Jump to content

mds3d

Members
  • Content Count

    200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by mds3d

  1. But that isn't the situation that Eagle1993 is talking about. Once the bankruptcy proceedings are done, new assets can't be targeted. National won't be looking for more money to pay lawsuits. This is all about if the lawyers are able to convince a judge that the Councils assets should be included in the proceedings. If they aren't then the lawyers will have to go after councils individually.
  2. @Eagle1993 Unless the bankruptcy court brings the councils into the process (which no one has ever provided precedent for). Council properties will only be in danger from lawsuits/judgement against individual councils, not against national. So if no one sues my council, it doesn't matter how much the payouts are against national or another council, our council property is not at risk. I am still doubtful that the lawyers will be able to target the unaffected councils. Certainly CO's are safe unless they are named in a lawsuit.
  3. I think it is entirely possible that the bankruptcy proceedings will take more than a year. I doubt that the 80 days the BSA has requested for victims to come forward will be granted. As long as we are waiting for lawsuits to be filed, there is the chance that they will go after councils. Merging councils puts assets at risk. I am not saying we shouldn't do it but I think we have to be careful about the timing.
  4. I really don't know how I feel about this. We have more than 15 districts in our council as it is. There are no small bordering councils. I think this just doesn't apply here. I don't live that far from the central office and it already seems far away. I can't imagine what the farther districts think. Seems like a thing to tackle after everything settles down so that no new problems arise. Maybe we should just merge all the councils up to the area.
  5. I think that TLS has explained how they were different. His explanation is consistent with my limited experience with LDS Crews. One of the things that is often explained is that we do not punish boys for the mistakes of adults. Just because he is an adult now, that doesn't change. He was involved and registered as a venturer from 16-18 so he is entitled to those years of service. If he really wants to represent those years correctly, I don't think anyone would fault him for including his years in his Boy Scout star. I think this situation is perfect for combining everything under l
  6. I think everyone was aware that LDS Crews weren't the same thing as a traditional crew. It's not quite the same thing as a paper crew that didn't really exist.
  7. I think if you are going to wear stars, they should actually add up to your years of service. I am a combined under the scouter blue man myself, but that's mostly laziness.
  8. That quote is news to me. The bylaws state that council property is transferred to national on dissolution of the council but there isn't anything about national having any direct control over the assets of the council (only that they be used for furthering scouting).
  9. I think there is a big question on if the BSA national organization was involved in any "intentional wrong-doing" or was simply not doing enough.
  10. Even if the insurance doesn't have to pay out for that specific incident, more lawsuits mean that the BSA is a greater liability for continuing litigation.
  11. This doesn't really address the reason that it is important that councils and national are separate. Yes, the lawyers can add the council and even the unit (CO) to the lawsuit. However, my council cannot be added to a lawsuit that happened in your council. This means a couple of things. First, the property owned by my council should not be included in the bankruptcy settlement. I believe the BSA that enough has been done to keep these two entities separate. If you believe otherwise then find precedent where a bankruptcy court included the assets of a legally separate organization. I
  12. There is a lot of US History on the Citizenship test. I am not sure that is the aim of Citizenship in the Nation. I would be interested in the non-history questions. I also wonder about the methodology of this survey as there doesn't seem to be any information on how the questions were selected. The actual test randomly selects 10 questions from a bank of 100. For example, the actual test only asks you to name 3 of the original 13 colonies. There is also is a significant difference between someone who studies for that test and one who doesn't. I wonder what the pass rate woul
  13. Predictions are often wrong. They are also often predicated on nothing changing from current environment (not the case over the last 30 years). The news does all these things a disservice by always reporting on the extreme of whatever was said by the scientific community. Academia is rarely in agreement so well as it is on climate change, and that should tell you something. Richard Mueller might not be disingenuous but I think he is at least taking his stance in the way that will make him the most notable.
