Twocubdad

It looks like the belts and patches of the day are still on side of the site restricted to jamboree participants. You have to have a jamboree account and long in with it to get those items. The close-out junk -- jamboree noise sticks and logo gummie bears -- is available to anyone. Seems like they really ran the inventory down tight this time. A lot of the good stuff was sold out before the end of the jamboree. Last time the national scout shops had mounds of stuff on sale, including a good bit of previously restricted stuff like participant patches, etc. Obviously, not having a lot of remaining inventory is a good thing, but it's encouraging that they are being customer-oriented and offering the belts and PODs on a re-order basis.

Usually one of the problems in this situation is that unless someone in the pack knows the family personally, you never really know what the situation is. We're neither the IRS or Social Services, so it's not like we can do audits or in-home visits. In reality, most of us are probably uncomfortable asking folks tough questions on this topic. More times than not, if someone asks for help, we're going to provide it with little or no questions asked. Beyond that, I would look at the fundraisers not as a means for the family to contribute to the pack, but as a way for the family to earn their own way. I would suggest giving the family all the profits from any popcorn or tickets they sell, then offer to match what ever they earn with scholarship money. That is still very generous but puts the responsibility on the family to take some initiative in earning their own way.

In a functioning troop, maybe, but not this one. Perhaps I'm reading between the lines, but I'm seeing an entire troop is disarray, not just a problem with this one Scout and dad. The Scoutmaster seems to have gone ROAD (Retired On Active Duty), the SPL is burned out, an entire crop of PLs served in name only, one dad is hijacking both committee and troop meetings. This isn't about one pushy dad who wants his boy to earn 120 merit badges. Evry needs to start with a battle he can win. Yes, every journey starts with one step. And if it were any other boy, a Board of Review would be a good place to start. But I'm telling you, starting with this particular boy won't go well -- been there, done that, got the patch. If he's lucky he will spend the next six months arguing about advancement procedures, boards of review authority and the appeals process. And that's if it all stays civil. If Evry wants to fix this troop, turning down this kid for advancement was not going to advance that cause.

I like how we advise caution in dealing with the dad and the overall situation with the troop, but we don't mind having evry light the fuse from the other end, throwing the kid under the bus at the same time. What do you think is going to cause a bigger explosion? Confronting the troop/dad over his merit-badge-every-two-days plan, or making an example of his boy during a board of review? BORs don't operate in vacuums. If the troop is all in agreement that this is how things work, denying this boy his advancement is going to be seen as picking on him and/or making a example of him because you don't like the way his dad is a bully. And that wouldn't be a totally inaccurate assesment. Given the situation, evry and the board didn't have much choice. They do have a choice of what to do now. The PRIMARY function of a board of review is to assess how the TROOP is delivering it's program to the Scouts. The whole board of review needs to now report back to the troop committee that you have Scouts being signed off on advancement who are serving in PORs in name only. These boys are not meeting the rank requirements and it it the TROOP's responsibility to fix the program so they do. This is an adult problem to fix. Don't try to fix it on a Scout's back during his Board of Review.

Den chiefs can be a hard sell, especially if they are expected to really serve in the position, not just show up now and again and make a show of having a Boy Scout at the den meeting. Not every Scout wants to be Den Chief or will make a good one. Not every Scout has the willingness, interest or ability to work with much younger boys. And if that's not present, it will be a bad fit. The other big issue is time commitment. Den Chief are asked to almost double their time commitment to Scouting. Doing it right means attending all den and pack meetings and activities. Just because the troops haven't sent you any den chiefs doesn't mean they haven't tried. Maybe they just didn't have any takers. I often hear Cub leaders say, "I asked the troop for Den Chiefs but they didn't send any" almost as if a Den Chief is an entitlement. I've had cubmasters flat out tell me "we send you all these Webelos every year, you need to give us Den Chiefs" as if it is some sort of quid quo pro. It's a two-way street. What is the pack doing to make Den Chief an attractive option for the Scouts? Has anyone offered to give the DC a ride to den meetings? Is the pack or the District offering DC training? Is someone working with the DCs to help them earn the Nation Den Chief Award (do you know what that is?) Are your DLs trained to properly use DCs? The worst thing that can happen is for a DC to show up at den meetings and spend the hour sitting in a corner. Probably the second worst thing is for the DL to dump and entire program on a DC. How about for the Scoutmasters? Do the pack leaders understand that DC is a positions of responsibility for the Boy Scout? Do the DLs understand how that fits in with the Boy Scout advancement program? I generally get ZERO feed back from the pack as to the job the DCs have done and consequently have no clue if the Scout has fulfilled his position of responsibility. If a DL comes to me and says "I understand DC counts for a Scouts' advancement and I'll send you updates every month or two regarding how your Scout is performing," as Scoutmaster, that's the first den I direct a Den Chief toward. Most packs could do a lot more to help recruit Den Chiefs instead of sitting back and waiting for them. Sorry for the hijack.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

