MattR

Just the other night they the last troop meeting.... "they" decided to set up first aid stations.  Not sure who's idea it was, but I know "they" have a renewed focus on trying to get the younger scouts moving along with their advancement...

blw2, this is not classic vs current scouts, it's adults not respecting the scouts. Nothing needs to be changed with the program to support that. The adults just need a better understanding of how it all fits together. Maybe just a classic attitude is needed. I swear people just didn't worry so much about advancement when I was a scout. I don't remember doing advancement at summer camp. Eagle was nice but just not a big deal.

 

Another classic idea is that it just takes time to be a kid. Scouts was fun and it was not a rush. It was also not a constant Harrison Ford adventure either. We had one really cool campout a year and the rest were nothing special. We had time to hang out and that was okay. Some adults get mad at me now because I want the scouts to have time to do what they want Saturday afternoons and the adults think we should have more scheduled activities. "Scouts will get into trouble if they have free time." I've noticed that scouts will get in trouble if they have all day and are stuck in a cabin, but a morning activity and an afternoon to climb on the rocks is magic when it comes to making memories. The best SM conferences I do are talking to 17.99 year olds. They all tell me how great it was to just hang out with their friends on campouts. Yes, they also talk about high adventure trips. So adventure is good, but it's not everything. For some scouts, just perfecting a DO pizza is also an adventure.

Is this satirical, or do you really think each council should be able to change the advancement requirements?  And add merit badges?

 

And while we're adding merit badges, apropos of the other thread, maybe some council would like to add the Bartending Merit Badge.  

What I said was let councils experiment and find out what really works. I did not say any council can make up any rules they want. If you think you have a good reason for bartending MB then make a proposal to national. Let me know how it turns out.

 

Or, everyone can keep arguing. That certainly changes a lot of people's minds, at least on this forum.

 

I'll leave it up to you to decide what is and is not sarcasm.

As long as we're making proposals...

 

Let's not have a top down, troop method decision. How about let councils that feel strongly about something make a proposal, get approval, and try things out for 10 years to see what happens. Do you want to simplify merit badges and reduce class time? Great, make a proposal, figure out a way to gauge the results, and report back in a few years. Do you want coed? Fine, let us know how it works. Do you want to ditch FCFY? Increase service hours? Reduce or change the Eagle required MBs? Revamp adult training? Add a theology MB? Require that a scout take his patrol on a campout, without adults, as a First Class requirement? Do you want to reduce cub scouts to 4 years?

 

Let's see what works where. It's about the scouts but we also have to trust the adults. I would be all for letting anyone here that has a passion for scouting be able to try something out.

 

Who knows. Maybe we'll find out that coed works fine in some places and is just a huge waste in others, or that an all girls troop is the way to go (and the GSUSA is forced to fix their program )

@@RememberSchiff, your graphic is perfect. Succinct. If there was a green LMAO button I would hit it for you.

 

Anyway, that is why my scouts could care less about MBs.

 

We're classic in some of these things. We give out ranks at COHs, but do a big shout out after a BOR. We require scouts to pass a skills test, but if they don't know all the skills that's when they get to relearn it. My scouts like it because it's better to be embarrassed by an adult than a younger scout. I do like the Eagle project.

 

The issue seems to be that the process is being sped up. The mentality is replace a lot of experience with class work. This is causing a loss of the big picture. Honestly, who cares about 4 different types of tents? There's a trade off between weight and protection, you'll figure that out after you do enough camping.

 

My scouts made a monkey bridge last weekend. Every scout there now knows how to make a really good square lashing. And patrols did a great job dividing up the work and working as a big team. They also had a lot of fun. They made decisions and solved problems, they learned by doing, they had fun. That's the recipe. It takes time. There's no getting around that.

 

If classic scouts means let's focus on the big picture then I'm all for it. If it means going back to red tabs on knee high socks, no.

Sounds like cabin camping to me. If a scout doesn't have to deal with the possibility of bad weather, then no. If a scout isn't going to cook on a fire or stove he had to bring with him, no again.

 

That said, a night on an old aircraft carrier is a lot of fun. I once camped in a WWI graveyard with scouts.

 

Just my 2 cents. You could ask your local OA.

Is dorkiness how others see someone that is wearing a neckerchief or how someone sees himself wearing a neckerchief?

 

These scouts are not dorky. They are having fun.
 

