. I had some difficult discussions with a couple of scouts. It's a lot easier to get a bad name than a good one. They grew a lot, even though a couple never got nominated. The best leader we had didn't get nominated until his last opportunity. It forced him to look out for others for so long that it became a habit.

6 hours ago, fred8033 said:

I thought I was the only one who had that opinion.  I have never seen the unit commishioners as effective at all.  

I'd sign up to be one if I saw a way to make it work. It's an impossible position as described. As implemented it's a group of people that answer simple questions about council policy. My troop's commissioner goes to most of our committee meetings but is solely there to answer questions about policy. If there's a bigger purpose they're not interested.

Comparing that reality to the discussions here about commissioners being an important way to help units develop - I see a gap.

7 hours ago, GrammaScout said:

So:  Are you all saying that Districts may have their 'own' Charter Agreement not the National?

 

 

Wrong thread? This is about fees and not charters.

I never used a timer. The scouts had fun just watching the rockets crash into the end and fall apart. 

34 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

The District schedules too many events, if you can believe it.

I was both an sm and district camping chair. As an sm the district events could help the scouts fill in the calendar but when they had an abundance of ideas, camporees got replaced. As camping chair I understood that. I also tried to make camporees fun and challenging so the scouts wanted to be there. As for the other events mentioned I didn't organize any of those. We didn't have the bandwidth.

Hopefully the chimney wasn't lit.

I use a burner for a minute to start charcoal in a chimney. Much better than wads of newspaper. No flaming bits of paper floating around.

2 hours ago, CommishJulian said:

rich angry white people cause the environment to turn toxic

This is kind of amusing. I see angry people turn any group toxic, but their wealth and race don't really have much to do with it. If there's one common thread to toxicity in my district it's the council exec. 

But I think it's less toxicity and more good old fashioned burnout. Our council and district volunteers get along with each other. 

This all assumes you have more volunteers than open positions. "We haven't had that spirit here since 1969."

17 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

For those who like org charts and job descriptions:

This just reminds me of the org charts I used to see when nobody really had any good ideas - just shuffle and hope. It's sort of vision lite: we kinda know what the problems are but we really have no ideas on how to solve them. If national really had ideas then wouldn't this be reflected in the organization? 

Not only that but this reeks of matrix management. Since our council's membership has been dropping will our council membership lead be replaced? If, more likely, all the council memberships have been dropping is it time to admit the territory membership lead hasn't a clue? This reminds me of the plan that said membership would drop again this year but would then start going up, for the first time in 50 some years? 

Use the adults as taste testers. If they don't die then let the scouts have some. 😀

On 6/3/2021 at 1:29 PM, Eagledad said:

And while I agree, role models of good character contribute to building good character, a good Patrol Method experience is the main driver of growth, even among role models of bad character. Patrol Method forces the scout to make decisions for other scouts that reflects their character back at them. Now, try to explain how that works to a new parent.

I absolutely agree. Sports can also teach fair play and how to lose well, if the adults understand that it's an important skill to teach. But in scouting there's not agreement about what the game even is. 

The outdoors is to scouting what the rule book is to sports. And if done right, the patrol method is to scouting what fair play and honor is to sports. Any parent understands this about sports. I'm not sure many know all this about scouting. 

I think burnout is an important subject that is not just about parents. Kids get tired of all these activities as well. I was thinking of cub scouts and one thing that would have kept it fun would just be to make each rank a 4 month season and give the scouts a break for the other 8 months a year. A parent that only had to plan a 3rd as much time would have a much easier time and the scouts wouldn't get bored of doing the same things over and over. 

Just my opinion, but the underlying issue seems to be about money. My council says it costs $600/scout/year, whether it's a 4 month year or a 12 month year.  So the focus seems to be more on justifying that price than anything else. And that includes what you call the noble mission of scouts.

Pushing @Eagledad's idea, how about getting adults from different districts to work together to run events for patrols? Or organize them? Have a campfire just for adults and, again, mix up the adults from different districts and have them put on skits. That could be fun for the scouts as well.

17 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I'm kind of lost in this thread

I can see that vision. 😀

As you have described the goal, vision and mission elsewhere, I think it's great. The challenge I see is translating that into a program that is really simple for the new person, adult or youth, to understand and implement. 

A sport, for example, is simple. Learn the rules and skills, play the game. It might not be perfect but as a first cut it will get the youth going in the right direction. In scouting, if you ask someone what the game is the odds are they'll look at you funny. 

If the game is the outdoors then why do we spend so much time indoors doing schoolwork? As an example I just saw my troop spend 3 meetings doing bridges. They learned about bridges, they built bridges and there was some competition related to bridges. This did not lead to an outdoor activity but they said they had fun. 

However, if you watched this I'm not sure you could identify the game. 

I don't think it's so much that the kids can't focus as the adults can't focus - or maybe just can't see the game.

I would much rather see a troop say our game is the outdoors but it's hard camping from Thanksgiving to March so during that time we will have a lighter schedule that focusses on service to our community (except for one really cold campout 😀). In other words, don't have meetings just to fill time. If you're not playing the game then don't take up people's time. 

Anyone got the cliff notes version? Kind of brings back memories of Pip.

3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Because the underlying motive (I perceive) in many youth, and their parents, is to aim for freedom from responsibility, rather than freedom to choose your responsibilities, and then living up to them.  I hope I am wrong.

As a teenager I certainly had those tendencies as well. I don't think this is a generational thing so much as a growing up thing.

Back to the future. 

This looks like 2 different subjects. One is about the desired program and the other is making changes if a unit isn't doing that program. To me, a program that's defined by how much advancement is done is the problem and not necessarily changing leadership. If the program was defined as fun in the outdoors and some unit was solely running advancement then maybe working with the leadership wouldn't be so bad. However, there really is no description of the program, so jte is all there is.