Jump to content

Gone

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    1810

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Gone

  1. Gone
    We shall see if money talks. If TLUSA wanted to allow the LDS to rebrand their own version of TL, now would be the time.
  2. Gone
    @@fred johnson but most units I know meet at their CO, service their CO, have space and are "part of" the CO, yet the CO does not consider them in the same vein as any of their other ministries. They see them more as a philanthropic service by providing a space to meet and such. Most CORs are not involved beyond the odd signature now and then.
  3. Gone
    Yeah, forum "buzz" would not be the smoking gun I'd believe. Besides, given the vote yesterday and the amount of money the LDS has, I think that's enough to make TLUSA reconsider if that (anti-mormon) was truly their position.
  4. Gone
    Is that stated by the organization somewhere?
  5. Gone
    The data is 18 months old and was revised downward during mid 2013 to 96,000 units. The 2014 number was around 93,000 or so (have to check the BSA source). Below are the unit stats from BSA since 2007. 100k is three years in the rear view mirror. 2007 50,780 50,213 49,037 Total= 112,647 2008 47,418 45,962 44,830 Total= 111,839 2009 43,110 41,947 41,628 Total= 109,786 2010 40,997 40,146 39,392 Total= 106,464 2011 38,713 37,739 19,920 Total= 103,207 2012 19,998 19,752 18,900 Total= 100,618 2013 17,853 17,075 16,013 Total= 96
  6. Gone
    There are few clear-cut debates like that in society today. Take illegal immigration. Proponents argue they are not a burden to society and pay more in taxes than they consume in benefits. Opponents argue the opposite and cite BLS stats that prove their point, yet the other side still argue its a positive. That debate has been going on since IRCA 1986 and before...yet the same arguments remain. Clear cut and yet hardly.
  7. Gone
    It will be an interesting debate, indeed, within the Mormon church. Not from My experience. We have a few LDS folks (kids and adults) in our non-LDS unit. They prefer a more traditional BSA-style unit and program. The are "strongly encouraged" to go LDS but to my knowledge they are not excommunicated if they do. I can only speak for myself, but I don't think the LDS units will go bye-bye. I see a few scenarios actually. One is that the LDS units stay put (in BSA) but they all go with restricted membership. Another could be they split BUT somehow get BSA to license back to
  8. Gone
    Scout driven to me means you spark the interest via a vis a troop or patrol sponsored event that covers a requirement or two, then leave the boys to follow up with the MBC. Troop classes would be ok. But I'd avoid anything that smells like a rubber stamping MBU.
  9. Gone
    If *I* were BSA membership chair? I'd offer them the same program but on their terms...because that's what my advisory board said they'd support yesterday. If BSA means what they say then they should allow the LDS units to separate out, have their own rules and still use the BSA program. That way I can claim their numbers and still have visibility in to their program. That's assuming the LDS folks aren't so ticked off over how BSA handled this situation they don't outright start their own program.
  10. Gone
    @@RememberSchiff I suspect since they are the largest bid in the nest they're ticked this came up when they were out and not when BSA promised. Seems like fishy timing....almost as if it were planned. I'd expect them to split or something else monumentous.
  11. Gone
    I believe he said units. Looks like the word units. My point stands, BSA hasn't seen a 100k units in a while.
  12. Gone
    Yet. Of course since it is Christian-based it's a different membership base to begin with.
  13. Gone
    @@desertrat77 our council was uninvited tonight to our COH Saturday where they were supposed to present FOS. They asked why, our COR said "Turn on CNN."
  14. Gone
    Figured. So tagged photos of youth on manage pages is akin to giving youth personal info. Not a good idea and against policy. Thanks.
  15. Gone
    Sticks are natural TP? Who knew.
  16. Gone
    It's either ballsy or stupid to get rid of 70% of an organization which is bleeding members already. I'm going with the latter. BSA has never been known to make smart business or membership decisions.
  17. Gone
    100,000 units? BSA has not seen that many units in a long while.
  18. Gone
    Yep, I get that. He mentioned "page managers" which usually is an open, public page rather than a close group. If you tag them on a page then it is open. Can you have closed pages? Never tried.
  19. Gone
    Interesting. So only page managers (assumed to be unit leaders) can tag. Tagging is done by linking the picture to a scout's FB account, right? Isn't that identifying that scout by name and other FB info? Is that available for anyone on FB to see that picture?
  20. Gone
    For me this is an MB that should be scout-driven rather than done at camp or by the troop. We did a troop-based class on this a few years ago when it was non-required and had 10 kids attend. Did the requirements by the book BUT we added a few extras that were optional such as knife/cutting skills, cooking skills not in the book (smoking, desserts and fondues) and had a Top Chef competition at the end. The kids loved it! Now that it's required if we offered such a class we'd have 25 kids no problem and it would be too cumbersome.
  21. Gone
    Doesn't look like it. They reported 20,000 in their first year and have added another 5,000 according to a few different reports so far for 2015. Lord knows how many they will add after today. Unless membership was dropping I wouldn't classify it as floundering.
  22. Gone
    Hopefully you won't. But if the unit does it someone could construe that you broke BSA policy about identifying youths in photos.
  23. Gone
    On sharing the pic I disagree to a point. If Bobby's mom uses the "share" feature for a picture on FB she's taking a pic on the unit FB page and putting it on her timeline or wherever. That ties the scout to the parent and the unit, which gives anyone looking enough identifiable info to find the scout if they want. Our unit has concluded doing so would violate the BSA guidelines around personal scout info had taken steps to prohibit that from happening. I agree if mom wants to download the pic and post on her page NOT using the "share" feature she's entirely welcome to do so. On tagging I
  24. Gone
    That's why a closed group picture sharing service is better. It is the same as a private email list or website (i.e., SOAR) so it does not violate the BSA photo or social media policy.
  25. Gone
    But how can you prevent Bobby's mom from tagging kids in photos? It gets very hard to manage that. Our unit's policy goes a bit further than BSA. When we post photos we do group shots or action photos. We have told our parents never to tag or discuss their kids on FB. If THEY want to share on their page that's okay, BUT we as that they not use the "share" feature, but rather to download the photo and paste on their own page. It is tough enough to manage the page itself, making sure parents (who may not know better) don't violate BSA policy is a huge job on FB. We avoid individual or sm
×
×
  • Create New...