scoutldr

As a former training chair, I found the most complaints from attendees centered on content...which I had no control over. If I strayed from the syllabus to add things of interest, we went over time and they were unhappy about that too. The Cub Leader specific courses were the worst. Council would advertise the training as "Cub Leader Specific", and would issue quotas to anyone who signed up. I would end up with a class of 10 people...2 WL, 3 DL, 1 CM, 1 MC, 3 ADL, etc., and only one instructor. I did my best, but it was inadequate. As designed, the Cub training is too cumbersome to do it correctly.

Our CO, a Methodist Church, provides a place to meet...a termite-eaten, rat infested office trailer in the back...and they asked us last winter not to turn on the heat because of the cost. We fund everything ourselves.

"And if we can save just one life... well, than any restriction on liberty is worth it." That's a pretty frightening statement, there, Beav.

Well, TAHAWK, since none of us, including you, has been through the course, we really have NO idea on how they intend to pull it off, do we? Why not give them the benefit of the doubt and hold our complaints until they actually screw it up, if indeed they do. Our "SE" (proper title-Scout Executive) tried the same thing a couple of years ago. Since we are a highly transient military area, it would be impossible for every unit to stay "Trained", and several units said they would just fold. The idea quietly died. As a district training chair, my stats hovered around the 20-30% range, no matter how many training courses I put on (and I put on a LOT). I mainly trained other districts' scouters, for some reason.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

I am amused by the constant comments on the "miserably hot weather"...why don't we schedule every other Jambo for Minnesota in January so we can all be equally miserable? August in Virginia means temps in the 90's and dew points above 70. Nothing new or unexpected about that. The guys from Alabama and Texas think it's great. THose from Alaska think it's miserable. Go figure. Be prepared!

There is a printed syllabus for the IOLS course. If the SE signs the training card that the requirements were completed, then it's "legit". In my opinion, you may get "trained" but you won't learn much. In some councils, you are allowed to meet with a "mentor" to demonstrate the skills (mostly T-1 requirements). No formal training required.

He remains registered in the Pack until such time he is eligible to register with a troop. It's not fair to allow him to be a Boy Scout if he's not interested in doing the work necessary to get there. He's made his choice, now there are consequences.

Some of the OA threads are password protected just for OA members, due to the nature of the discussions.

Besides when the rain goes right through the nylon, you don't need to "trench" (our term) the tents. The old canvas tents weren't like that.

We went to a newly opened camp last summer and the food service was contracted out to professionals. Best camp food we ever had. When scout camp staff is in charge, you tend to get prepackaged institutional food, like "mystery meat", corn dogs, etc...anything that comes in 20 lb frozen packages. Salad bars and fresh fruit are always popular. Healthy choices for those of us "over the hill" scouters who shouldn't be eating a 5000 cal per day diet of sugar, salt and carbs. One nice thing about this camp that we appreciated was that breakfast and lunch were "on your own"...just show up in the dining hall during the stated hours and get served. So whenever kids were in the area, they could just pop in and grab lunch.

There is a restricted forum just for moderators. We're not allowed to see them. Much like the "Rules and Regulations of the BSA".

"Until now we have gotten along well" I think that says it. You should still get along well. The SM admitted his mistake, and he just plain forgot. You can't change that. He's probably embarrassed and hesitant to call. This is a good reminder that we are all human, we all make mistakes, and we all need to forgive those who hurt us unintentionally. A SCout is Kind. My advice is to return to Scouting and put it behind you. Plan a good ECOH and have a blast. Congratulations.

Once again, we dug up this horse corpse and are kicking it around to maker sure it's really dead! I thought we agreed a while ago that what a SCouter chooses to wear is a personal decision, as long as it was earned and in accordance with the insignia guide? If it's too over the top (like my UC example a couple of weeks ago), I just write the guy off as a nut case and get on with my life. In most cases, MYOB.

Regarding Pack organization, my information, like me, is old. I stand corrected. I think Jeffrey has it...

I agree with Barry...technically, the ACMs and DLs do not attend Pack committee meetings...because they are not members of the Committee. The CM attends as their representative, but technically he is not on the committee, either. The CM and CC both report to the COR, equally. At least that's the way it was last time I was trained. In my way of thinking the CM is analogous to the SPL and the DLs are the patrol leaders. Program should be planned by that group and presented to the committee for approval. Then the committee goes to work to finance it, recruit new members, monitor and process advancements, etc. That could be part of the problem...too many people at the Committee meetings mucking up the works. The other thing you might want to consider is the husband/wife CM/CC team thing.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

I think the control point is the annual adult reapplication and background check. If he is not an immediate threat and hasn't been convicted (in other words, he's still innocent), then it's nobody's business. He should answer the questions truthfully when he re=registers and let the system do its job. We had a similar situation, and someone reported it to COuncil...the DE asked me about it and all I said was "well, there were no charges pressed." The DE said, "thanks, that's all I need to know."

Just remember that a Professional's goals are not the same as the volunteers. The DE will be rated by his supervisor primarily on money and membership (and new units). It's also his job to ensure that there are volunteers in place who can develop and deliver the program. I wouldn't expect the DE to spend a lot of time camping and hiking, or planning program...that's not his job.

My mom always said, "Don't do that, you'll put someone's eye out." Seems to me if that were true, there'd be a lot of 50-something one-eyed Boomers walking around today.

In our council, District Dinner time is approaching. I think that would be a good venue to honor your DE with a special award...maybe a James E West fellowship. Depending on his personality, a "roast" can be fun.

I thank God that I live in a country where I can hear ALL ideas. Not just the ones that make me comfortable. It's sort of comforting too, to hear all sides. As my office-mate used to tell me..."without them, we'd just be average."

To really look good, the poly/wool shirt should be word with the poly/wool trousers. They are more "dressy" and look like dress slacks. $60 bucks. JMHO

This is unfortunately what happens when Troops are not serious about recordkeeping. I would call your Council office and talk to the Registrar. Explain your dilemma and ask for an appointment to come down and research your records. Hopefully they have everything recorded in ScoutNet. If your troop did not submit advancement records to Council, then you have a problem. Good Luck.

Pack, I think your problem is, it's the "Great Master of all Scouts"...not "Scoutmaster", most of whom are mere mortals.

Bloomberg...hmmm. Rich. Jew. Businessman. Philanthropist. Eagle Scout. NY-ness. Maybe. But I think he's too far behind the curve, and hasn't got the momentum.

What scares me is that most voters will vote not on the issues, but on intangibles or on "what will he/she give me". My 75 yo MIL just stated that she would vote for Edwards because he's "pretty". Others will vote for Hillary because she's a woman or because she will provide the most govt handouts. Others will vote for Obama because they like Oprah. My impression: McCain: Most qualified to handle today's issues, but maybe too hawkish. Obama: Too inexperienced ... not ready for the No 1 job. Hillary: No track record of accomplishments...Bill will probably be the shadow President if he can keep his pants zipped. Huckabee: Capable, but not sure we want a cleric as head of state. Paul: Not very "presidential", but I agree with his Libertarian ideas. But now is not the time. Romney: Stuffed shirt...too plastic. He's done. Giuliani: Done. The others never had a fighting chance and just wasted our time.