Jump to content

ParkMan

Members
  • Content Count

    2293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    51

Everything posted by ParkMan

  1. A memorial/reflection location sounds like a good idea. I do appreciate that memorial is not quite the right term here. Perhaps even a foundation that promotes advancement of awareness and prevention of child sexual abuse as well. I second the notion that it should be for all victims of child sexual abuse - not simply those received it through Scouting. Some sort of visual reminder at Philmont and the Summit would be a good idea. Something visible to remind us all how important it is for us all to work everyday to keep children safe. Once a settlement is reached, it strike
  2. You have to remember that the NAM is not actually a meeting - it's a event designed to generate enthusiasm and encouragements amongst the members. It's something akin to the big annual stockholders meetings that corporations have. All the real information sharing happens outside of these sorts of meetings. Yes, activist members could find a way to highjack the meeting - but rarely does that happen.
  3. I fear that people all around miss that fact. My child joined a pack and later a troop to experience scouting (lower case). Yes, the BSA program is good and nicely developed. But most people are not in the BSA because of the organization. At some point the continual increase in funds to defend lawsuits will only lead to declining membership. Just as in the bankruptcy thread, it will be impossible to discuss this topic because none of us can leave emotions and beliefs out of this.
  4. @MattR - I saw your post and read several of the surrounding comments. I suspect that it is impossible to sperate people's feelings of the lawsuit, the BSA, and child abuse. Even if this topic was simply numbers and motions, those discussions would still be centered around whether the BSA was paying enough or not. This is simply too charged a topic for dispassionate analysis. No matter what we do, people will come back to those core issues around the lawsuit. I think we have to recognize that fact and do our best to be tolerant of each other here. Generally this forum does a good
  5. But does a potentially future actionable claim matter if the BSA is the sole organization involved after the US Trustee's objection? Doesn't chapter 11 or chapter 7 really push for a determination of who has claims, what assets are available to settle those claims, and if the organization is financially viable afterwards? Does a "we might have a claim someday" go pretty low on the list? If at all? Isn't the settlement more applicable only if the LCs are joining so that their future liability goes away?
  6. Hi @Alaina, Can I ask you three questions first so that I can get a sense of your troop? 1. If you had to describe where your troop is today, what does you troop look like? How many kids, how active, how many volunteers? 2. If you could describe what you want you troop to look like in 2-3 years, what does it look like? 3. Why did you decide to volunteer as a Committee Member? Thanks!
  7. I'm not quite sure what you're referring to here. But, in general I would encourage that none of us read too much into how any of us writes. We all have different professional backgrounds and different styles. I enjoy the discussion on stuff like this. I theme I'm inferring for your posts is one of obeying the rules. As an adult, I don't put a whole lot of energy into worrying about obeying a BSA rule on how many knots to wear. Yes, I do follow the BSA guidelines on uniforming because I have chosen to. For me, obeying the rule isn't the point. There are somethings in Scout
  8. Well, in that case... I cannot believe how big a deal we make over what is essentially a non issue. Why do we need to look down at Scouters because they want to put a few pieces of cloth on their shirt? Aren't the leaders in the no-knot crowd simply trying to look superior by claiming "real Scouters don't wear knots?" Are they not themselves breaking several parts of the Scout law - friendly, courteous, kind, cheerful. Why should obedient trump all these others? Is that better?
  9. The reason this comes up a lot is honestly captured in your response. Why would you use the phase "with enough knots to make a third-world general blush" Why do you not see awe from a lot of experience? Why should "a Scouter with this much supposed experience should know better."? Why does this "one would think, be aware of current uniforming standards, and be modest enough or humble enough to abide by them." matter? Knots are .75" x 1.75" pieces of cloth you sew on a shirt. So you have 1, 2, 9, 20, or 30 - really so what? Why do we infer that this means anyt
  10. It's a volunteer activity - uniforms can be a fun way for a volunteer to share something of their story. If someone wears 0 knots, 3 knots, or 20 knots - I don't see the harm. I say - if you've got the knot, wear it if you want. We should not be making people feel guilty about wearing their knots and sharing a little about their journey.
  11. I just think you have to show the Scouts the move the Matrix and they'll be ready for all the martial arts the BSA could throw at them.
  12. Around where I am, the council has very little impact on recruiting. Recruiting in our area is driven almost entirely by units. If there was a path to recruiting older Scouts, I think our troops would try it. I just don't think they see a path. Maybe if we could figure out how to recruit those older kids into the program this wouldn't be such a big deal. The obvious path for recruiting is still to recruit tigers & wolves and then keep them in the program.