 

I find it strange that it's difficult to find pictures on the internet of BSA Boy Scouts having fun in a "full" uniform. I think the dork factor comes from the adult perception of scouts. The whole attitude around the uniform is serious and the only thing the scouts can push back on is the neckerchief. A shirt that's called a Field Uniform, costs anywhere from $37-$45 and needs to be ironed is not shouting fun. Shirts with pockets are not fun. The idea of uniform is great. But it has to support fun.

 

We sell activity shirts for something like $6. So make a $12 shirt that isn't a nightmare to sew patches onto and doesn't feel like saran wrap in the summer time, and scouts might just forget they're wearing a uniform and leave it on when they get to camp.

I don't have much time for this so:

 

1) I told my committee that since I'm leaving they should change things the way they want and more importantly they should think about what they want. They all said they came to our troop because of the way we do things. They are asking me to teach them. Since I'm stepping down in 3 months I have no problem trying to ensure a quality program sticks around.

 

2) The aims and methods of scouting along with most of the training in the BSA is poor. Consequently new Webelo parents need a lot of work. It doesn't matter if they were Eagle scouts before. Also, vague platitudes about citizenship and ethics do not make a connection with the increasing number of parents that only see Eagle. This is partly why I want to rewrite them for my troop.

 

3) Different troops have different cultures. So again, just giving adults a pile of BSA documentation will not convey how my troop does things. BSA documentation will not explain why I might stand back while someone's son is frustrated or upset.

 

4) The idea of a brief slogan was just the first step and I wanted to get it right. When I get to the methods I want to explain how they support the aims. If I can succinctly explain how the patrol method supports the aims then maybe a parent will understand why I'm waiting to see if another scout will come and help their frustrated son.

 

5) It is clear to me that scouting is one of those things that can't be described but at the same time is worthy of many good quotes. So I think I'll just take the best quotes from here and make that the intro. I will likely start with Heraclitus's quote just because I like it.

Well, I guess I'm glad that everyone has a different view on how to describe scouts. Maybe that just means it's worthwhile.
 
@@Col. Flagg, After rereading your original post about different types of statements I thought some more about what I'm trying to do. It's really about rewriting the aims and methods to both better explain what scouts is about and also explain the why behind the how my troop does things. I guess that would be a values statement.

 

Trying to boil down the aim of scouting into a phrase is not just a sales pitch so much as just trying to get it down to the essence of scouting. When there are multiple options that are competing but only one is allowed to go forward it's the essence of what scouting is that will make the decision. In sports, benching good players when they're a bad sport points to sportsmanship having more importance than winning. Scouts has it's own version of this. The worst is when a parent calls wondering why their son is not advancing. To them, the aim is advancement. To me it's something involving doing and good.

 

Anyway, thank you all. I will muddle on.

"Building Citizens of Character and Leaders of Integrity".

 

Hmm, doesn't exactly grab me.

 

Try again!

 

I will teach you to fail? I knew someone was going to bring up sports is more than just winning, but competition, at it's very basic level, is about winning. I agree that good coaches at the secondary school level don't focus on winning. And yet, at higher levels it is all about winning and big money.

 

We want everyone to be 1st class scouts, the concept, not the patch.

 

The pinnacle scouting experience: hiking and camping independently with your mates.

 

I know what that means, you know what that means, but your average parent can't relate to it.

 

 

A picture is worth a thousand words, so this fails my brevity test As David CO would say, try again.

 

Well if the sports angle is "We'll teach your kid how to win," I think a comparable slogan for scouts would be "We'll teach your kid how to lead."

 

How about: We'll teach your kid to lead, starting with himself.

 

I liked to old marketing campaign of "Prepared for Life"

 

Just change the tense: Preparing your son for life. That's a lot better than grow up, but it's still vague. What does it mean to be prepared for life?

 

 Is just being the Scout Law (recite it here to yourself) is sufficient?

 

 

You're right. You're all right. Being the Scout law should be enough. As should Integrity, Being Prepared, Leadership, Character, and Independence. I wonder how many parents really respond to that.

 

It reminds of a quote I found from Heraclitus. Character is destiny.

No, the title has nothing to do with the other threads (they honestly seem fairly good). But you have to admit it caught your attention and that's what I'm trying to get at.