I would very quickly hit reply and say that for the ADULTS to suspend PL elections because ADULTS don't feel the current crop of PLs did anything is completely counter to both the Patrol Method and the idea of a Boy led troop. The boys need to decide this for themselves while ALL the adults stand quietly in the back of the room. Secondly, you need to invite the ASM who suggested a different program structure out to lunch TOMORROW. Now it's not just you out there whining. Two of you makes it an organization; one more and you have yourself a movement!

You don't say what your position is in the troop, but that makes a difference. Without the support of the Scoutmaster or committee chair, you have an especially tough row. There are numerous check points this guy has blown through -- properly registering MB counselors, his son getting blue cards and counselors' names before beginning MBs, etc.-- which this guy has blown through. Unfortunately, the SM and CC are the ones responsible for managing these check points. The thing which is most troublesome to me it that the committee asked the guy to run the fly fishing idea past the boys, but the guy basically ignored that and told the boys what was going to happen. Have a private meeting with the Scoutmaster. Explain to him your concerns and let him know that you and your son feel strongly enough about this you are considering moving troops if the merit badge mill continues -- not as a threat, but to let him know the level of your displeasure. THEN ASK WHAT YOU CAN DO TO GET THE TROOP PROGRAM BACK ON TRACK. This probably means you step up and help the boys run some appropriate troop meeting programs. Maybe it means you become the new advancement chairman. Maybe the Scoutmaster designates you as the ASM responsible for signing off rank requirements.

I was given the camp version of a french press several years ago and use it every campout. Love it. It makes two good-sized mugs of coffee, which is my normal morning ration. (Dr. said several years ago to cut back to two cups. I did, but bought bigger cups.) It's a little fussy if you're trying to make coffee for more than two people, but I've found I can make a second pot by adding half the amout of coffee to the used grounds. One of the nice things about this one is it came with an insulating sleeve which keeps the coffee hot longer, since you can't put the pot, which is made of Lexan, on the stove REI and Campmor both sell them. I've also seen attachments which turn your Nalgene into a french press, but I've not tried them. One thing about the old, cowboy-style percolators, is you have to take care of them. I could never get them to work until someone finally pointed out to me that the base of the stem has to be flat and sit tight on the bottom of the pot. If it gets dented or warped (which is common banging around in a back pack or patrol box) the hot water goes out the sides instead of up the stem.

Ain't happening. National couldn't get the food prep guides out until the first day of jamboree. The scouts got their participants' handbooks the week before. What makes anyone think they could get the thousands of images in from all the councils in time to publish the books. And they would cost a fortune. And who is going to put their neck on the line and take the liability for getting it right. It may help if councils afixed one of the BSA hologram logos to their official patches, like the they did on the on the participant patches. That's easy enough to control and police. And there does need to be "patch police" patroling the hard-core area watching to be sure the existing rules are followed. I also think scouts should be encouraged to check the IDs of the people they're trading with. Exchanging names should be part of the friendship of patch trading, but many people would be hesitant to make clearly abusive trades if they know it could be traced back to them. (And maybe this is a different thread, but with all the grief we went through to get credentialed and the constant threats not to leave the campsite without them, what was the deal with thousands of visitor roaming without IDs?) But part of the fun of jamboree are the thousands of patches and other stuff generated by councils, troops and individuals. At world three years ago, there were quite a few people who had their own, personal, JSPs. Generally, they gave them away like business cards and didn't trade them. But who's to say they aren't being traded secondarily? This year our troop produced troop patches which our guys traded. No one approved them. Should they be considered illegal? Shoot, when I went to jamboree as a youth, my mom and I made handmade neckerchiefs with a stenciled logo.

The short answer is that your unit leaders who sign the form get to make the call. What ever they're willing to sign. Personally, I would look at it in terms of when the boys dropped. If the first two dropped at the beginning of the year and were never active, I wouldn't count them against the average. That the third boy hung on, participated in a couple events, but didn't drop until late in the year, he probably counts. I really don't like goals like this. You're really pushing a string up hill. What control do you have if a Scout's family gets transferred out of town, or his parents make him drop due to poor grades or conflict with church responsibilities. Den leaders need to be scored on the things they control, not thing outside their control.