  13. I think you have to define "totally controlled by national." I've been involved long enough now at the district/council level that I know well that our council is most certainly not controlled on a day to day basis by national. I seriously doubt that national even cares about our camporees or other council level activities. Sure, there are some places where national has established firm rules that must be follow - such as YPT. But those are not all that prevalent. I can tell you that in my volunteer work, I see almost no control by national.
  14. I follow - thanks. But, as this is a bankruptcy case for the BSA, isn't the real question on the table what to do with BSA national? The BSA will run out of money - so either it goes into Chapter 11 or Chapter 7. In order to negotiate a settlement, the BSA has made a proposal that is larger than just BSA national - it includes the LCs as well. This settlement, if agreed, is the "neatest" way to close all the issue on the table. However, if the parties cannot agree to a settlement - we are still left with BSA national going bankrupt. We've all been thinking that if not sett
  15. But isn't the only party here that really matters the BSA? Maybe also the LCs - maybe. The judge is telegraphing she wants the BSA to continue and so that means Chapter 11. Let's say that she has mentally ruled out Chapter 7. That means that she'll determine the assets the BSA has to divide and to then continue. Everyone else is secondary. No?
  16. Is that when she might entertain a cramdown approach? Would she not be able to let BSA national complete a chapter 11 bankruptcy and declare the amount they have to pay to creditors? To her point, if she did focus on the 100 million in legal fees the BSA has already paid, she may be getting frustrated with the insurance companies and lawyers for the claimants. From my amateur viewpoint, that would seem a scenario where a judge might impose a settlement.
  17. This seemed a promising quote from the judge: I know I'm looking for a silver lining, but this was promising. "the Boy Scouts' mission needs to continue". Sounds like liquidation isn't an end she favors.
  18. A discussion presupposes that there is a way to draw a conclusion on the topic and decide if co-ed is better or not. There are so many different factors in deciding whether to go co-ed or not. Each segment of the population is going to have different factors they favor over others. Trying to make a decision at the BSA level because "girls mature faster and tend to take over" generalizes two genders overall. Not every girl is going to take over. Not ever boy is going to mature more slowly. It also takes away the opportunity for boys to learn from girls and vice-versa. I thi
  19. If I were a betting man... - 50% or more of local camps that exist now will be sold. - In the next 18 months we'll merge down to one council per 10,000-15,000 scouts. Each will retain a camp - all other council owned buildings will be sold to preserve whatever camps we can.
  20. That was an awful answer. 1. That "girls mature faster than boys" and "we don't want to disadvantage the boys" is the reason, that's an offensive and insulting reason. That stereotypes each group and neglects the notion that boys and girls can influence each other. Both genders will benefit from begin around the other. 2. If no one on their committee is talking about co-ed troops, they have the wrong people on that committee. How do we get someone a bit more current on that committee? I've got no time, but I'll volunteer. Just PM me.
  21. Makes me wonder if we never had the abuse lawsuits if the BSA would allow more things like this. I imagine that with all the abuse suits, the BSA is a bit gun shy on more suits. When I started, a leader reminded me that the most dangerous activity in the BSA is biking. Even with helmets they have seen more and worse accidents from biking than anything else.
  22. This is one of that areas that the BSA can certainly clean up. They need to be clear what is a YPT rule and what is a program rule. Mixing the two dilutes the importance of the YPT rules. It has to be clear what rules require a YPT violation and which rules do not. Tenting with your special needs child or bringing your son to an event with a troop for girls is not a YPT violation. This needs to be separate FAQs.
  23. Depends on the district & council to be honest. As others have said, some councils require it and so I expect that in those councils it's a big deal. In general, from the district & council perspective, the goal is well run packs & dens. Knowledgeable, engaged leaders can have a big impact on the quality of the programs. Training is one of the best ways to increase leader knowledge. To that end, having trained leaders is important to improving Scouting which is important to a district. The problem you run into is that a single leader can probably do fine by picking up
  24. Right - and that's much of the problem discussing the YP program here on this forum. People here are looking for the what they feel are weak spots and are amplifying them. When people here start to think bigger picture, they start to let the worry creep in. Are we enforcing it enough, are we making sure everyone is 100% trained at all time, and so on. We're all trying to find out how to make it perfect, but are glossing over the fact that it's already good now. When I've explained YPT to parents, they are all generally quite happy with what we do. That's why I give it a B-.
  25. The problem is always one of perspective. Many see as a solid program that is working and yet someone will always come along and point to something that improve safety. Yet, may of these safety increases do come at a cost. We will always be asking ourselves if the cost is worth the gain. Since we're talking about kids and safety, we'll almost always say the cost is worth it - but we need to be honest that there's is a cost. I would submit that the BSA's YPT program is not ineffective nor is it inconsistent. Yes, there are places where interpretation can occur and in those places it i
×
×
  • Create New...