 

The challenge is to come up with a tight description of why someone should not only put their son in scouts but also volunteer. And by tight I mean just a few words. I'm a lousy salesman but one thing I've learned is that a short succinct message, even if it's not completely accurate, is worth a lot more than a rambling committee based mash up.

 

Take sports as an example. The short message from coaches to parents is we'll teach your kid to win. The longer version can include something about hard work, teamwork, and good sportsmanship, but that's way too long. People understand winning. It connects. The BSA does not connect.

 

What is it for scouts? Scouts is similar to sports but not quite the same. Teamwork and hard work are there, but there's more to it than that. Selfless? There's a huge overlap between theological free will and scouting but it will never fit in a couple of words without sounding stupid.

 

I'm looking for a short, one or two word phrase of what Boy Scouts will teach a boy. We'll teach your son ... to grow up, to be a man, honor. I like growing up. The average frazzled parent of a teenager will get that. I also like we'll teach your son honor, but the idea of honor in today's world sounds like a wish more than a necessity. But I wouldn't mind being corrected on that one. 

 

The reason I'm doing this is because my committee asked me to write down my vision/philosophy/whatever it is that drives a lot of decisions I make and I told them about the aims and methods of scouting. Unfortunately they said that's all, to put it kindly, poorly written. So I'm going to just rewrite the aims and methods. I also think it would help talking to parents outside of cub scouts, something that we need to start doing.

 

How about a lion themed patch? I'm sure there are lion patrol patches you can order online.

 

Sock puppet lions? It's something they can play with, which is all they probably want anyway.

 

Or maybe a lion themed helium balloon. Just call it a really big patch and it will be just like the big kids.

3/4 will work, but as an uncoordinated kid, I always felt more stable on a 1" rope. A splice sounds like a great way to increase stability.

 

1/2" Might not withstand the tension in a 30' span.

 

Has anybody modified the monkey bridge design with Kevlar, a.k.a. slack line?

That's a great idea. Cheaper. Includes a tightener. Much easier to sell to the scouts. Easier to walk on. We can use it as a regular slackline at another event.

Any opinions on rope size for the main rope of a monkey bridge. We have 1/2". Was wondering if 3/4 or 1" would be better. It's probably harder to tie but I was going to put an eye splice in the end and use a come-a-long to tighten it. We're thinking 20-30' for the span between the frames.

 

A website I found https://scoutpioneering.com/2012/12/27/double-a-frame-monkey-bridge/said 1/2 or 3/4.

 

• inappropriate costumes (cross dressing, nudity, underwear) This is actually directly from BSA, no cross dressing.

 

 

How about using squirt guns?

 

I know, the BSA says yada yada and I had a patrol get their skit pulled in the middle of the skit because they used a pillow but then the summer camp staff used a wig for a damsel in distress. How prudish are the people at National if they won't let a kid stuff a pillow under his shirt and act like a woman in labor? I can guarantee you that any woman that has been in labor would not consider it sexual. (This skit is writing itself. How about a skit where the scouts poke fun at National for not allowing them to portray pregnant women!)

 

I'm not making fun of you Mashmaster, I realize you're trying to follow the rules. It's just that there are lots of rules that just get going too far and start taking all the fun and purpose out of scouts. There are no simple rules for what is humor and what is crude. Funny things are about pain that didn't go too far. How many scouts laugh about things that went wrong on a campout? Those are the great stories. Things need to go wrong. Adventure is about going out towards the line and hoping you don't go over. Scouts is about letting kids make mistakes and then learning from them. Why not do that in the context of skits? If a skit is offensive then there's an opportunity for someone to learn how to apologize and for someone else to learn how to accept an apology.

coarse language: sure, but the occasional dab nabbit can be used for character development.

 

disparage a certain demographic: what about idiots? I understand not making fun of minorities, but the best slapstick usually makes fun of idiots. Or country bumpkins. There's a great skit where two cops end up moving a dead guy from one spot to another because they didn't know how to spell the first.

 

cross dressing: there are hilarious skits involving damsels in distress or pregnant women. A pair of socks or a pillow adds to it. The guy in the doctor's office that collects everyone else's ailments. Starts with a cough, a cold, itching, ... and finally a pregnant woman walks in and the guy runs off screaming.

 

death and violence: lots of skits with someone dying with over exaggerated motions. Or evil people just being evil. Death is usually used to setup the punch line.

 

toilet humor. ever see the one with the SM riding a roller coaster while the audience is told he's on the toilet? I know. this one can get out of hand really easy but let's face it, the bean scene in blazing saddles was funny.

