Krampus

WELL another reason appeared tonite to give me another reason why the PLC and a few other Scouts should be able to sign off on the S-T-2-1 requirements instead of adults: we had a Scout who had a BOR for Second and First Class last week, who had his mom sign off on requirements, and not one of the adult leaders.  SM glanced over to see signatures, had a conference, and passed him along to the BOR. Was able to pass the 2 BORs. It was only after the BOR when the SM went to update the troop records was it caught that mom was signing off. Took about 20 minutes of asking adults, asking the Scout 2 times, and him not remembering, when SM decided to check mom's signature onteh application. Yep, she was signing off.

 

This is the mom who drops off and goes. Never attends any events, never attends any parents' meeting, etc. And when we did meet with her to discuss an issue we had with her son, it wasn't his fault, butthe other scout's and the medication he's on.

What does this SM do during the SMCs? Shouldn't he have done the SC SMC then bor, then FC SMC and bor?

 

That's two chances to catch this BEFOREHAND!!!

Jim, Joey, and Pete didn't have no women sewing on the Broken Wheel Ranch,  This was a real guy's show.  Even Fury was a stallion.

"Fury, do you like gladiator movies?".  

Military: Let's institute the "you're rich enough to take care of yourself rule."  Let's finish pulling our troops, aircraft and equipment out of Europe.

...or, let's leave the decision of what to do with the military to people who actually know how to protect you. You wouldn't hire a golf pro to teach you tennis, why allow someone who has no clue on how to protect you to make decisions about your security?

 

replaced with a national minimum income.

Thank you Karl Marx, but I'd like to determine exactly what I am going to pay my employees, thank you. If you did that you'd pay $8 for your Big Mac and not even get fries and a drink.

 

If $15/hour is the right minimum wage then maybe $30k/year is the right guarantee.

No reputable free-market economist thinks this is a rational idea.

 

Privatization: I like CP's idea about privatizing the TSA, I think it's a model that could be expanded.

You don't privatize something that broken, you simply open the contract up to companies to bid on. Privatizing means turning the TSA into a business. That's dumb. It would lose money based on how it is organized and operates. Put the whole process up for contract for companies to bid on. Makes more sense.

 

School vouchers: Same argument as minimum guaranteed income.  Stopping giving taxes to education bureaucracies.  Rather, give the parents $8000/kid/year indexed to geographic cost of living and the requirement to get the kid educated to a given standard.

Why not use the Texas model. Each area has their own independent school district funded through property taxes and other bonds. People are free to move to wherever they think the better schools are. That's true freedom without too much government intervention.

Huh? I thought the previous year membership numbers were released in the Report to the Nation, two months before Annual Meeting.

 

2015:

         1,261,340 boys ages 6 to 10 in Cub Scouts

            840,654 boys ages 11 to 17 in Boy Scouts and Varsity Scouts

            142,892 young men and women ages 14 to 20 in Venturing and Sea Scouts

 

http://scoutingnewsroom.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/2015-Report-to-the-Nation.pdf

Those are the 2014 numbers released before the 2015 annual meeting. The numbers in the annual report are a bit different from those. The numbers revised later in 2015 were different still.

 

The point: Membership numbers for the previous year are announced in the spring, reported in the annual report and revised later in the year. There have been times when they release provisional registration numbers in the spring for the current year but they are unofficial until they are in the annual report...which are usually revised downward (in terms of membership numbers).

 

 

Exactly. Everyone knows it was Jimmy Carter's fault.

Krampus, does "re-evaluated" mean what I think it means? 

 

So the best thing for National to do:  go to Sandy Eggo and tout the "positive gains...in the quality of its program."

 

Two words:  open bar.

 

Historically the numbers released at the annual meeting have been adjusted downward (meaning the loss of membership has been increased, the membership numbers lowered)  later in the year (usually July or August). Last year's numbers, I am told, are showing double-digit losses and that may not be something they want to present in May. What I heard was there was a request to "revise" the numbers so that they do not show a double-digit loss.

 

It will be interesting to see what happens....and to see what happens later in the year when the numbers get updated.

