NJCubScouter

(Moderator hat on) The discussion in this thread has gotten a little too personal (and not in a good way.) Let's please ALL take a "step back" (not a "step down") and remember to direct your remarks at the issue and the posts of others, and not the others themselves.

I've never heard of any of this. When I hear the term "White Rabbit" I assume it's about the Jefferson Airplane song.

Pselb, you are just as free to express your perspective as anyone else. And others are free to disagree with your perspective, as much as anyone else's. But it would be helpful if everybody realized that there is a perspective other than their own, on almost every subject discussed in this forum.

When, when IS National planning to have the new program in place? They originally said "sometime in 2019" but I thought that had been moved up for the purpose of the new units accepting female crossovers. Has an actual date been announced? And, they have not actually "announced" this new program yet at all. It has to have a name, they need to start lining up CO's, they have to manufacture the green skorts, etc. etc. (Ha ha on that last one.) Has anyone heard when that announcement is planned? (It's sort of like a presidential candidate, announcing when they are going to announce.)

If that 10 year old girl is in the fifth grade, she did not join on Jan. 15, 2018. (Assuming that the rules spelled out by National are being followed.) Only girls up through grade 4 were permitted to join under the early adopter program, and that was presumably done for the exact reason you mention. A fourth grade girl who just joined can go for their Webelos and Arrow of Light badges, and then cross over in about a year, and National has said that by then, there will be a program for Boy-Scout-age girls to join.

Customer demand? The BSA will tell you what you demand!

Well, we usually seem to agree on most things, but not this time. (But I'm not going to down-vote your post like you did to mine. ) A note on the socks: I think that in my entire life (which has included being a Cub Scout and later a Den Leader and Assistant Cubmaster), I have never seen a Cub Scout wearing the official socks, before I saw this video and photo. (In most of the packs in my area, the kids don't even wear the official pants, they all wear jeans, but that's a different discussion.) I think the presence of Cub Scout socks supports the suggestion made by a couple of people above that this was sort of a "setup" for marketing/promotional purposes. Not that there's anything necessarily wrong with that, but if you're going to "stage" something, it is better not to be so obvious about it.

Generally I wouldn't advocate for or against anyone doing anything anywhere unless it (1) affects me or my family or my troop or my community, or (2) is against the law, which this is not, or (3) violates a rule of an organization that I have some connection to, which I don't in this case. I am not this girl's father, nor her troop leader. Those who are can keep her safe, they don't need my help.

I noticed that too. It is new with the latest software update. It is indeed cool. It is also much easier now to get parts of quotes from a post to go in different boxes in the reply so you can put your response to each part of the post under the part you are referring to.

Um. The 1980s or the 1480s?

I'm not sure what that case has to do with the "Me Too" movement. The differences are too numerous to count, but obviously the most important one is the difference between statements of preschoolers (who, I thought, are presumed incapable of distinguishing fact from fiction, and therefore I am not even sure why their testimony was admitted anyway) who were basically told what to say, and the stories now being recounted by adult women. The youngest "Me too" accusers (at the time of the alleged incidents) that I am aware of are the 14-year-old girl in the Roy Moore situation and (if we can go back to 2016) the under-age beauty contestants who say the current president came into their dressing room and ogled them while they were changing clothes. They are capable of distinguishing fact and fiction and their testimony (not that that is going to happen in either case) would be admitted in court.

I'm not talking about any of those things. I am talking about cookies.

It is, but lately, on this general subject, the balance seems to be off. We have about 90 percent "conjecture" and debate about the "conjecture" - including me saying that maybe so much conjecture is not very productive. Some of the other 10 percent, the "learning" part, are posts by the one person (I believe its only one) who is a leader in a pack that is actually implementing the program now. And I guess the posts by our friends across the pond also fall into that category.

The change at the Cub Scout level has been in place for 23 days. The details of the change at ages 11-17 have not even been announced yet. I suppose one alternative would be to wait until we see what actually happens rather than drawing all kinds of conclusions based on what any of us thinks will happen. But I realize that in this forum, that's crazy talk.

I didn't see any seedy characters outside that building in the picture. All I see is a girl selling cookies. The police are probably watching that place like hawks. It's probably the safest place in town. In response to your previous post about Scouts doing things "against federal law": Nothing she is doing violates any law, state or federal. She is selling cookies, presumably not the kind of cookies they may sell inside. At most she might have been violating some rule of the GSUSA, but the story seems to indicate that she wasn't even doing that.

I understand that, and yet, there they are. I don't know. Maybe they could violate the Emoluments Clause, that doesn't seem to be enforced either.

I don't see any U.S. Marshals there padlocking the door and confiscating what's inside.

I was actually serious with this question. I do not see the values issue here, especially in comparison with other things I have seen that are apparently ok. This is a legal product being sold in a legal establishment, and the girl is standing outside. My local convenience store sells cigarettes, a dangerous product that cannot be sold to children - in fact, so dangerous that now in NJ it cannot be sold to some adults - and yet during "selling season" there are always Girl Scouts and Cub Scouts right outside the door, selling cookies or popcorn. Is that ok?

Can anybody explain to me what is actually wrong with what this girl did?

... and I feel fine? I think that song was meant to be taken ironically. And where would "Leonard Bernstein" fit into your lyrics?

Let's all please call people by their correct names, and not make up nicknames. The CSE's name is Michael Surbaugh, or if one prefers, just Surbaugh, or if you want to just use his title, he's the CSE.

Our charter is by calendar year... so October probably doesn't mean anything. On the other hand, when I said I was going to ignore it, I didn't mean for that long.

I plan on ignoring it completely until someone tells me I have to do something.

What I mean is, if I go online right now to take YPT, am I going to find a new, longer presentation or the same-old 30 minute one with the 25 quiz questions?

Is this included in the online training as well?