MattR

35 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

By the way, this has now run far, far afield of the original topic and should be put into the Toggle plan thread.

Peakaboo! For all of you that just look at the "what's new" page, it looks like @Eagle1993 corralled that other thread about how superior Latin is, or whatever it was, and put it back here. You can continue here.

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

True, summer brings the challenges of family vacations, but a patrol of 2 (or even one) can have a really great experience planning their own campout.

I used to tell patrols: 1 scout, find another patrol; 2 scouts, your choice; 3 or more, you're a patrol. A lot of scouts enjoyed the smaller patrols. Everyone had to help and it was all very fluid. They could cook things that were too hard with 6 scouts. One patrol started their standard for dessert - melted chocolate and some sort of fruit. That patrol stuck together till everyone aged out for no other reason than melted chocolate and some sort of fruit. Well, that and they just got along, but they claimed it was the dessert.

Thanks, that's a really good memory.

Probably not the right sub forum but why not.

My understanding of bamboo is that if it is not contained, you have a problem.

I also know it costs a bunch to get the poles where I live, so maybe Etsy would be an option. It also makes for good pioneering poles. Much lighter than wood. 

Other than that, I'm ignorant about bamboo.

The drone sounds like great fun. I hope they have lots of extra props 😉.

The maker space also sounds like a good idea. We have push cart parts the scouts really enjoy. The frame and wheels are standard and they can add simple things like push bars and decorations. It's kind of the big kid version of the pinewood derby. Helmets required so they enjoy it.

49 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

I WISH it was a "pol."  But BSA has clearly said it's a POR.  😐

Either way, just pause it. Or end it and restart it. Talk to the scouts and ask them what they think is right. I have a hunch they'll understand. And for those that are so driven for check boxes, this could be a blessing for you as you'll get them out of the way.

First, there's an easy solution to the OP, before the pause tell everyone with a pol that they no longer have it and it will start up after the pause. But, yeah, I get your frustration. 

Next, summer is the only time we can count on not having freezing temps, so we want to camp. At the same time we also have lower attendance. So we make things a bit looser, more relaxed. We make it work.

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

What would be the topic? Theories of vicarious liability and the morality of supervisorial accountability? 

 

Whatever all that means, no. I was thinking of the ethics of the situation. Whats the best solution for everyone and not just "my" side. This problem has been thought about for millennia, how to write a wrong, and I see very little of it in this case. To be honest, the legal system would struggle with it, but people keep bringing up the idea of fairness and the only person that has anything to do with that is the judge. For all other parties in this case, fairness isn't a primary concern. So a separate discussion about what's fair might shed some light.

Big caveat: Nobody cares a wit about anything written on these pages, we have zero impact on this case. If anyone is worried about the result then they are just giving themselves stress. It's best to only worry about what one can control, and that ain't much. That, too, is an idea that has been thought about for millennia.

3 hours ago, Eagledad said:

OK, but somehow the splits loose posts. Or I just don't see the new threads. If that is the case, I apologize. I do agree with the splitting, but this is like the gay issue years back, it's complicated and so intertwined that one specific thread is almost next to impossible.

Barry 

Apology accepted.

Maybe we just need one other thread that deals with things not related directly to the legal system. I think there are some worthy points that you and others would like to talk about but just don't fit in a thread about the legal aspects. You're welcome to start a thread.

59 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

This is not a fair conversation. Nobody here wishes you ill will, in fact just the opposite. This is not about us against them, as a couple here keep suggesting, it's about question of fairness over the future of a century old youth organization.. But, every time the discussion veers toward that question, the mod steps in and reformates (deletes) that part of the discussion and then says stick to the subject. Then, the thread starts out away from the question of fairness, but eventually works it's way back, AGAIN. I believe many of the members here want to express a frustration. But, not the moderator. 

Barry

Sorry, I don't buy that. The moderators keep trying to keep this thread as just news about the court case. We have split off other threads, including what's fair, and nobody seems to be interested in keeping those threads going. Everyone just piles more into this thread, which by the way, is some hundreds of pages long if you include the previous ones we capped. When we try and tamp some of the anger down it's because the original intent (information about the court case) gets pushed to the side by everyone's opinions about what is right/wrong about everyone else's opinions.

Personally, I think a discussion about what's fair would be good as it brings up a lot of ethical issues. But as long as the discussion is stuck on winners and losers, it's a dead end.

Best of luck.

Time is money in this case. A much cheaper high adventure or summer camp can be done but it costs time.

I read through some of the thesis and my impression is there have been numerous forces against the BSA that nobody has figured out how to deal with and it's been going on since the 50's. The East coast was already losing membership in the 60's, and that was the supposed golden age. Add in a culture war, the changing economy, poor management, sexual abuse and here we are. 

