Posts posted by NJCubScouter
I don't have a problem with this in general, but I think the BSA could pay a little more attention to how people are going to perceive things. The one thing that catches my eye is the "premium linens." Really? The whole setup is still reasonably rustic, I have no problem with a family opting for (and paying extra for) electricity, but "premium linens" seems kind of silly and unnecessary. All it does is lend itself to sarcastic exaggerations like the ones in the original post. (Plus I am not quite sure what would count as "premium linens." I am going to guess the ones we use at home would not qualify, but they do the job in a reasonably comfortable manner.)
18 hours ago, Eagledad said:
...I’m old and those days are a bit of a blur.
I know the feeling...
It was actually kind of an eventful week, and the events were kind of unavoidable for us. Prince Charles and Princess Diana got married four days after we did, so we were in the capital of Canada at the time the heir to their throne got married. (They went kind of bonkers over that.) And then the air traffic controller strike as we were trying to get back.
22 hours ago, hiker67 said:
Gabriella Burke, the girl who started the petition, did go to the camporee after all -- in Scouts BSA:
The article is a little confusing because the reporter gets the BSA terminology mixed up, but what else is new.
On 8/21/2019 at 3:33 PM, Eagledad said:
Yes, but when I was flying during the controller strike in 1982...
Not that it matters to the discussion, but the air traffic controller's strike was in August 1981. Wikipedia tells me it started August 3 and essentially ended on August 5 when the controllers were all fired and started being replaced, but even without Wikipedia I knew it was 1981. The first day of the strike was the day my wife and I flew back from our honeymoon in Canada, and if there is one piece of information that I absolutely need to have in my memory at all times (well, two, the other is my wife's birthday), it is the date and year of my wedding. (How exactly we got back despite the strike I do not recall; I think we may have been on one of the last planes in the air before everything was shut down. I could probably get a minute-by-minute recitation from my wife.)
One might also ask why the BSA decided to hold its' Jamborees in a place without adequate transportation facilities. (And "because it was donated" is NOT a good answer.)
On 8/16/2019 at 7:05 AM, Jameson76 said:
That pretty much sums up a great issue...SIX YEARS OF CUB SCOUTS. The Cubs used to be sort of the waiting room for Scouts, as that was the really good stuff. Now it can be a 6 year slog to Scouts, parents may determine to do something new. Also after SIX YEARS OF CUB SCOUTS many parents (can you say family scouting) expect Troops to be the same, or in many cases worry that it will be more of the same
I know. Cub Scouting was three years when I was in it. Now it has become the tail that wags the dog. I believe there are significantly more youth members in Cub Scouts than in Scouts BSA (that name is still difficult for me to type) at any given time. That is really where National's focus seems to be most of the time.
I think I am u$ing "value" to mean $omething different from the re$t of you.
4 minutes ago, SubSM said:
It’s that free market angle that I am looking to work on. I really don’t think there is much marketing, that I have seen, touting the benefits of scouting. There are many advertisements for sports, but not scouts.
I can see this becoming a WB ticket in someone’s future. 🤔
When I was a Cub Scout and Boy Scout (mid-60's to mid-70's) there were ads for Boy Scouting on tv on a regular basis. I don't actually know when they stopped. There have been several discussions of BSA advertising in this forum over the years. Some have said that National makes tv ads for Scouting available to the councils but that the councils don't use them. (I had been under the impression that the old BSA ads were "public service announcements," which I assume means the advertiser doesn't have to pay for them. If that's not the case, or is no longer the case, then the fact that the councils don't use them makes a little more sense, because they cost money.)
10 minutes ago, ParkMan said:
So, I'd peel the onion here.
Why are they willing to choose sports and walk away from scouting?
I already mentioned what I think is probably the biggest reason: The parents push sports over Scouting because they believe it is in their financial best interests to do so - regardless of whether it actually is or not.
On a related note, I think that by the end of what is now almost SIX YEARS of Cub Scouting, the parents (particularly those who were not Scouts themselves) tend to think that their sons have "done Scouting" and have gotten all the benefit they can out of it (of course, we know they're wrong, but they don't.) On the other hand, they view the benefits of sports as just beginning at that age.
