ParkMan

I imagine there is a vote required, but ultimately you are correct. However, I suspect the selection of some other Scouting organization in the US would be met with a collective "so what?" As a country we are inherently too independent to care what the WOSM says when picking an activity for our kids. The competing Scouting programs in the US gave not gotten traction because they are not the BSA and have neither it's personal connections nor it's ubiquitous reach and facilities.

I see. I understand now. Thanks

I believe the primary reason for this is so that units do not compete with the council for donations. If Scouting units are all running around asking banks to donate to their troops, then it will make it more difficult for the council to solicit funds. This is why councils have the ability to approve fundraisers too. Until recently councils were not allowed to assess fees to members and so the bulk of their funding needed to come from donations. So, while the distinction between soliciting and earning is a good one - the primary reason is to make it easier for the councils to exist.

I'm not sure I'm following you here. Where so you see adults not supporting the youth in this one?

@OLDRIFLE, I'm going to go in a slightly different direction than many of my esteemed fellow Scouters here. If the Scout in question (you perhaps?) looses the opportunity to make Eagle because of this because of reaching 18 years old, then yes - file a request through council. Explain that the troop has added this requirement and this requirement is pushing the Scout past the age of 18. However, if this is not the case, then mention it to the Scoutmaster and Advancement Chair/Committee Chair that this interpretation is incorrect, but then move on. What is the fundamental issue here

My vote: New subforum seperate from I&P which allows for more general discussion. If we are already here, why not have the ability to discuss items like this more generally amongst Scouters?

My suggestion - just raise your hand with your fellow ASMs and explore how you can do more patrol oriented activities during meetings. Zoom isn't the issue and I'm sure it's not a nefarious plot to end patrol based Scouting. Odds are it's just people who don't really know what to do are guessing. Honestly, I'd have no idea how to make a virtual troop meeting with 30 people interactive and patrol based. But I'm guessing that since you're living it, you've got some ideas. Offer to be the person to sort it out for the SM & ASMs.

To add some context. I've staffed several courses, so my recommendation is based on my observations with many participants. 1) @T2Eagle is spot on. This isn't an advanced outdoor skills course. It's not a backpacking course. It's a leadership development course. They staff knows that not everyone will even own a tent let alone a lightweight backpacking tent. 2) Unless your tent is crazy heavy, I expect you'll be able to find a way to manage getting it to wherever you need to camp. While discouraged, I've watched people bring cots, dutch ovens, coolers, etc. 3) You will be

Sounds like a winning plan. As a CC, I asked the advancement chair to sign all advancement docs which required a CC signature. The BSA structure has to accommodate everything from little units with 5 scouts all the way to troops of 100+. As CC, I had absolutely no idea what individual scouts were doing with advancement nor did I have the technical knowledge of the advancement chair. Never in 5 years did we have any issue with it.

Oh - the other responses confused me. I am not a lawyer, but I don't believe there are any laws in this space. It's a question of decency and ethics. Sharing the letter like this shows poor form unless there was a reason it had to be shared. I'll assume in this case it did not have to be shared and so the CC acted in poor form. But, as far as I know there is no rule against being a jerk. As a result, you're stuck trying to get some putative action taken by the CO (unlikely to happen, but maybe) or the BSA (certainly won't happen). So I think you're facing an uphill battle he

I think I misunderstood - I thought your concern was that the SM shared the letter, not that he was removed. I'm out of my element on fighting removals. Sorry.

Thank you - I didn't know that things ever progressed that far. That's fascinating.

My .02. Have a quiet word with the SM and explain the point and ask him not to do it again. The downside of a volunteer organization is that not everyone in a leadership position actually understands that they need to show discretion in these cases. You could go start a big to-do and report on the guy, but to what end? What he purposefully malicious or just a dolt?

