BrotherhoodWWW

The Scout, why is it boastful to have and wear an OA position patch and yet not so for any other position patch. I can think of plenty of reasons why a youth might want an OA position patch. With your line of reasoning why have three distinct sashes? Heck lets abolish rank badges too for that matter. Lodge officers spend plenty of time serving their fellow arrowmen and fellow scouts as well as in some cases their communities. When they are acting in thier official capacity as a Lodge officer why not let them show their position. Not only that but new arrowmen might actually be able to find their Lodge officers at a Lodge event if the officers have a position patch on their sleeve. Many of these arrowmen are over 18 and not yet 21. They do great things for the movement of Scouting, much more in fact than just possibly being an asst. Scoutmaster, which seems a likely role that an 18 yo Lodge Chief may hold in his home unit.

Here is my take on this. When i was a youthful member I was once a chapter cheif and once a lodge Dance Team Cheif. While I was Dance Team Cheif IIRC I was also my Troop''s SPL so that is the position patch I wore; although I don''t think one was even available for Dance Team Cheif. Even if there was I''m doubtful that I would have worn one. However while I was Chapter Cheif I turned 18. I actually changed my registration to a new business explorer post. I also helped with a Troop as an ASM. I attended many events in which my primary purpose was to represent the Chapter and Lodge and a CC position patch would have been useful. I think that in active lodges this may still be the case to this day with lodge and chapter leadership being at least partly filled by arrowmen of transitional age and low to moderate responsibilities to their home unit.

I think I may have said in other topic that if the OA is to be a successful part of the Boy Scout program then it really does need youth that commit to it. I believe that in many cases Arrowmen are active in their troops for the express purpose so that they can also be a part of the OA. If older arrowmen focus 75% of their energy on the OA and only 25% on their home unit. This is far better than losing the youth completly to other activities as is such often the case of scouts that are over 16, regarless of their level of advancement. Active involvement in the OA will also lead to involvement in the Troop as long as the purpose of the OA is to honor scouts and promote scout camping. Any added impact to a troop should IMHO be considered icing on the cake. I know many will disagree with me on this. I base my opinion at least partly on the facts of participation that I have noticed in older scouts that also became arrowmen. In lodges and chapters where there has been a solid active OA program most all of the arrowmen that I have known were involved because of the OA. in lodges and chapters where there was or is not a solid active OA program older arrowmen simply leave scouting after either getting a DL or their Eagle rank.

My current chapter and in some ways lodge also are in the 2nd group as explained above. In the part of the chapter I live, where I am an assoc chapter advisor, we have about 6 registered youth arrowmen. The other county in this chapter is 40 miles away at the closest. Of these arrowmen 4 are in my current unit and two of these 4 are very close to acheiving their Eagle. One of these two is likely to leave the scouting movement after earning his eagle. Two of the other three have many other interests and activities so it is unlikely that they will be very active in scouting for much longer. If the chapter would have had an active program this may not have been the case. With such small numbers getting things going is presenting a huge challenge to me. I know that if we can get these youth active in the OA then they will also remain active in the Troop. Without one I''m doubtful that we will have the other. I wish the OA leadership at the region and national levels would consider this. If only mixed signals were not given about an arrowmans primary responsibility in the literature and in fact. (This is not the correct place to argue this point, however if someone want to disagree I''d be happy to expand onthis subject line either by PM or in the private forum.)

IMHO if one adult is there then there should be two, although if there are at least two scouts present then there should not be any one on one contact. If it a Troop outing where the troop is planning and arranging the transportaion then a trip permit may be required depending on local custom.

FWIW I think hikes for hiking merit badge should be scout only hikes and if the scouts needing the credit are not old enough they should find an older scout to accompany them, or put aside this merit badge until they are older. There are plenty other mertit badges to choose from. Granted that there are probabaly some places where this simply would not be safe. I think the youth will get the most out of the merit badge requirements when they are done in the smallest of numbers so that each participant plays a large part of the planning process. A workable alternative is for a patrol to work on the badge together with each boy planning each hike and the Patrol choosing the best one each time.