3 minutes ago, SteveMM said:
Our SM has tried to do this, even going so far as to have a sign-in sheet so he can tally how often Scouts come to meetings. Frankly, I bristle at this. Scouts who don't show up won't get elected to leadership positions, nor will they complete requirements for rank. That should be enough to encourage them to come to meetings.
Our troop traditionally takes attendance, which is to say that there have been times when the scribe has taken attendance and times where he hasn't, usually depending on how hard the SM at the time pushed the SPL at the time to push the Scribe at the time. How the attendance records are used, if at all, is not consistent as well. (I am talking about a 16-year period during which I have been a troop committee member and sometime Advancement Chair. Currently our troop is down to about 6 or 7 Scouts so nobody bothers to take attendance.
7 minutes ago, ParkMan said:
In short, no-one. The leaders of these activities understand that to field a team, they need participation. So, they draw a line and say "no participation, no team." Most of use Scouters are not willing to do the same.
So, in short, for the most part, we do it to ourselves.
I think a lot of Scouters have TRIED to do the same and have found that the parents and Scouts, given a choice between sports and Scouting, will usually choose sports. So the "free market" dictates that it's us who make the accommodation, and not the coaches.
18 hours ago, Jameson76 said:
Absolutely. And I have seen #3 happen, although I do not know whether there was any way of knowing about it in advance as there was in the article. When I was in high school a football player suffered a ruptured spleen from a "hit" during a game and died a few weeks later.
1 hour ago, Jameson76 said:
For the "elite" youth athlete I have questioned the wisdom to pay $4k - $6 annually to participate in a sport for 6 - 8 years with hopes/plans of getting a scholarship.
I think that's the answer. A lot of parents have stars in their eyes. They look forward to their child getting a free ride on a sports scholarship, turning pro and supporting them in their old age. The fact that the chances of this happening for any given youth are very, very small does not seem to deter many of them.
4 hours ago, Eagledad said:
The Methodist church uses scouting to spread the message, but not by actively preaching by word. I would imagine that Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc COs are thinking along the same lines.
That's my point. In the BSA you have CO's that are Christian churches, Jewish synagogues, Hindu temples, etc. and many that are not religious at all, like PTA's, American Legion, Elks, etc. If you want a new unit of your own religious bent, you can line up the appropriate place of worship and start a new unit, regardless of which religion it is. None of that is true for Trail Life. You cannot get a charter for a Trail Life unit unless you are a Christian church (and maybe other kinds of Christian organizations, I don't know.) The point is, Christian. Nothing else. I am not faulting them for that, it is their organization. I was just wondering, since people say Trail Life is open to non-Christian youth (but not non-Christian adults), whether the group is open with parents of non-Christian youth about the fact that people are going to try to "spread the word" to their children. If they are, and a parent chooses to send their child into that environment, that's fine.
By the way, the general rule within Judaism is to not proselytize to members of other faiths.
On 8/12/2019 at 2:18 AM, WAKWIB said:
Trail Life and the churches that are CO's for their units view inclusion of non-Christian youth as part of their evangelistic outreach to the community. They don't require "faith" as a requirement for the youth. They are hoping they can plant the seeds of Christian faith through their program. However, that's a side outcome for the most part. Most of the men and boys who participate in Trail Life just want to camp and enjoy outdoor fun.
I would be curious to know how clear they make it, up front, to parents of children who are Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc. that the organization may try to convert their sons to Christianity.
On 8/12/2019 at 9:30 AM, David CO said:
Have you ever read mythology? Zeus would never be compliant with YP. He is constantly taking strange forms and sexually molesting young people as they sleep. Zeus is the perfect example of what BSA is trying to keep out of scouting.
The hypothetical Scout probably read a sanitized version in school where they did not mention Leda and the Swan, Ganymede and the Eagle, etc. Ol' Zeus apparently had a preference for taking the form of birds.
Just to follow up on what Chadamus said, SeattlePioneer made this post more than eight years ago. His last visit to the forum was more than three years ago. I would not necessarily expect a response from him.