From the '74 para:

 

"Despite a loss in members, Scouting made positive gains in 1974 in the quality of its program. Membership on December 31 was 5,803,885."

 

Gosh, that Improved Scouting Program was such an improvement, it prompted over 60,000 folks to depart.  

 

Once one mulls the particulars of that bit of wonderful spin, I guess the only logical thing to do is fly all of the execs to Hawaii for a meeting.

 

It will be interesting to see the membership numbers for 2015. The initial word I got was it was over 10% off what 2014 was, but the date was being "re-evaluated" for accuracy.   

As I say, the first time I've had to deal with this. Most parents drop and run, particularly when its raining like it was last Friday! And hints on subtle ways of getting rid of parents without being rude?

 

Have coffee ready and offer him a cup. If he doesn't drink coffee flat out remind him that we let Scouts do everything unless it is a safety issue.

Hollywood, Spielberg and Lucasnare doing a reboot of this classic. They are busy casting over 100 adults to serve as he council, district and unit advisors to help the boys on their path to Eagle.

All good ideas. One other: Go to a feeding station or park in your area to try to make a list of birds. 

 

IMHO the intent of the requirement is to make the house or feeding station, then identify birds that use it. If no birds come, I would think the counselor would want the Scout to make an attempt to track and identify birds elsewhere. Ponds and lakes are a great place.

IMO, the Annual meeting attendees are a money, power, networking, award banquet crowd (with spouses). Any scouts or scouters attending are vetted and brought in briefly from the outside.

 

BSA run by out of touch elitists who are more focused on themselves and what's in it for them than helping their volunteers?

 

Stop the presses.

Relax, @@Krampus you have to remember these are Ivory Tower folks here that if they were to get too close to the rank and file, they might begin to understand what really going on and we couldn't let that happen.

 

The only time any of these people have a tool of any sort in their hands is at a photo op.  When has there ever been a photograph produced at one of these gatherings as a tent city?  Where's the PR value in that? 

 

I've been to one of these. I think it is funny that the cost for that event is roughly that of NYLT...and that's outside!!!

 

They are back-slapping blingfests where these folks can feel good about themselves instead of facing their members and really learning how they can help us. The last one I went to reminded me of that scene in the Hunger Games when the Tributes arrive in the Capitol City and are greeted by all the dilettantes welcoming them. 

Glad to see that the money BSA takes in is being used in the most cost-effective manner possible.

 

If it is good enough for volunteers to meet at council camps, camp in the outdoors and use their conference facilities, why can't BSA big wigs do the same thing?

 

This simply sends the wrong message to folks. There's no need for a giant blingfest like this. 

Not hard at all. The weight/height chart on the often revised medical form over the past 10 years. Remember it started out as weight/height only and excluded hefty football-playing scouts from activities, not to mention scouters. Regularly ignored locally. A lot of negative feedback followed in this forum, that this was the wrong metric. A couple years later weight rules changed with BMI added...

 

Another common situation is when a rule/requirement is re-intrepreted, e.g., Emergency Preparedness MB requires that a scout have First Aid MB. To me that mean prerequisite, but word has come down that co-requisite was intended.

 

"A nod and a wink" is still alive and well when it comes to following BSA rules.

Let's face it, those are not rules so much as they are suggestions.

 

What rules -- similar in weight and intention to the "add/subtract no requirements" rule -- have been ignored by scouters and then eventually changed?

The whole A-10 vs. F-35 vs, A-??  mess is the military arguing to civilians who control the spending, although fortunately some of the civilians were military at one time (to the Air Force's dismay).

 

A-10 any day. Those boys could drop a whole lot of hurt in a few seconds...and drove a plane that could take punishment like few others.

Most great scoutin' ideas come from da actual practice of great scouters who care about the kids more than they care about page 37 of Book #5.

 

Really? Name one rule broken often by scooters, which hurt the scouts, that's gone on to be a "changed rule"? If it's happened enough over the years one example shouldn't be hard to find.

 

I still find it astounding your pick the adult side over a scout who has completed what's been asked him and followed the rules. If it happened to you I'll bet your folksy wisdom wouldn't be so civil.

