qwazse

This . ‘Nuff said.

My FL relatives had a friend who, at about that age, got bit while surfing. After that he proudly wore a t-shirt with a tooth pattern traced in red. Hopefully this scout will recover and be able to look back with courage and, yes, a bit of cheer.

If we can get past ad homenim. Some of us can recount discussions at length in other threads. In summary … American Adults rn up the price of old patches by selling them. American Adults produced replicas of high-value patches, and flooded Jamborees with them. American Adults demanded means of authentication, so that their Little Johnny wouldn’t be ripped off by making a “bad trade”. It wasn’t enough that their patch was pretty, it now had In short, adults violated my rule #1. They asked for rules. BSA obliged by establishing a series of trademarks and methods of authentication. The good news: I’ve seen WSJ scouts giving away patches without expecting anything in return. They’ve inspired me. It is now my life’s purpose to give away my patches to any clever youth anywhere. I don’t want there be any left for my family to throw in my casket.

In terms of accountability, the more adult who are registered and trained, the better. As a practical matter, four adults for each den/patrol/crew/ship gives you reasonable YP coverage for all meetings and activities.

You know you've "arrived" when you begin to hear things like this. Like I explain to my crew: Advisor = Good for nothing and best used that way. I should have told you to expect island camping to have that pervasive low-tide smell. No love lost between me and no-see-ums. And, yes, that tropical hypothermia is a surreal feeling.

In our council, volunteers, not professionals, raise funds for FOS. The more that we've gone electronic, the more manpower we've needed. Part of the problem is that we're tracking too much. Part of it is because we believe that we can increase accountability for training requirements. It's creating a lot more things to key in when before a slip of paper would do. I want my DE's (and SE's) doing what you couldn't pay me to do. And since I don't come cheap, I figure they're earning their keep. That said, I know the pay gap causes no small amount of consternation among entry-level pros. One always wonders if one could have a more productive organization by cutting individual compensation at the top by 1/4 and quadrupling the number of pros. @mrjohns2, their IT group has an E-mail. Send them your credentials. Enjoy listening to the crickets.

So, there is an expectation that thousands of claims won't be verifiable. Stacked against the 85,000 submitted, that seems unsurprising to me. It also seems likely that some "verifiable" claims will later be found to be fraudulent. (E.g., a claimant is later caught on record saying he outright lied -- for whatever reason.) We all hope there will be very few of those. Will the trust be able to sue? File criminal charges? Or, does that responsibility fall to another party?

I disagree. This is where we go off the rails. We volunteers should be intently focused on program. DE's need to make sure the paperwork/e-submission goes smoothly, and they should find us CO's and donors to help us do what we do. This is no small order. The scoutbook MBC list is a moving target, and getting my adults on it has been such a hassle. Registration/recharter is fraught with pitfalls. (E.g., they lost my '02 training records for SM basics.) When the SE's are on the ball, they are filling camps, applying for grants, and getting donors. Then, there is every accident and CSA -- all of which are going straight to them (ideally after the police have been notified). Then, they will take point on camp sales. If they are successful in finding top-dollar buyers, expect the LC boards to increase their salary. Anyway, there's a load that these guys have to execute ... program is not one of them.

About the same for us. Some of the old guard were called back to Heritage Reservation. Some had stepped down from the scouting pro's to staff the camp. Also, we absorbed some of the staff from the now sold Camp Twin Echo. They are passionate about the camp and are pretty sharp. The new staff seemed competent and engaged the scouts during slack time. (E.g., a female staff asked my ASPL his opinion of girl troops and got a respectful earful.) I think that was partly because our scouts, in spite of their personal opinions, felt like the female staff and female Scouts BSA were just like them. Seasoned staff, however, have the skills to work anywhere for more. Certainly the scout from our troop who was a back-office manager making schedules and advancement tracking hum could be doing the same in industry for much much more. So, when times get tough for any of them, they won't be available. The facilities were improved.

That’s what I had thought. But if the scout finishes a hike/catches the minimum/swims the day’s laps … whatever … in two hours? Would you let him/her go back to camp or visit another program area? If you would, then that’s not a block schedule. Regarding the three hours of fishing … I remember fishing with my father-in-law. I’d just get to relaxing and he’d pull anchor. If they weren’t biting after fifteen minutes, he moved on. More than three of those in a row, and we were on our way to the nearest sausage egg McMuffin. The good news was that we generally had bait leftover for the evening.

As I do at the end of the week of camp, I take he evaluation form that the CD gives to me and hand it to the SPL/ASPL to complete. They usually gather a few scouts and ask how they should rate everything. This year, they worked very hard to spell out what they felt didn’t work for them: block schedules. Instead of a 1-hour classes for five days per MB, the camp switched to 3 hour classes for two days, with Friday as an open program day to wrap up MBs. (There we’re also open evenings at aquatics and shooting sports.) My scouts knocked it, a lot! For starters, many MBs did not require that much time — especially for older scouts. But, scouts were told that they could not be dismissed from the program area. The camp commissioners told us that they would try to help the staff fill the time. But scouts told us a different story … They emphasized that it was not the camp staff’s fault. Most MBs simply do not require six hours of counseling. Furthermore, we always counted on some older scouts being back at camp during slack times so that they could teach crossovers and first years. The camp provided a Trail to First class program. But we do not send our crossovers to it. Imagine being committed to one area for 6 hours! That’s grade school, not scout camp! Anybody else camp on a block schedule? Different experience?