The short answer is that your unit leaders who sign the form get to make the call. What ever they're willing to sign. Personally, I would look at it in terms of when the boys dropped. If the first two dropped at the beginning of the year and were never active, I wouldn't count them against the average. That the third boy hung on, participated in a couple events, but didn't drop until late in the year, he probably counts. I really don't like goals like this. You're really pushing a string up hill. What control do you have if a Scout's family gets transferred out of town, or his parents make him drop due to poor grades or conflict with church responsibilities. Den leaders need to be scored on the things they control, not thing outside their control.

I have my collection of jamboree patches framed in a conventional frame and held in place with one stitch through the mat board. I'm very careful to catch the patch in a location where the stitch won't do any permanent damage or be seen. Unless you want a house full of patch displays, your best bet for the others is to store them in notebooks using the various-sized sleeve pages. If your son has any of the big, multi-patch "halos" that all the boys were nuts for, I don't know how you display those things.

Yooohoooo! I hope the bums trying to sell the POD set for $1000 on ebay choke on them. I just hope the paid way above retail to get them in the first place.

First, I'd like to suggest we drop the "LDS unit" from the conversation. I forsee its inclusion being more inflamatory than enlightening. Secondly, Eagle92 is on the right track. If these boys were registered to your troop, you are under no obligation to accept advancement sign-offs from other troops or even other Scout camps. As Scoutmaster you control who signs off on advancements in your troop. I assume you didn't designate the dad or anyone from the other troop. Sit down with the boys and go through the requirements with them. If they know their stuff, you (or whoever in your troop handles this) can re-sign the requirements. If not.... The MBs are another issue. E92 is also correct that if a counselor properly signed the blue cards, it's a done deal. On the other hand, the boys should have initiated the merit badge process by getting YOUR signature on a blue card and getting the name of a couneslor from YOU. That part of the procedure doesn't seem to have been completed. How do you know if the counselor for the MBs is qualified or even registered? Even from Jamboree there was an advisory that the Merit Badge Midway program had been approved by the National Advancement committee and that troops should accept the jamboree blue sheets and/or electronic records. I think you are entitled -- at minimum -- to verify that the merit badge counselors through their council. I don't think is would be unreasonable for the boys to sit down with your local counselors and spot check some of the requirements. These boys (and their father) have only been in your unit since May. You need to bring them up to speed on what your expectations and procedures are for advancement. In our troop, this wouldn't fly on several levels. I'd start with a conversation with the dad and explain why blowing through three ranks in 9 weeks is a bad idea, even if it's done well. With the boys, try not to make this a negative thing. Praise them for all their work and accomplishments over the summer. Talk about all stuff they did and how they can bring some of it back to your troop. But matter-of-factly, explain they still need to review the requirements with someone in your troop. No big deal.

Yes, the menus were posted long ago, but the preparation instructions were not. Most of the stuff was heat and serve, but the best method was not always apparent. Some boil-n-bags, so heated in a pot, etc. We had a couple runied meals and frequently went to a lot of extra work before convincing all the patrols that reading the preparation instructions was mandatory. All could have been avoided if the full guide -- not just the menus -- were available at shakedown.

One battle at a time. If you go into the committee meeting with a laundry list of complaints, you risk being dismissed entirely. Beavah may fuss at me for assuming bad things about other Scouters, but it sounds to me that you're dealing with an old-school, well-entrenched bunch of Scouters. You need to earn your stripes with these guys before charging ahead on all these issues If you want to persue the rank issue for this boy, get a copy of Advancement Committee Guidelines and Policy book. It clearly explains that a rank cannot be recinded. Take that to the troop committe, highlight the appropriate passages and ask if recinding the Scout's rank is the right thing for the troop to be doing. Don't lecture or argue. Just lay it out there and see how they respond. You probably don't have all the information on this Scout. I generally treat discipline stuff on a need to know basis. You may be out of the loop somewhat. But recinding an advancement is clearly beyond the pale. The troop needs to find some more constructive (and permissible) forms of dealing with the Scout's behavior.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

That depends on what happens when a Scout follows the instructions in the packet, completes the workbook by hand and explains that the only computer he can use is at school and he's not allowed to use it for non-school work (or something similar). If the person accepting the proposals says, "don't worry son, I'll take care of if for you," it's not a requirement. If the person says, "I'm sorry, I can't accept your proposal unless you have an electronic copy with it," then it's a requirement.

Seems unnecessarily arrogant. A very wise, trusted Scouting friend recently said to me that Scouting seems to attract a lot of folks who don't get listened to in their non-Scouting lives. Scouting gives them an opportunity to make rules and give orders. While I agree that most older Scouts will have access to a computer, there could be a number of reasons which this requirement would be a hardship. If their goal is to handle most proposals electronically, simply saying the committee strongly prefers proposals be submitted electronically would be sufficient. I would think they would get a high level of compliance and the few remaining hard copies could be handled without a great deal of trouble.

