BDPT00

Don't be bound by any rules regarding what "has to" be done. Bottom line ... the award could be dropped in the mail, and there could be no ceremony. A Scout is no less an Eagle whether there's a ceremony or not, so do what you wish. The "rules" are whatever those around you are used to. BDPT00

They're old because they're old. Find the newest stuff you can, and run with it. BDPT00

You don't need Wood Badge to proceed with your high adventure plans. Go ahead. Holding off on your plans so that you can walk into the course with a ticket ready to go is a mistake. Do your high adventure research and promotion now. There's no reason to wait for this fall or next. That being said, if I were you, I'd do Wood Badge this fall. Just don't go in with preconceived (and pre-announced) notions about a ticket. Go in with an open mind and an empty slate. You don't need anyone's permission to take Wood Badge. A very common comment after a course is participants who say, "I w

What troubles me? I don't happen to like the whole notion of altering the syllabus to include Venturers, but I'm not interested in arguing about that. What bothers me is exactly what I'm seeing happen in your case. Venturers (whose adults in my council criticize Boy Scouting as being inferior to Venturing ... at least that's the way I see it) becoming patrol members within a troop. One of the things that makes NYLT doable is an agreement to live by the Oath and Law. Venturers don't happen to promise to live by them, but it sounds like they recite them because they're now acting as patr

I'm still not seeing the light here. What I'm reading from TAHAWK in particular is that now there are young ladies on the staff. The terminology and structure you say you're using is that of a troop. OK. I'm listening. What position do these girls hold on the staff? What uniform do they wear? For your model troop meetings, etc, do they say the Scout Oath and Law? Is the patrol and troop structure what they're to take back to their units and lead (as stated by your SE)? What am I missing? BDPT00

Well, for starters, the 2009 syllabus is for troops, and has a very heavy focus on the patrol method. If that's what we want to teach Venturers, fine. The 2011 syllabus (to my understanding) has completely removed even the word "patrol" from the syllabus. As far as I know (and the reason for my concern), adding Venturers to NYLT removes the patrol method from this advanced Boy Scout leadership training. Is that a positive twist? BDPT00

I lean in Eamonn's direction. Just what is the purpose? If you're going to retire the flags, go ahead and retire the flags. Is there some special reason for wanting to put on a production? I'd define the purpose. BDPT00

You're absolutely right. I didn't state that very well. A Scoutmaster who understands how it works, and does what he's told is a huge asset. What I'm referring to is one who tries to manipulate the process (like telling new Scouts to vote yes for people they don't even know!). I think that some Scoutmasters see elected Scouts as notches on their belt, and they're very disappointed when the number selected is low. Or the ones who try to alter the results because someone they put on the eligible list got elected, and now they realize it was a mistake to put him on the list in the first

If Venturing leadership training includes VLSC, Kodiak, and Kodiak-X, why is there a need to rewrite the NYLT syllabus so that they can attend that too? I don't see how removing the patrol method will benefit Boy Scouts. There must be a positive twist to this somewhere. What is it? BDPT00

Thanks for the clarification, ideadoc. That makes sense. I can't agree (yet) that Venturers in NYLT makes sense, but your response does. I'll let you know if it ever becomes clear to me. BDPT00

Thanks hotair. Interesting verbiage. Draft materials said Scoutmaster (not Course Director). Was just curious. Thanks, BDPT00

OK, so you're assuming I have a 2011 NYLT Draft Syllabus. I don't, and I'm going to guess that you do. Please quote for me something regarding a course director receiving a 4th bead. Then also address my second query: 3rd and 4th beads for the Philmont Challenge. I thought them to be reasonable questions. I don't need to see it. I just want to know what it says. Thank you, BDPT00

*** Good luck on this one. The only mention in previous posts in this thread regarding a 4th bead for NYLT was for a course director. You sure won't see that written anywhere. While we're at it, let's see something written regarding a 3rd or 4th bead for the Philmont Challenge. BDPT00

I'd be careful accepting advice here (including mine). Much of what is heard regarding Wood Badge is based purely upon one's own perception. Examples: You won't have 5 tickets ... it's one ticket. You need to be trained for your position to take Wood Badge, but your ticket can have several different focuses. They aren't restricted to one position. It's your ticket ... do with it what you wish. If people tell you you should or should not be registered in certain positions, that's personal opinion based upon their own experience, but more likely based upon conjecture. The only advice I'd

Not uncommon? OK, I'll bite. Out of a thousand sashes, how many would you say need to be continued on the back? BDPT00

There are numerous topics brought up by moosetracker, and they wander a bit. First was stated that the guy with the bucks who runs NYLT has done it for many years, and refuses to change. First question: Is he doing NYLT or JLTC? That change took place about 6 years ago, and many objected. If he's doing NYLT, then the change you're referring to is much more recent and must be about the addition of Venturing (That's a big negative on Exploring. They have nothing to do with this, so I think right from the start that your misconceptions are too numerous to tackle all at once. I'd suggest one

No, not in the middle. I'd start 3 or 4 inches from the seam and go down. If it happens to ever get filled up, you can plan ahead to leave room for 2 or 3 rows at the top. BDPT00

My experience and understanding of GSUSA is that when a welcoming hand is offered by the BSA, they want nothing to do with it. We've tried a few times to do some joint efforts with GSUSA, and have been turned down every time. I think they're trying to prove they don't want or need our help. OK. Eventually we just quit offering, and their program just keeps getting weaker. BDPT00

OK, so what's a Wood Badge association, and why or how does one get elected? Then what happens? BDPT00

When uniforming is no longer a method of Scouting, I might be willing to listen to your argument. I've seen Scouters wearing as many as 6 Mentor Pins. Nothing impresses me less. Where do we draw the line on this? How about a dozen? Four on each collar would look pretty cool... sorta like General Patton. Proper uniforming either matters or it doesn't. For me, it does. BDPT00

I've read here about SPL gifting metal beads, about gold plating or gold leafing actual beads, and about gold string or gold-colored chain to hang them from. Now I'm reading about them being a spousal recognition. So what is it? I'll ask the same question again... Why? BDPT00

It would probably be nice if there were, but no. It's for civilian wear. Congratulations. BDPT00

It all sounds pretty good. Fun. Only piece I don't care for is awarding beads at a Wood Badge dinner/breakfast. It's the wrong audience. Many will be bored with it (seen it too many times, and don't know the recipients), and more importantly, the people who should see it aren't there. I think beadings should be in front of a roundtable, a unit, or a training course (not WB). I was at a WB breakfast a few years ago. 35 people got beads. What a total waste. That was the last time beads were presented at the breakfast. How many get beads at the dinner? (I 'm trying not to jump to

OK then ... make it three. BDPT00

Why? BDPT00