Although not even advised then I did most of my hikes for hiking merit badge solo, but that was back around 1980, and I was in High School. In the same time frame I was a long distance runner and would train solo in the off seasons, plus I fished alone. Being self relient was SOP for me.

I think the Bob White list is a good one and most of the time Troops with those attributes will be sucessful on paper and perhaps even have high advancement numbers. That said there are plenty of other benchmarks one could use to guage success as others have posted. IMHO success should be defined so that boys grow into men of high morals and good leadership skills. Success also means older boys stay in the program or an offshoot, aka Venturing, but enough older boys stay involved to lead and teach the younger scouts how to not only be proficient in scoutcraft skills but also learn to be leaders. Adults are in the program to support the boys and catch them when they fall, offer advice, encouragement, and direction. Many times IMNSHO adults do far too much in Scouts. "Never do for a boy what he can do for himself" should be the adults motto.

My only run-in with Bob White was distasteful but thats not to say that nothing of what he has written has merit; some does. Even though some have found his posts annoying, for lack of a better word, I think he should consider adding to the online discussion.

I'm not going myself but am planning on promoting it plenty with the youth membership in my chapter. Seems like a great opportunity for high adventure for Arrowmen.

"....the lowest 2%..." Seems to me a rather arrogant statement. I have a mid level management job in a blue collar industry and the aforementioned language is normal everyday speech for a significant segment of our population. It is courteous to consider others feelings and sensitivites to certian words in our language but IMNSHO it is absurb to change just because a minority may be offended. This is not to say that we should intentionally offend others but those offended might want to consider for a moment that no offense was intended. Their being offended is mostly a matter of their overreaction and insensitivity to others expressions. Scouts should strive to have a richer vocabulary and be able to use more exact adjectives, but an occasional sucks seems quite appropriate to me. This could have been handled in a different way so that no one got their feelings bruised.

My take is different on this. A woodworker of modest skill and only a few tools could build a track that would be fine. Materials choice is where you can design in unifomity. Although rather expensive my fist choice for the track would be MDO plywood, which has a smooth paper face that takes paint nicely. Number the sections so they go together in the same order every time and use flat head machine screws and wing nuts to join each section. My former pack has a track built by a former Cubmaster. It has three lanes, but in use we only ever used two of them. Each car was ran at least twice switching lanes each time; to win the car has to win two consecutive races. We used double elimination so that each Cub got a fair amount of track time. The Cubs had fun, the parents enjoyed it and the Leaders had a great time. PM me if you wnat further details on special design element of the track.

I'm glad Scoutnut quoted the actual National policy about this as I have learned something new. From last year's expierence with my son's former Pack our 2nd year Webelos Den did not attend the fall Camporee but almost the entire first year Webelos Den did. They were guests of my current Troop! The Troop only would have had one patrol without these added boys but their numbers increased them to two Patrols. Funny thing is they earned all of the top awards at this camporee. Perhaps National should revise their policy. Our Council does not do a Webelos-Ree, rather thay did a fall District cub-o-ree, same weekend as the district fall camporee. Perhaps they should have done both at the same time and place with age-appropriate activities for the cubs and webelos dens.

My opinion is that it is worth asking your district exec and/or unit commish. and/or Camporee Chair if Webelos are welcome as guests of a Troop for the whole weekend. Their answer may be in conflict with National Policy but I think Councils are given some latitude in such matters. Interaction between Webelos and Boy Scouts seems to me to be mutually beneficial. It helps make for strong Packs and strong Troops. It fosters relationships that can be deepened once the Webelos join the Troop. Not to hijack this topic but I do not agree with the current thought that Patrols should be divided by age groups. Older boys need to be teaching younger boys the skills they need to learn for T-2-1. IMHO having a buddy of your own age is far more important than having 4 sets of buddies in a Patrol all of the same age.