  14. @DuctTape I didn't really mean to defend it. I was trying to give my thoughts after some others had responded without putting them all at the beginning. I help my units through JTE every year and don't get a lot of pushback so I don't have personal experience with the problems with it. @walk in the woodsI do wish that it was easier to track these things without a separate worksheet. Most of this stuff should be automatic. I like your idea for tracking camping and service hours. @ParkManTheoretically, Unit Commissioners are supposed to be the people working collaboratively
  15. That's the idea! Again, I don't think already great troops are the target for JTE. I think that the idea with the numbers is to put a measurable (because it is supposed to be consistent) score on good practices. Here is how I think these goals are supposed to be read: 1. Planning and Budget: Good troops will make a plan, involve the youth, and have an active committee to support that plan. 2. Building Scouting: Good troops will grow. 3. Retention: Scouts will stay in a good troop (and age out). 4. Webelos-to-Scout: Good troops will provide the next step for graduating cub
  16. I am curious. I see people here complain about JTE, but it is rarely about specific things. What are your complaints about the program? Is it the targets themselves? Is gold too easy or too hard? Are you still bitter it isn't silver at the top 😉?
  17. As one who has worn silver loops for most of the time I have been a scouter, let me say that I both understand and am saddened by your frustration. Many of us at the district level are trying to help units provide a good, safe, consistent scouting program to as many young people as possible. This means that our priorities are sometimes different but they should not be at odds. I was a Roundtable commissioner for a little while and I tried to make sure that the program was useful to the unit leaders that came. Maybe they were just nice, and maybe the ones who didn't approve just didn't come
  18. This is a significant misapplication of that verse. Jesus is not telling us that social judgement cannot be applied by the sinful. The verse is in context of a situation manufactured to trap Jesus in conflict with either Jewish or Roman law (because the laws themselves conflicted). We can certainly discuss if this man should continue to be a BSA leader or how we believe the justice system should act. We are not the ones administering judgement here so no one is actually casting stones. Don't water down that analogy. Jesus didn't mean figurative stones. The men in that story were try
  19. The justice system assumes innocence in the absence of contrary evidence presented beyond a reasonable doubt. That does not mean that we act as if the accused was actually innocent. After all, they are accused of a crime and if we acted as if they were innocent no trial would be held. Society can make whatever judgement they feel is reasonable about this guy as we are not a jury of his peers or a judge dispensing justice.
  20. I watched the video. If you pause it as he goes by, I don't think there is any way his hand is at the level of her lower back. She isn't that much shorter than him. Her back should be mostly within the frame of the video and his hand is clearly below it. We have no reason not to believe her. We have several reasons to believe him (he is facing a year in jail for one). We can discuss his guilt/innocence until we are blue in the face but that is for a court to decide. As for the BSA, they don't have to wait until he is proven guilty or not. They can look at the video and decide. Th
  21. You have misinterpreted this law. Only a second "sexual battery" offense requires offender registration. Aggravated sexual battery is a different charge.
  22. This wasn't a "lapse in judgement." This is Sexual Battery under Georgia law. Kick him out. Send him to a judge. @qwazse : I dont think this is an impertinent moment. It was a crime. I also don't think she was slow to react. She was attempting to continue to perform her job without making a scene. She understood that she wasn't in immediate danger and this doofus was on TV. If I were the IH of his church he would be fired immediately from both scouts and his job. Men who think it is appropriate to touch a woman's butt without permission don't have any business in the BSA
  23. Your comments on Hitler seem to be colored by a desire to consider socialism wrong. https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists
  24. This article assigns the quality of "purity" and "loyalty" to a man who betrayed his country to fight to defend the institution of slavery. This is surely not an unbiased article.
  25. I'm sorry... Your interest is about the horses they rode? That's fine, be interested. There is still no reason for us to celebrate these men. These statues, monuments, parks, schools, buildings, etc are not legacies of these men's great horses. They are not celebrating these men's great military prowess or their leadership of people. They are monuments created by people who refuse to accept the idea that all men are created equal decades after we fought a war about it. They celebrate a time when certain people were considered property and others felt the need to kill fellow Americans to try
×
×
  • Create New...