Oof. You don't want to be on the receiving end of an order from an unhappy judge.
2 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:
What I find interesting (upsetting) is that the lawyers are stating they need to get these in now before BSA declares bankruptcy. However, if you look at the USA Gymnastics bankruptcy, they are still allowing individuals who were abused to file claims within the bankruptcy court (what appears as creditors). So, is the real difference that lawyers that file pre bankruptcy can get their 33% commission check?
You're talking about what the attorney says in the last two paragraphs of the article. It does not make much sense to me. Maybe he does not understand how bankruptcy works, and I have encountered some lawyers in other fields who really don't have a clue about bankruptcy. (I do, but what I say here is not legal advice to the BSA or anybody else, consult your own attorney for legal advice, etc.) A case would not be affected by the bankruptcy if it begins AND ENDS before the bankruptcy was filed. (And there are some wrinkles in there as far as the timing, but I'm not going to get into them.) If the case is still pending when the bankruptcy is filed, the case stops (which actually is what that lawyer says, which is why what else he says doesn't make sense) and the claim becomes a claim in the bankruptcy case. (In some cases the case can continue in non-bankruptcy court IF it is FULLY covered by insurance.) But that claim should be treated the same as someone who just files a claim in the bankruptcy case (for which there are deadlines) without having filed a lawsuit.
As for the attorney fees, I am not seeing how those would affected by whether a case is filed before or after a bankruptcy is filed either. The fee agreement is between the creditor (the victim of abuse) and his attorney, not between the debtor (BSA) and the creditor's attorney. This is not the type of case where the loser has to pay the winner's attorneys fees, as in an employment discrimination case for example (if the winner is the employee.) Or at least, that's the situation in NJ and I am not aware of any state where it is otherwise. (Note, there are exceptions to, and technicalities about, just about everything I said; this is a general overview.)
18 hours ago, David CO said:
He got off way too easy.
Well... non-violent crime, $24,000 (as opposed to say $240,000 or $2,400,000), pleaded guilty, first offense, he paid it all back... it doesn't shock me that he got two years probation instead of jail time. If I were the judge I probably would have leaned toward maybe six months in jail. The "first offense" part has a real impact; generally the whole picture changes if you have a previous conviction or two, or three... I once consulted with someone who had (allegedly) embezzled more than $500,000; HE was heading to prison.
On 7/26/2019 at 2:09 PM, David CO said:
True. But I have never seen kids quite so eager to get into my classroom as they are to get out.
Ha. But (and not to make light of a serious subject) I think bullets flying around would change the dynamic.
1 hour ago, David CO said:
Besides that, classroom doors usually open outward towards the hallway. This prevents students from piling up at the door in an emergency (making it impossible to open). This actually happened once at a movie theater.
It can happen getting out, and it can happen getting in. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Who_concert_disaster - 11 dead in that case.
1 minute ago, Pale Horse said:
I would imagine these door stops aren't in use unless an active shooter situation is ongoing. I'm (thankfully) yet to hear of the school shooter who also attempts to torch the school down.
Besides, rooms don't tent to just suddenly fill with smoke.
Schools or any other building can catch fire with or without a criminal involved.
And no, rooms don't "tend to" just suddenly fill with smoke. But do you think they never do? I'm thinking worst-case scenario here.
8 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:
Wife got $2 door stops to use in her class.
Interesting. They are presumably on the inside of the door. If the classroom has suddenly filled with smoke from a fire and the teacher has become temporarily incapacitated, one wonders whether a panicky child trying to open the door, when its mostly dark due to the smoke, is going to immediately realize why the door won't open.
Military Explorers sponsored by BSA Learning for Life?
in Issues & Politics
Posted · Edited by NJCubScouter
I wonder if the people running this program are aware of the longstanding policy of the BSA in not wanting its programs to be "military" in nature - or maybe that policy doesn't exist anymore?
Added: Ok I just looked at the links and here is the photo that is in the article:
I find it VERY difficult to believe that this is approved by National.