 

inside jokes: yeah, those just aren't funny.

 

alcohol: I haven't seen it either way, so I'd be fine with this restriction. But you know, a country bumpkin sipping out of a paper bag could be funny.

 

I hate to say this, but most humor involves pain and ridicule. There's always a line that shouldn't be crossed. Rather than rule out anything that could be anywhere close to that line maybe a better approach is to start showing scouts how to find that line. And if they go too far it's an opportunity for them to learn how to apologize. Skits are fun. Be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water (that's both death and toilet humor )

One of the struggles with cub scouts is most den leaders are figuring it out about a week in front of their scouts whereas in boy scouts the adults tend to have years of experience. So while the DLs are trying to keep their heads above water the SMs already know how something is going to play out because they've seen it a dozen times before.

 

Better training for DLs might help but training is not a strength in the BSA. The only thing that works is seeing it done right.

 

For all the comments about too much cub scouts. I agree. My son and I took 2 years off in the middle. I was waiting for boy scouts.

Hmm, or is this an example of one really extreme situation being blown way out of proportion and broadcast everywhere to the point where all sorts of people think this is normal.

 

How many girls sell cookies? How many get robbed at gun point? Is it worse than the odds of being struck by lightening? Is it getting worse? If not, then maybe this is just sensational news used to get more clicks. You know, the same thing that's keeping kids from enjoying the outdoors.

It's hard enough that getting fifth graders to adapt to camping without mom and dad. Couldn't imagine them doing it earlier.

Why not just have the PARENTS of Webelos get more involved and deliver a good Webelos program? Make it more outdoors and more camping. My guys camped monthly for nearly two years. Weren't bored. It's all what the leader makes of it.

I keep seeing this quote and I need to clarify. I never said move the second webelo year into boy scouts or change any of the rules about parents going with their son. I just said have the webelos meet with the troop.

 

I agree that having parents with more ideas and doing a better job would be great, but most webelo parents are burned out and don't understand what boy scouts is about. So moving the webelo den near a troop helps train the parents, it shows the webelos what their future might hold, and it gives the webelos a way to ease into boy scouts, not just one day we're at cub scouts and the next we're into boy scouts.

 

There's a big range of maturity coming in from webelos. Some kids are ready when they're ten and some don't seem to get it until they're 12. As much as I'd like to see a simple rule about what new scouts can do, the cub scout to boy scout transition can be a shock and I've seen it drive kids away. The point is, lessen that shock.

I don't know, @@blw2. I understand the time constraint. I also see a lot of parents pushing their kids to get scholorships of all sorts when learning how to run your own business, even if it's just spreading mulch or raking leaves, can make a bigger dent on college expenses.

 

I agree it doesn't have to be a troop event and it certainly shouldn't be the parents doing all the work. But something that encourages and teaches the scouts how to make some money would be better than the Personal Management MB.

Does that mean we're going to get 12 year old Eagles and major burn out on the Scout level?

No, boy scouts doesn't start until normal and the webelos still do their program. It's just that the webelos do their last 9 months much closer to a scout troop so they can see what the future holds. They still go camping with a parent and maybe it's just 4 campouts instead of 10, but they see the boy scouts getting ready for 10.

 

Webelos was always supposed to be a transition from cub scouts to boy scouts but it's just another cub scout den. All I'm proposing is put that den at a troop. If the troop is doing patrol method then it should fit just fine.

 

For a discussion about scout burnout, there's another thread: http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/28836-wheres-the-adventure-that-was-promised/Oh wait, you started that

Eagledad, I was thinking of something related to this. Here are some problems:

 

1) Webelos are bored to tears

2) Webelo parents are bored to tears

3) NSP for a year is too long

4) New scout parents don't understand the scout program

 

So how about taking the 2nd webelo year, keeping nearly the exact program, and just moving the webelo den into a troop as a NSP? They keep working on the cub scout program but it can be less about pins and more about getting ready for boy scouts. It is a den, so they don't need a PL. Troop guides or Den Chiefs can be used to teach the scouts how to do really simple things. The parents will get a chance to back off and learn while the boy scouts will get a chance for more leadership. The webelos can slowly transition to regular patrols, rather than all at once. And the webelos don't have to go from few if any campouts to every month. Start them off with warm weather and easy, under the guidance of scouters and boy scouts that know what they're doing. For those boys that have never gone camping with their parents they can learn slowly, at their pace. Better than that, the parents can learn as well.