And it feels like you are writing an ad hominem, which violates forum rules. I respectfully advise you to relent. Meanwhile allow me to restate … Plaintiffs get help in acquiring large sums. It doesn’t matter how vile the holder of those sums is, it doesn’t matter how righteous the plaintiffs’ cause, the party who helps will reasonably expect half the award so as to continue their agenda, whatever it may be. If this is not neutral enough language, I’m happy to revise further.

If you were to ask me to extract some billions from anyone (legally or otherwise), I would expect about half the take. It really doesn’t matter who you are or how tough life’s been for you. I’d need that much in order to arrange the resources for the next attempted extraction on behalf of whoever else for whom I may be asked to raid a castle.

Would you accept zero dollar payout in lieu of reimbursement for counseling? I have no idea how that would play out. I can’t imagine it being healthy for a claimant to continue to need BSA to do anything for them. A trust would be a better way to go. There’s also the broader question … What’s best for future CSA victims? My gut says a more robust federal mental health infrastructure.

With coaching, we have our SPL and PLC do this. I’m still trying to figure out who decided to put my tent adjacent the snoring SM!

I’m always on the hunt for fresh examples , of which about one in ten I may apply. It’s like I said to the SPL today, he is to fill his little black book with other SPL’s numbers. That’s partly because I enjoy the look on their faces when I put it that way. But mostly because it’s through our youth talking to other youth that really fun outside-the-box ideas begin to trickle in to the troop. Do SPLs take me up in that little bit of seasoned summer camp advice? Not always. But if I didn’t repeat it, the would do it even less frequently.

As long as National is on the hook for every deviation from policy and perversion of the program, expect more rules.

I admire the optimism. And, in fact, when folks start posting vulgar impersonal messages, I typically leave the conversation. As long as this guy isn’t using base rhetoric to other parents it could blow over. On the other hand, arm-chair quarterbacking is the easiest sport in the world thanks to modern media (thus why my campfire is miles into back country and nowhere near cell towers). So it’s even odds that there’ll be a repeat. I once came on a committee (not scouting) that was beleaguered by parent criticism. Not just any parents … These were seasoned, well qualified adults who should have known better than to expect more from staff and volunteers than they could provide. It took some firm, positive communication to get everybody on the same page. I got help with that so it didn’t sound like I was just randomly spouting off (again). It boiled down to a letter to parents saying: We will provide x you are expected to provide y. It went to every parent, even though much of it was designed to bring dissenters to a better place.

The local CO has just given you a free pass to lean in to other things that you are passionate about. You can still be a loyal scout parent. Keep up that YP training. Train others on doing your job. Give them chocolates and flowers regularly because they stepped up. Your spouse will find something to do with that time you’re not in a committee meeting. If scouting is now your thing and you just gotta kick in that “1 hour”, contact your district commissioner, and see how you can volunteer there. Otherwise, there are refugees, immigrants, and homeless who could use a friend for an hour.

It really depends on the scout. Sometimes we go over the board of review process. Sometimes we go over how to respond during an interview, Sometimes we review a little paperwork. But, by and large, a positive, relaxed, reflection on the scout’s career is what we’re here for.

Understood and, frankly, envious — runny coffee aside. I was referring to the Seabase captain, not crew captain, i.e., the director of Seabase.

Welcome, @lildancr73!

My ugly mug doesn’t make it on the manifest either. I would never bring instant coffee. Espresso or bust. Seriously, I think there would be no problem. But, this is the kind of thing the Seabase captain would weigh in on. They might be provisioning your crew with coffee anyway. Drop him/her a line and find out.

Or, as the text from a scout alumnus said, "Oh wow. This website might be the best thing in existence" (Yes, I've kept that in my flip phone for years.) And @MattR, that is precisely where CALTOPO says, "Hold my beer." The ability to add overlays -- or remove all overlays to create a blank map with only your controls -- is priceless. What's really nice is that from the same map you can make print to .pdf's at different scales. You can only save so many maps on their site, but you can download the .pdf's of the one's you like before they expire. A scouter can do a lot with the free subscription -- enough to tailor it to most, if not all, troop activity. I've started a community map of all Eagle projects. I put my brother onto it, and he's mapping hemlocks for his conservation district. I shared it with a Life scout so that he can map out a watershed restoration project.

To be precise, Big Tobacco knew the general use of their product would increase risk (as opposed to generally not using it). I attended Kessler's lecture on the subject while he headed the FDA . It wasn't merely that smokers got cancer (among other things). Lot's of people did. It was that, in company-funded studies, multiple times the percentage of smokers got sick than did non-smokers, tobacco -- especially concentrated nicotine was likely to be addictive, smokers who started as youth were less likely to quit, And the corporate response (documented by whistle-blowers) was to begin ad campaigns targeting youth. With regard to scouting and CSA, there are no such smoking guns. BSA had no evidence that CSA is more frequent as a result of the scouting program. That is why Kosnoff and others who've posted here hypothesize that BSA should have more victims. They are generalizing from what they know to be the background rate. Take 130 million, multiply by .07 (proportion of US males reporting that they experienced CSA), multiply by .1 (the proportion of time youth would be scouting as opposed to other activities like religion, school, sports) ... there should be 910,000 victims. (How we adjust other assumptions will make that number go up and down, but by rights there should be at least a quarter million still alive.) So either: The TCC is an abject failure at finding victims (Kosnoff's point), The majority of victims don't want any part of this action, or Hundreds of thousands of "other" victims don't exist. And, at the moment we only have each others' anecdotal experience (and all the personal biases therein) on which we can base how likely each is.