Jump to content

The Blancmange

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by The Blancmange

  1. On 2/18/2018 at 11:19 AM, CNYScouter said:

    Thanks for confirming my understanding that there is only one COR for each CO. Without going into details it seems that the Pack and crew had issues with the COR and asked for the COR to be replaced. The troop didnt want to switch CORs. Our councils compromise was to have each ubit have thier own COR. They asked that the key 3 from each unit take COR training and this us where they were told it was ok to have multiple CORs.


    Are each of them allowed to vote at council annual meetings?  That would seem to give that particular CO disproportionate influence. 

  2. On 12/13/2017 at 3:24 PM, Cambridgeskip said:

    I occasionally hammock.

    One night the wind shifted round to be at right angles to the hammock. I ended up getting sea sick from the swaying!

    Weird thing is I don't actually get sea sick at sea.

    My Hennessey has tie outs on the side of both the hammock and rainfly to minimize this.  Never been through a severe storm to test the limits of this, but my guess is that such a storm would be bad enough to affect anything less than a 4 season tent as well. 

  3. On 12/4/2017 at 11:59 AM, JoeBob said:


    • Campsite improvement opportunity.  Improve the fire ring seating, clear the landing area, cut back the latrine trail.  Blowdown trees were everywhere.

    While I know this was posted with nothing but the best intentions, keep in mind that this is a wilderness area; none of those are things you should be doing on your own.  

  4. Prior to the EBOR, the council registrar has to certify that all of the advancement details, including MB's that are noted on the application, are accurate.  So it's unclear why the EBOR would want to see them.   Seems like a waste of time for the Board to be bogged down in reviewing things that have already been certified when they should be focusing on the candidate's achievements and experiences.  

    • Upvote 3
  5. This was very slanted reporting. I think the most important question is whether or not cameras and filming were allowed at the event. Is this really about a cub scout's pointed questions, or is it about a mother's unauthorized filming of a cub scout event being posted online? 


    I would have no problem with a unit booting a family for violating their policy on photographic and video privacy.


    If you believe that is the most important question here, then your priorities are quite skewed.  I'm more concerned for the scout who was dismissed without rational explanation.  


    Your speculation about whether recording was permitted is a red herring.  It doesn't appear to be a surreptitiously recorded video; i'm guessing she was sitting there recording with her phone.   If the leaders had an issue with it, they would have asked her to stop.   I see videos of pinewood derbies and  pack awards posted all the time.  

    • Upvote 1
  6. This has now made the national news.   BSA and councils are keenly aware of their image and wants to avoid public relations debacles like the plague.  That's why they employ people like the "marketing director" who is quoted in the story.  I feel fairly confident that if there were a more rational explanation for this incident, it would have been put forth by now.  



    the Council nor BSA would say anything it would violate privacy and disclosure laws related to minors. 




    This is straying pretty far from the original scope of the thread, but again I have to ask, where?, what laws?   


    There aren't any that would apply, except in the very limited area of Youth Protection disclosures.  

  8.  There are major privacy restrictions so BSA at any level, as well as the unit, is bared from explaining or giving any details.




    Where?  Show me a BSA rule that says if I, a registered volunteer, am falsely accused in the media of something improper, I cannot respond publicly to set the record straight.


    I think you're confusing scouting with a school or medical provider, who do have statutory privacy obligations. 

  9. Why would you presume that the pack is not?



    I didn't; I took the mother's word in the absence of any contrary account put forth by the unit, the council, or anyone else. The only account of which I am aware to judge the event is the mother's (other than the video of the actual exchange with Sen. Marble, which corroborates what was said).


    To continue your line of speculative "maybe's," maybe the den leader is a racist knuckle-dragger who agrees with the senator's "chicken & barbecue" comments and retaliated against the scout because of that. His or her silence certainly leaves the door open for that conclusion.


    The lack of a substantive response is quite conspicuous. If there were a defensible explanation for this, the reputation-conscious folks at council would have been all over it.


    Regardless of who does it, and regardless of whether the council eventually sides with the Den Leader or the Cub Scout, I think this sends a very bad message to these young people in whom the BSA is trying to instill the values of citizenship.  I am not exactly sure where you draw the line between a question that is "pointed" and one that is "disrespectful" but I do not think these questions cross that line.  Nobody should be surprised when a politician is asked tough questions.


    Well said.  I agree.

    • Upvote 1
  11. These are my thoughts exactly. I'm willing to bet that there was a lot more to this but we are only getting the mother's side of the story. 


    Why would you presume that the mother is being anything less than forthright?  If her version were incorrect, one would think someone would correct it in order to save face.   The second story linked above makes more sense and also makes her story seem even more credible. 

  12. The OP is looking for solutions to the dilemma that her son is in, not to be lectured on how her son should have been more detailed and thorough in outlining the scope of work in his proposal.




    I don't see a single post in this thread that suggests the scout's proposal was deficient.  The OP provided minimal information about what was in the proposal, and more importantly, how it differed from what the beneficiary was demanding in the end.  That is important information in order to provide any useful guidance.   It's possible that the beneficiary is being entirely unreasonable by demanding something that is clearly outside the scope of the proposal.  It's also possible that the proposal was vague and lent itself to two different reasonable interpretations.  We have no idea.  

    • Upvote 2
  • Create New...