I wonder if the Made in America labels really are.

How about we leave the military ideas to those who've been involved in those institutions, shall we?

 

I don't want someone who has never been involved in military Ops telling me who will resupply me or cover my tuckas when I need it.

 

Different branches run different missions. I wouldn't call on one group for strategic air support and I would call the other for S&R. Same as you wouldn't call a brain surgeon to remove your prostate, and you don't want your Urologist doing brain surgery. Sure they all went to medical school and they all deal with your body, but...

Yah, @@Stosh, I reckon it just depends whether yeh view Boy Scout ranks as entitlements or not, eh? 

 

If gettin' a Boy Scout rank is an entitlement, then if yeh don't get what's comin' to yeh you might be "screwed over".

 

I don't see BSA ranks as entitlements, and I don't think we're playin' this Scoutin' game to teach kids to feel entitled to the time and effort and recognition of others.

 

Just my humble opinion.

 

I think we are bein' trustworthy when we follow the "cardinal rule" of advancement and make sure we're usin' advancement to educate kids.   I think we build confidence in kids and parents when badges represent what a lad is able to do, rather than bein' an award for what he has done.  I think we're followin' da rules when we we interpret advancement in the way that best advances da Aims of Scouting to promote character, fitness and citizenship.

 

Not entitlement.

 

I agree with @@Krampus though, eh?  Most units don't really track attendance or have policies on participation.  Those only come up either when some lad/family tries to take advantage and other folks get upset by that, or when a unit has gotten very lax and some better-trained folks are tryin' to put the house back in order.   For the rest of da time, this stuff just sorta cruises along.  Perhaps with a SM sayin' "Hey, Joe, we've all been missin' you lately.  I'd love to sign yeh off for Scout Spirit, sure.  I might have some time to do that on the next campout, eh?  Will I see yeh there?

 

Gee, my definition of "active" in my troops has been: you pay your registration, you're active for another year.

 

Yeh can choose to have a definition like that, eh?  Nobody's goin' to stop you, if yeh have some families who want that sort of thing.    I'm not sure what you're teachin' though.  Is an active student a lad who just registers for class, but never shows up?   Is a good employee a fellow who signs a contract but doesn't come to work? Is an active member is someone who signs da church register, but doesn't come to Sunday services or contribute in any other way?  Is that definition consistent with da values of your CO?

 

I prefer da BSA's definition:

 

A youth member is a youth under 18 years of age who, with the approval of a parent or guardian, becomes a member of a unit; obligates himself to regularly attend the meetings; fulfills a member’s obligation to the unit; subscribes to the Scout Oath; and participates in appropriate program [sic] based on the current guidelines of the Boy Scouts of America.  - Rules & Regulations of the Boy Scouts of America

 

Beavah

@@Beavah, I really find it hard to follow your logic.

 

You talk about ranks and entitlements, but that TOTALLY misses the point that this Scout did the work required of him and now adults are asking him to re-do something as a condition of signing off on requirements. 

 

It is not an entitlement to get something for doing the required work. The process of the Scout getting that badge -- and therefore achieving what he's capable of, as you point out -- is part of the process the SMs and other adults should help this Scout with WHILE he is working toward rank. It is NOT something you do AFTER the fact.

 

Imagine how ill-done you'd feel if you just did your taxes and filed for a refund, but now the IRS wants you to document every mile you've driven before you can get your refund. You can probably time your incredulity in nanoseconds, and yet somehow this Scout is supposed to swallow this injustice in the name of "what he's capable of"? Forgive me, but that's just bollocks!!

 

Your quote of what the BSA defines as "active" is incomplete as it omits the very definition of active outlined in the GTA.

 

Lastly, if you looked a bit further in the same document you'd find another quote that blows a hole in your support of the Scoutmaster denying this Scout his signature:

 

"...a Scouter must agree to: subscribe to the Scout Oath; fulfill the obligations of his or her position; and perform his or her duties in accordance with the Rules and Regulations, policies, and guidelines of the Boy Scouts of America" -- Page 8 BSA Rules and Regulations.