 

What is meant by "adapt to the world?" Here's another way of asking that question, what is it that keeps a scout around until he ages out? And is the BSA moving towards that?

 

For what keeps a scout around I'd say they need deep friendships, they need to make decisions that matter, and they need room for improvement. An adventure will create friendships. Just know different people have different definitions of an adventure. Knowing that you're truly responsible for others, and being able to handle it, will create purpose. Growth will always come from a deep enough problem. At the same time the subject has to be simple enough that a 16 year old can master it enough to show others how to do it.

 

I don't think the BSA is moving towards that. They're moving away because they're under the impression that short attention spans mean everything should be one and done. What I find is scouts that want to stick around are the ones that find something that keeps their interest for years. We run a haunted house for the council. As much as I'd like to ditch that program the scouts love it and we keep making it bigger and better. And it's a ton of fun.

 

The outdoors has proven that it works. It's fun, deep enough to get better at and yet the scouts can teach others. All of the other ideas I can think of fail. They're either too difficult for a scout to master and make decisions about, or only a few scouts will be interested. I think a better approach is to keep the outdoor emphasis in scouts and push some of the ideas about venturing down into scouts and encourage troops to find their adventure. Survival, STEM, 4H, helping to raise service dogs, getting a job to pay for scouts, regularly helping with habitat for humanity, taking ownership of a path at a state park. I think there are lots of possibilities. An adventure doesn't have to be a week in the woods. An adventure is accepting a challenge with your friends. An adventure that lasts years is just accepting a series of challenges with your friends.

 

Reworking the MB program to include more adventure and less classroom might really help. Make it so a patrol or troop can do an extended version of the MB. Do it for a summer or for 5 years. The scouts choose. A MB counselor would not just work with a single scout for a couple of weeks, he'd help a patrol develop a program for whatever time frame they'd like. Talk about getting patrols out of a rut. That would be way cool. The goal is not eagle (but you're welcome to it), the goal is a long adventure.

Frankly, if you can't substitute the word "black" or "christian" into what ever you put in it is wrong IMHO.  The local option is BS and sounds like Jim Crow laws to me.

 

I respecrtfully disagree. And by respectfully I mean I respect your opinion, but I don't think it's the right time or place to fight that battle. There are two sides to this issue and both are claiming the moral high ground. Just as much as I don't want anyone else telling me what my religious beliefs are, I shouldn't tell anyone else what theirs should be. We have differences. I'm okay with that. Maybe I'm right or maybe they're right. I think it's time the BSA let someone else decide. The thing is, nearly all the decisions I make regarding scouts has nothing to do with this issue. It's not worth the fight.

 

I know, I'm suggesting a pragmatic response whereas a lot of people want a moral one. When people fight every injustice they see they can stretch themselves too thin. Sometimes battles should be left for someone else to fight. If a transgender or gay kid wants to join scouts then let's help him find a place he'll be happy. Maybe, just maybe, if both sides try to help each other out they might stop yelling at each other.

I knew FB had facial recognition software. I didn't think it could recognize a face specifically as @@MattR...not without someone saying who it is. Can it really recognize a specific person?

 

Yep. My first response was Oh, facebook should manage content, not create it. Anyway, Google "facebook auto tagging" or try this mess:

 

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://vtldesign.com/digital-marketing/social-media/nh-facebook-marketing/how-to-disable-facebook-facial-recognition-photo-tagging-nhmarketing/&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwi6iuKL-JfSAhVmwlQKHdLGCtEQFggcMAI&usg=AFQjCNE5LUNasKw2ypmPKGMkiUa0NA9New

This is an unusual situation but I've seen where a parent doesn't want their children's photos online. In this case it was because the dad was stalking and threatening violence. Mom was scared enough that a restraining order was not enough. I'm not saying it happens often, but just that there are reasons.

 

On another topic, I've noticed FB will automatically ask if you want certain people tagged. It's doing face recognition, knows who a person is in a photo, and asks you if you want that person tagged. What I don't know is who gets those messages. I see them for pictures that I don't post. My guess is that they are only friends of mine so it shouldn't be an issue, but with facebook I never know.

 

We don't use facebook. We use our own website and just load tons of photos on it. The photos are public (we asked the parents).