shortridge

ThunderFox, Please go back and read the thread. I posted my position at 4:25 p.m. on April 5. You have used slash-and-burn tactics all through this thread, so it should come as no surprise that you attack the questioner rather than answering a simple question that goes to the heart of the debate? What is the difference between information and discouraging? I agree with Eagle. Lock the thread. As for me, I'm ignoring it from now on.

Seattle - Too late to back off on that, guy. You have repeatedly held yourself up as an authority on how the Order should handle these issues. >> "Sorry, if you are discouraging parents from attending you are encouraging a secret organization and activity in my book." >> "ANY effort to discourage parents from attending is VERBOTTEN! Frankly, anyone who can't understand that simple concept should be replaced as an OA leader in my opinion." >> "One check on that is having parents freely able to observe what is going on and act to file complaints if they see things that worry them. Without that check being freely available, I think there's a real risk that things will get out of hand through poor judgment by adult leaders who don't know when to say Enough!" >> "I'm also appalled at the number of adults determined to obstruct the rules of the BSA by burdening the right of parents to observe OA proceedings. Frankly, I'd boot every such person out of any OA leadership position they might hold." >> "Personally I would keep Old Ox away from any OA leadership position. He makes excuses to avoid carrying out BSA policies that are there for good reason, in my opinion." >> "Unfortunately, Brotherhood makes an excellent case and example for shutting down OA. Overinvolved, willfull adult leaders in positions of leadership are something BSA simply can't afford. If he's been able to hold a position of leadership in OA for an extended period of time with the attitudes he displays here, there is certainly something seriously wrong. If Brotherhood would care to e-mail me with his name, BSA registration number or some other means I would like to forward a copy of this thread to the Council Executive of the Grand Columbia Council so that they can decide if some kind of investigation or counseling of this Scouter might be in order. His attitude strikes me as wrong and risky, but that's simply my opinion. I do think the council leadership should be informed so they can decide what, if any, action might be appropriate." >> "Frankly, the alleged importance of keeping OA rituals secret is so trivial as to be absurd, in my opinion, compared to the real hazard of creating a public relations nightmare for OA and Scouting." You and ThunderFox wax very eloquently about public perception and appearances and the importance of not letting Scouting get dragged down. Yet in this thread, the two of you have together repeatedly denigrated and attacked multiple people who simply do not share your views. How does that conduct build a positive public perception of Scouting?

ThunderFox: If I had quoted you, I would have used quotation marks. Rather, I provided my interpretation of the ridiculous argument collectively advanced by you and others. I'm glad to hear that you don't believe that providing information is bad. I am, however, very eager to hear from you examples of what crosses the line.

"Rechartering" in the abstract means nothing to 99.99 percent of Scout parents. It has to be linked to something concrete - like no participation in meetings or campouts until it's done. Plan a cool pack event for January, with the boldfaced uppercase underlined note that only registered Scouts can participate. Then they'll get the picture.

The link that SSScout provided - the SA/BSA joint pamphlet - conspiciously does not list bell-ringing or kettle-staffing as one of its suggested service projects.

Dennis (and Seattle), Regarding the religion discussion on page 13 - respectfully, you're the one who doesn't get it. I'm not answering Eagle92's question. I'm making a statement of my own that echoes the official OA policy statement (from the Guide to Inductions): "Nothing in the Order shall be interpreted as interfering with any member's religious obligation." You call my argument insulting to certain people of faith? Im insulted by that. But perhaps I shouldnt be, as its clear you utterly misread and misunderstood my point. If you can name me one religious group that comes down against the Order of the Arrows practices - not the BSA in general, that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish, and you know that's a red herring - I will have to reconsider my statement. But in all the threads I've read on this board on the subject, in all the discussions I've had over the years with people from a variety of faith traditions, I have yet to encounter one person, Arrowman or non-Arrowman, who has religious objections to the Order. Until then, this line that you and Seattle are putting forward about the potential effects upon some unknown's person theoretical religious beliefs is just a hyperbolic hypothetical argument. I refer you to BDPT00s statement from the other thread, which I previously quoted. It's ironic that what Seattle is espousing - "What would be welcome would be to describe your plans in detail so that people can decide for themselves whether it's something in which they want to participate" - is exactly what the Order instructs its officers and advisers to do when a parent has questions. So he's just undercut his whole dang anti-OA argument, as far as I'm concerned. Back to the whole point of this thread: Parents can certainly ask to observe what their children are doing. It's BSA policy to permit that. But what if a parent asks out of ignorance? Seattle, ThunderFox and other members of the purist school would seem to argue that we're not allowed to provide them with information - that we have to abide by their knee-jerk request, that educating them is "intimidating" them. I think that's a wrong-headed approach, and definitely prefer a more nuanced method. The vast majority of parents can differentiate between information and intimidation, and the vast majority of Scouters can offer information in a non-intimidating way. To assume otherwise, as the loud voices here are shouting, is to denigrate the intelligence of both our parents and volunteers.

I've also observed that homesickness is most often felt, or felt most strongly, among those kids whose parents can't cut the ties - who check in with the SM by phone daily, or visit multiple times a week, or have the kid call home daily. Those boys who are left alone for the week, even the newbies, usually love it and thrive. For many, I'm sure it's their first real chance to stand out of their parents' shadow and breathe the heady air of freedom.