@Eagle94-A1 - I'm so sorry to hear of the continued woes in your district and council. It really is a shame at how it has deteriorated. @CommishJulian - I'm trying to follow your story, but am a bit confused. For that I apologize. I'm involved in a mid-to-large council. In our council there is certainly some correlation between personal success and positions like district chair - but only to a small degree. What I've found happens is that the every couple of years as the council nears nomination time, they look around at the districts. If you've got a well functioning district w

Have the troop advancement chair (assuming he/she is a committee member) sign for the CC. 1. In the 20 Eagle's during my tenure as CC no-one ever checked a signature. 2. A member of the committee being delegated the authority to sign on behalf of the CC is pretty reasonable. Our advancement chair knew the status much better than I ever did as CC. 3. Even if there ever is a dispute, the BSA will come down on the side of accepting the signature simply because "no scout should be punished for the mistake of an adult"

What better way to stay gender segregated then to run both the "girls only" and "boys only" programs? The GSUSA could run the GSUSA program for girls and the BSA program for boys. Their professional staff could support both sides of the program. Cost of program would be less for the GSUSA and they wouldn't have to worry about serious competition.

In my mind, the most valuable parts of the BSA ot the GSUSA are: stop the loss of girls in Scouting to the BSA two million boys in the Scouting program efficiency in delivery of services The BSA just made a play to establish co-ed Scouting. Imagine if the GSUSA could do the same by purchasing the core program IP of the BSA. All it would take to trigger mergers at the council level would be for the GSUSA to buy ownership of the BSA core program. The GSUSA wouldn't have to compete with the BSA in starting a co-ed program, they could simply become a co-ed program in a mat

When I saw the post about the new GSUSA uniforms I was struck by how much they looked like BSA colors. It got me to thinking - what if in the bankruptcy process the GSUSA makes an attempt to buy the assets of the BSA and effectivly merges the two organizations. Possible, not possible? What would you think?

I would have your friend see if he could arrange a legal setup where the land is open to use by Scouts, but not owned by the local council. Then find the district that most closely aligns with it and talk to the local district chair and/or commissioner.

The camping requirement varies from course to course - but generally the expectation is that it's pretty typical stuff. We work on our courses to make sure that gear is not an obstacle for anyone. I wouldn't sweat it. If you are really stuck for gear, bring it up weekend one and I'm sure someone can help you figure out a solution. The course and materials are the point - not what kind of tent you have.

Interesting that you posted about that. I was thinking about the same after my prior post and the right structure for longer term ownership of camping resources. Legally separate "Friends Of" organizations might make a lot of sense here. One of the differences I see here is that initially there will be a much smaller professional structure at the national level. I wonder if we will see the same at the local level. If we start removing fundraising and membership drives, the district executives role becomes smaller. I wonder if we'll see a very small number of professionals p

I would assume that if the new organization of large councils could control the licensing, they could in essence all become mega councils. I would gather that during liquidation all current council agreements become void and the existing councils would in turn have no ability to license program materials from the new BSA until new agreements are made. Hypothetically, say that my council survived but did not join in with the 45 others and did not obtain licensing rights. We then effectively become a regional camping club for kids with no relationship to the new national. Could I as an i

Thank you for such a throughout post - very impressive. I would agree with this sentiment. Whenever we talk membership here on the forum, conversations often tend to frame it as a choice - membership or quality. But in reality, a true focus on membership isn't about lowering the quality of Scouting to get more kids to join. True membership growth comes from delivering a quality Scouting program and then building membership around that. I see the same thing. For all the reasons you listed in your post, unit execution is crucial My gut tells me that we having many of

There is somewhere around 74 million kids in the United States today. At some point a program focused around providing to those 74 million kids needs to ask itself - how many are joining? The world is full of good ideas. I can rattle off 50 ideas that would make Scouting better. All those ideas require thousands of hours of peoples' time and lots of money to make them work. If every idea that gets raised is measured solely on whether it's a good program idea or not we'd be all over the map as a program. Similarly - tone person's good program idea is that it's another person's

We have a BSA to provide Scouting to kids. Seems pretty natural that we'd measure success of the BSA by how many members of has. I think you know the path to seeing Lone Scouting again. If you really want it, work for it. The rest of this stuff is just platitudes.