 

 

If you are going to use that document to hold the Scout to some ambiguous level of activity, the you HAVE TO hold the adults to the bolded parts of that same document...which requires them to follow not only the Rules and Regulations, but the Oath, Law AND all policies and guidelines!!!!

 

So, in short -- and using your own source -- if the SM and other adults are not using the GTA and applying it correctly, they are violating the very same document you intend to hold the Scout to.

 

Where is your sense of fairness?

South Country is definitely going to be where those events take place. Chuck Wagon dinner should be Clarks Fork, if I remember correctly. Philmont has done a good job of spreading the good stuff out, 

 

3/4 of my time at Philmont was spend north of the Tooth, so I really don't have a whole lot to add. 

 

I posted the wrong link. We are doing the 7-day treks.

 

We sent two crews a year ago, one north, the other south. I was an advisor on the south tour.

 

Highlights where Trail peak and the crashed bomber, and Beaubien with food, campfire, horseback riding.

 

We also did the 30.06 reloading and shooting event as well. 

 

Did not do the Tooth, only thing really missing from our trek. 

 

Trek 7-12 is the closest match to ours.

 

Thanks for the input. Where's the crashed bomber?

Which treks are they going on? I went out of Rayado turnaround last summer. My trek was only in the South of the Ranch for a few days, as we quickly turned north to get to Baldy. Our trip was definitely more about hiking. We went about 90 miles. 

 

 

They were looking at 7-2, 7-10, 7-4, 7-5, 7-8, 7-12 in that order. 7-2 looks like a good route and hits a few places you mention above and does not just stay south of Tooth. 7-10 was popular for the shooting sports and ends by hiking the Tooth ridge in to camp. For the old-school guys hiking the Tooth ridge back to camp earned you the right to wear the bull tail over your right shoulder. 7-4 and 7-5 were strictly for the activities. 7-8 was filler and 7-12 was for those who wanted to hit Baldy.

 

The guys gave these objectives:

• Want to do Baldy or Tooth.
• Any "food events" were a plus.
• Ranger skills, shooting of any kind, black powder, gold mining/blacksmithing/cowboy events were big.
• Getting their arrowhead
• 30-50 miles

These guys did high adventure last summer in CO and had a blast. Leisure is important. Level of difficulty is not important but they didn't want to be hoofing it from station to station.

Gee, my definition of "active" in my troops has been: you pay your registration, you're active for another year.  If you don't show up, you just wasted your money, but not my time.  Works for me.  I've never had an attendance problem in my troops.  Boys are there because they want to be, not because they have to be.  As long as I keep it that way, I'm not going to change.

That's pretty close to the BSA definition. They add "in good standing" which I assume you take in to account too. 

 

Most units I know don't have an attendance policy or don't track it well so they never know if anyone is truly not meeting it. Those who do have it rarely invoke it. Only in the very rare instances you have a guy who pays but never attends, then shows up and wants an SMC.

Have two crews going to Philmont this August (Leader Guide here). Just made trek selections. The guys used a matrix to prioritize the activities they wanted to do. For them it is more about hiking from "cool thing to cool thing" and not about the miles they put down. They want to relax, enjoy their trek and have fun.

 

That said, I've been a few times but nearly always north of the Tooth on the north part of the range. Seems most of the treks these guys have selected are around the Tooth, along Shaefer's Pass, back along Phillips Junction and around the Black Mountain area.

 

The questions these guys had for me to ask are:

1. Any must see, must stay locations on the south range? 
2. Any activities that sound boring but are really fun?
3. Any activities that sound cool but are really boring or poorly done?

Thanks in advance!

Followin' that cardinal rule depends a lot on da circumstances, eh?  For me as a parent, I'd want my kid to learn da lessons of respectin' da SM/referee, not procrastinatin', and that if yeh want someone to give you their time, yeh had best be willin' to give generously of your own time in return.   So when I'm answerin' questions from another parent, that's where I'm goin' to lean.    If da question is from the SM instead and she or he is askin' about procedures, my answer would be different, eh?