My beef was that this was something which was heavily promoted to us and, in turn, we promoted it to the boys. It was supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread. We hand no clue about the limits on attendance until one of the SM meetings after we arrived. It's hard to comprehend how they could screw up something like that. It would be like not having enough room for every to get in the arena show -- oh, yeah, that happened too. I've yet to get a straight answer as to what it was about. When I asked my guys how they liked it, I got one "great" and one "eh".

Our troop doesn't use the BSA electronic advancement system, so I can't tell you how to go about it, but the theory was that when the boys registered for a MB at jamboree, their BSA member number was scanned from their ID card which directly linked the results, including partials, to their ScoutNet advancement records in real time. If your troop uses online advancement, your troop advancement person should be able to pull it up. Otherwise ask your council registrar if they can access the data.

KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID! These insane scoring systems are one reason we don't participate in these sorts of camporee. They're invariably screwed up. The judging in inherently subjective, but someone always thinks they can calculate the results to three decimal places. In our district's Scout Derby, the winning patrol will have something in excess of 600 points. The top ten patrols will all be within 20 points of each other. You're telling me the resolution of this scoring system is within .3% accuracy? Sure. Do this: Award blue ribbons to all patrols which greatly exceed expectations for the events, red ribbons to the patrols which exceed expectations for the events, yellow ribbons to the patrols which meet expectations and white ribbons to patrols which fall below expectations. What are the expectations? I don't know. The people who design the stations should have some sort of matrix for what they are looking for. Each station and each scorer has their own ideas of what they're looking for. Rendering that to a precise score is unimportant. To handicap a system like this, give the scorers the ages, ranks and years in Scouting of the boys and let them decide how that changes what the expectations for the event. Now before you all decide that this is some sort of commie, everyone-gets-a-trophy system, note that in our troops we don't total the "points" at the end of the year and award Eagle to the first place Scouts, Life to the second place Scouts, Star to third place, etc. Everyone who meets the expectations (requirements) for an award earns it. Same for the ribbons.

Yesterday's news. Bear was "outed" a couple seasons ago. Since then the show includes disclaimers that "certain situations are presented" to Bear to make a point. The past couple seasons he's been more interactive with the camera crew and open about creating situations to demonstrate a skill. How is this different than a Wilderness Survival merit badge class. Personally, I like Survivorman better in that it shows a more accurate approach to survival situations. His first response is usually to hunker down, find water, shelter and food and wait for help. Later in the show he will try to get himself out of a situation. Bear, on the other hand, tries some really stupid things (swimming under unknown obsticales, climbing or rappeling faces with rigged equipment) to make a point and a dramatic scene. I've only seen a couple episodes of Dual Survivor. Seems like tree-hugger vs. meat eater. But I'll admit I've not given the show a fair run. As to Gryllis's fitness to represent Scouting, how is he any different than Mike Rowe. Mike's not really a whale autopsy technician. He spends a day with them then goes to a fancy hotel for a soak in the hot tub. He really wanted to sing opera. Still, I'm all for naming Mike as BSA's Chief Scout.

Well it's not like these things are required for Eagle.... However I agree there were some major gaps in the leaders' guide. I think it was probably published sooner than possible. It was available, when?, before the first of the year? At minimum a supplement should have been produced. Heck, it was online. Updates wouldn't have been that tough. For example the menu and food prep guide would have been a doggone handy thing to have had at shakedown so we could have trained on it. But the fact that it wasn't distributed until the first food pick up Monday afternoon should tell you when it was printed. Back to the rockers ... I really don't think it's that big a deal. You earned them and want to wear them? Go for it. Largely due to the screw-up with the Mysterium Compass (and that was a BIG screw up) we gave all six rockers to all our Scouts. We told them if they earned them, wear them; otherwise consider them souveniers. We got real clear signals (BIG winks) from our commissioners and subcamp program staff that we should be very liberal in distributing the rockers.

Personal conversation with the Southern Region program staff when they handed me the patches. I have to say that the 100% rocker fits the adult patch and the activity rockers fit the yute patch is a pretty good clue too. My evidence for that is the two sets of patches and rockers I'm now holding in my hand. On the other hand, if you have enough rockers to give to both youth and adult and they want to wear the (and don't care the they don't fit the different patches well) then go for it.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

VE04 is correct. The 100% Program Award is for the adult leaders. Individual activity segments are for the Scouts.