From my own experience: My dad attended summer camp my first year I was in Boy Scouts; he was an ASM. I think I exchanged fifty words with him the whole week. I was too busy doing fun stuff (like doing a Wilderness Survival overnight), and he was too busy doing ASMy things. I think he may have attended my second year, but I really can't remember. What I do remember that year is having a blast taking Lifesaving MB. Then there was the mother I met while I was working on staff at the same camp a few years later. She accompanied her kid to every single merit badge class, sat down her camp chair nearby and watched. The kid was almost never out of her sight. My point is that it depends on the parent. Some can go and stay out of their kid's way; others can't.

Papadaddy - What's your definition of "we've," "established," and "false"? As BDPT00 wrote in the Christian objection thread: "You're referring to some religions, some lodges, and some parents. That's the problem. It's always about somebody, somewhere. ... Those making the issue out of nothing seem to think there is ... somewhere by somebody, but it's always somwwhere else by somebody else." There is nothing in the practice, structure, goals or ceremonies of the Order that interferes with any member's religious obligation.

Hopefully the majority of councils will ignore this garbage.

I find it ironic that a person who declared this thread hijacked and dead ("Rest In Peace!") is one of the people continuing to rant and argue. Not getting in the last word doesn't mean the other person wins, fellas. The amount of self-righteousness in this thread has become noxious.

There are also some people who do not volunteer or donate to the Salvation Army because it is a Christian church and they aren't Christian. Is this troop's practice coercing Scouts to aid a religious organization that they may disagree with? I disagree with that point of view, but it's perhaps a legitimate question to raise. Sincerely yours, a devil's advocate

I sew mine, but it's a painful process for my thumbs and fingertips. Those backings are solid - I've had more than one needle bend on them.

I agree with Basementdweller. NP visitation is only one indicator of the nation's outdoor activity. There are no NPs in my state, nor within an easy drive. And consider also that visitor days does not equate to camping. Many parks count as visitors people who drive in, walk around a little, snap a few photos, visit the gift shop, and drive out.

In 2010, there were 59,863 Varsity Scouts on 8,539 teams (average of 7 members per team) with 22,806 leaders (average of 2.6 leaders per team). There were 792,202 Boy Scouts in 40,099 troops (average of 20 members per troop) with 493,852 leaders. (It's not clear how many of those leaders are direct-contact leaders vs. holding a district-level post). http://www.scouting.org/About/FactSheets/OverviewofBSA.aspx

Scouting's timeless values still apply, of course: The rangemaster will allow a Scout to load the device with batteries only when the television screen does not include the image of a human being. Laughing my batteries off here...

"I know it is not supposed to count until they are 1st Class but it would serve the older boys right..." A lot of people have the misconception that you can't serve in a POR until you're First Class. Don't let the fact that it won't "count" until then stop you, or them. Is a Tenderfoot a natural leader for his friends? He should be the PL. Is there a Second Class Scout who wants to be Chaplain's Aide? Let him rip. A bigger issue that your troop may need to address down the road is that these boy should be naturally carrying out their duties as an integral part of the unit and patrol program. So there shouldn't be any need to for a special system to hold them accountable. >> Who says grace or leads interfaith services on campouts or provides moments of reflection now, if not the Chaplain Aide? >> Who keeps track of resource books, MBPs, reference material and teaching aids if not the Librarian? >> Who takes notes at the PLC and maintains dues and advancement records if not the Scribe? (If you have an adult "advancement coordinator" doing that right now - they've just been put out of a job.)(This message has been edited by shortridge)

Sure, there's a recommended way to recruit leaders and volunteers. This isn't it. But it's not all that different from what many units do already.

Use the greater than / less than signs, not brackets.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

Other examples might be: >> Running a community emergency preparedness workshop for senior citizens, including information on what to include in emergency kits, handouts with emergency contact information, evacuation routes and locations of emergency shelters. >> Helping the Red Cross with a CPR or First Aid training program. >> Running a disaster drill with the Red Cross, Citizen Corps or other local group to test emergency capabilities. >> Helping a local ham radio group with an emergency communications test.

This isn't really any different than sending a press release to your local newspaper seeking volunteers. Just reaches a much larger audience, is all.

RS - Registration procedures are not set by the BSA, but rather WOSM. "This means that there will not be any individual registrations through our site if you are interested in taking part in Moot Canada 2013, you will have to register with your local organization when the time comes. The national associations will then register their delegation with our organization." http://www.mootcanada2013.ca/en/participants-2/

RS - Registration procedures are not set by the BSA, but rather WOSM. "This means that there will not be any individual registrations through our site if you are interested in taking part in Moot Canada 2013, you will have to register with your local organization when the time comes. The national associations will then register their delegation with our organization." http://www.mootcanada2013.ca/en/participants-2/

It may not be required for Venturing youth 18+, but there's nothing preventing them. If they can test out of the course, they can certainly take the course.

trainerlady - That may be a local council rule, but it doesn't appear to be universal. Moots are specifically mentioned in a Venturing document on Venturing Kodiak treks and and the January 2012 moot in Panama is specifically mentioned in another document on international contingents. Alcohol may also be offered on a case-by-case basis; the 2010 moot, in Kenya, is specifically mentioned elsewhere as being an alcohol-free event. And it appears from the Moot site that individual registrations are not accepted - you have to be a part of a contingent - so councils will have a lot of power in that regard. Sources: http://www.scouting.org/filestore/training/pdf/Kodiak%20Challenge%20FINAL%202011%20-%20Item%20Number%20511-014.pdf) http://www.scouting.org/filestore/international/pdf/BSA_Contingent_Program.pdf http://issuu.com/worldscouting/docs/moot_bulletin_3_en