 

Huh? Following the rules depends on circumstance? I must have missed that part of the bylaws and charter agreement that allowed us as adult leaders to do that.

 

I understand discretion. As leaders we exercise discretion all the time. HOWEVER, there are certain things we cannot exercise discretion over. In the situation we are discussing we have a Scout that is DONE with a requirement and wants his SM's signature. The SM is placing conditions on the signature totally unrelated to the completion of the requirement!! Not only is that wrong but it breaks several rules and policies of Scouting, not to mention failing to demonstrate the exact thing you are advocating the Scout should be exhibiting (trust, honor, integrity, loyalty). So by siding with the SM on this you are 1) punishing the Scout and 2) demonstrating the exact opposite of what you want the Scout to show. Where is the Scoutmaster's respect for the Scout, the rules and the policies he is supposed to follow?? 

 

This kid did not procrastinate from what the OP notes. The kid completed a requirement and wants it signed off. It does not get any more clear cut. There's no reason for "different answers". The answer is pretty clear.

 

 

Besides I reckon it's goin' to take at least as long to go through the EBOR under disputed circumstances or change troops as it is to just go on a few campouts, eh?  Goin' on a few campouts seems like more fun, with more opportunities for learnin' and service.  Sometimes we do stuff just because the fellow who has spent his time with us for free for the past 5 years asks us to, eh?  Not because we're "required" by anything more than our honor.

Really? Why would re "reckon" that? Given the propensity of these adult to not follow the rules, what's to say they don't throw ANOTHER road block in front of this kid? Given their disloyalty and dishonesty with him on this issue, what give you that warm, fuzzy feeling these adults won't drag their heels at every turn for this kid?

 

But forget all that, ask yourself this: Since this kid has ALREADY MET the requirements for getting these Eagle requirements signed off (except the remaining MB), why should he have to do MORE?? He's met the level of activity laid out by the BSA. The troop has failed to produce their level of activity requirement (if they even have one), so why should the kid have to re-do anything??

 

You want to teach all these valuable lessons but you are missing the biggest lesson this kid is learning in all of this: Adults cannot be trusted. Let's make this clear: HE'S DONE THE WORK!! Why in God's name are you asking him to re-do it?

 

 

 

 

Sorry Beav, but forgetting one's mess kit or rain gear is not the same thing as getting screwed over on the Eagle rank at the last minute by a SM who changes the rules.

Exactly!!

If the youth pitchers can't find the plate, the coach shouldn't step in.

 

Just let the game unfold like a train wreck.   It will end.   Not soon enough.  It will be a very slow, painful span of time.  But eventually it will end.

 

The youths will have a moment to reflect, in the minivan, on the way home.   "26 - 3...wow...unpleasant."

 

If they have any grit, they'll figure out a way to prevent that kind of embarrassment from happening in the future. 

 

Same thing when the Roadrunner patrol screws up dinner.   Let them eat the charred remains.   They won't starve.   They'll make a concerted effort to do better next time.

Exactly. Had several scouts forget rain gear on last camp out. Torrential rain happened. They got soaked.

 

Next camp out planning meeting they were evangelizing the use of rain gear...and not forgetting it. One made a point to tell me he's already packed it.

This is where I think Sentinel947 's  analogy goes wrong.

 

Beavah has a son on a soccer team in the League of Youth Soccer.  Beavah doesn't own the league.  Beavah isn't an officer of the league.  So, Beavah has no authority to change the rules.

 

Beavah has a son on a soccer team in the League of Youth Soccer.  Beavah is a member of the organization that owns the League of Youth Soccer.  Beavah is an officer of the organization that owns the League of Youth Soccer.  This is a different situation.  Beavah may, in fact, have the authority to change the rules.

 

Huh? I think you missed the analogy.

 

In soccer, the league does not make up the rules. The league has to follow the rules laid down under the Laws of the Game (LOTG) by FIFA. So in this analogy FIFA is the BSA, the LOTG are the GTA, the League is the troop. 

 

No troop or adults have the right to add/subtract from requirements, just like soccer leagues cannot say that the players can use their hands.