On the other hand, this past weekend I went camping for the first time in 18 months and kids still like playing in the outdoors. They will still help the younger scouts and they just smile when they make their first dutch oven cake. They still don't like boring meetings and their brains are still a bit mushy at times.

The kids haven't changed. I'm still hopeful.

What is the class designation? 

That's us. The greater wyoming council had the Northern 2/3 of the state and longs peak had the rest, along with parts of colorado and nebraska. I was told the greater Wyoming council is down to less than 100 people. That's scouts and adults. But they do have a camp right outside of Yellowstone.

I wish there was more focus on quality rather than quantity. The number of quality programs is probably a better indicator of the future then the number of current youth.

The topic is a cub and dl/parent visiting a troop. Can we leave it out of this as, I believe, there might be other threads on that topic? 

8 minutes ago, David CO said:

It says the founder of Why Scouting Matters is a council president.  Doesn't sound much like an independent grassroots organization to me.

While I agree I also think both sides of the bsa needs to be seen. Nobody is perfectly good or perfectly bad. Some of the best lessons come from grappling with the good and bad in people, or organizations. Nobody is ever simple.

3 hours ago, 69RoadRunner said:

Many troops canoe in BWCAW with private outfitters rather than Northern Tier. We did NT last summer with BSA and had a great time, but you have options there.

@MattR did you use a guide company in the Wind River Range or plan it all on your own? I'd love to do that.

We did it on our own. I'm not sure there are any guides. It's fairly simple. But there's really no way to resupply. Our only mistake was the timing. Go later when the skeeters aren't around. It was absolutely beautiful, and just as steep. My GPS said we were doing 500' vertical, up or down, per mile. Even if that wasn't too accurate it was stunning scenery.

Worst night's sleep I ever had was at a camporee in the middle of 3 train tracks. Trains went by all night long. Needless to say, we never went back.

I would not tell the judge anything, seeing as how she hasn't asked me for my opinion. I would, however, invite her to join me at my imaginary bar on my imaginary island for an imaginary mojito with all my imaginary friends and band because, well, nobody honestly cares one wit for my opinion so I may as well make this game productive. Scouting is a game with a purpose?

Besides, that would be more fun than arguing the minutiae of the BSA charter.

Welcome to the forum, @Eagle1970.

My impression is there will not be one amount to everyone. I'm not sure of the process and I assume others can better explain.

I've seen similar things. Elections are great way for a scout to get some good feedback. Adults can say anything they want and it might not soak in but watching someone else get elected by one's peers for something a scout wants can be very inspiring. I also learned voting is much more useful than adult decision making. Once I asked some scouts why one scout didn't get elected and the response was very elegant. "Well, Mr R, some scouts act very differently when no adults are around." Pure gold.

Glad you're having fun.

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

1) National issues annual charters to each LC.

2) If an LC fails to recharter, ALL assets of the LC revert to National. LC's do not have any choice in the matter.

3) The timing would be that

FIRST: National terminates all LC charters directly or by failing to issue an annual renewal.

SECOND: The LCs must turn over/transfer all assets to National, per the above.

THIRD: National itself dissolves under Chapter 7, leaving the combined pot of National + LC assets to creditors.

That could be one interpretation. All of these rules assume national being able to decide whether they want to recharter a council. Is there anything that explicitly mentions what happens if national no longer exists? If not then it's a corner case that hasn't been considered. If so it could be that's what the judge gets to deal with.

In other words, we won't know until it happens. What will be will be.

2 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Scouting is becoming a thing of the past because the success of the program relies on trust. Even this discussion is how to undermine that process.  Scouting is a practice of applying the Scout Oath and Law instead of rules and policies. The culture (or is it counter-culture) wants rules and polices.

It is about trust, but trust is earned. It's also not binary. Some scouts and adults are never fully trusted while most are. That's the challenge. Once the scouts earned my trust to go off on their own I'd let them. When other scouts asked why they couldn't do that I'd tell them that I didn't trust them, yet. Until then they had to follow the  more restrictive rules. That encouraged some scouts to step up, some to just accept it and a few to leave. In the end, I was still responsible for their safety and that's why the parents trusted me. 

8 hours ago, David CO said:

I get it.  The elites rule and we obey.  It's an old story.

 

And a mighty fine story when it comes to improved airline and auto safety. 

13 hours ago, Treflienne said:

However, the vision displayed there (and in the BSA literature) does not seem to be what the troop committee, SM, and ASMs want.

That sounds like a challenging ticket

This is mostly in jest, but if you figure out a way to slowly move adults in the right direction I think it would be great. At the same time I understand your reluctance.