Gunny, IMHO the OA is the single best program element of Boy Scouting. For youth members that may otherwise move on to other things (cars, girls, & sports) it gives them an opportunity and purpose to stay involved in Boy Scouts. An arrowman's first responsibility is service to his unit and unit membership is required for membership in the Lodge. The OA gives as others have said plenty of opportunities for leadership past the troop level. Other than leadership it also offers older Scouts opportunities for High Adventure, more camping in addition to their troops, and plenty of chances to serve other Scouts and Scout units. As John-in-KC hinted, about any questions or concerns you may have as a unit leader can and will be answered by either your local Lodge Advisor, Staff Advisor or even Council Exec. In Councils that have a good active OA Lodge the youth want to become members and usually look up to and respect Arrowmen. In Councils with a less than great OA Lodge there is opportunity for meaningful, challenging leadership for the youth that are motivated to turn things around. In either case youth members have plenty to gain from being in the OA.

The OA provides much service to Scout camps and adventure bases (i.e. Philmont) with labor for improvements and other projects. Many Lodges activily promote camping in their councils by producing a area camping guide. Some Lodges have dance and ceremony teams available for indian dance demonstrations and some Cub Scout Ceremonies, such as Webelos Arrow of Light. Many arrowmen feel compelled from a dedication to servent leadership to become summer camp staff. Looking beyond a youths involvement in scouting many Arrowmen feel compelled to serve later in life as adult Scouters. I'm thinking you will find many that frequent this board and my unit has an ASM that was elected to the OA as a youth, also an Eagle Scout, plus myself as a CC. (our SM was not involved as a youth and our other ASM is an Eagle Scout) So your approval of Scouts for this honor could have real lasting benefit to Scouting far beyond today and tomorrow.(This message has been edited by BrotherhoodWWW)

Scoutnut's point about Youth protection is a great one that I think many that have had the YP training miss. The rule is no one-on-one contact. Two deep leadership applies to outings, meetings, and events.

Our Troop has in the past and is now doing a merit badge as a Troop. As CC I do not really like this gameplan and am activily trying to change it and the culture that has allowed it to happen.

I can respect others views on this subject but I do not agree that thereshould be any requirement. What works for one unit may or may not work for others. In my current unit I am quite happy serving as committee chair and I fill in as needed on select outings as requested. We have SM and ASM's that are far more physically fit than myself which is as it should be. If things were different and qualified adult leaders were simply not available I would have no problem being a SM even though my fitness level is not what it should be. Something that I am currently working on along with my Scout. It is really IMHO up to the CO, whomever they may be to determine what fitness level is needed to present the youth of their organization with the program they deem appropriate.

Fitness is a comparable thing. When I was young I could run a mile in less than 5 minutes; two mile times were less than 11 minutes. In fact during my freshman year of HS we had over 20 runners that ran faster than 5 minutes in the mile. Based on that I think it would have been fair to say that fitness for high school aged males to be the ability to run a 5 1/2 minute mile. I do not really believe this, didn't then and do not now but I think you may see my point. A 7 minute mile might be closer to a mininum mile time of 7 minutes but there is a world of difference in the level of fitness between 5 minutes and 7 minutes. Now-a-days I think I'd be lucky if I could jog a mile in 12 minutes. Just a few years ago I could walk for hours while hunting yet I was still, when compared to the fitness of my youth, at least 40 pounds overweight. I think we owe it to ourselves and the scouts to at least be fit enough to safely be able to handle whatever activity the unit plans. For this reason participation by an adult member of each scouts family should be required. Only then might the pool of adults be large and diverse enough to ensure that the youth have adults that can keep up.

The topic this is spun from has me thinking. Are we asking the wrong question here? Our local councils get our support as long as we partake in popcorn sales and/ or any other council wide fundraising efforts regardless of the fact if we attend their camps. I believe that the councils are there to support the units not the other way around. Attending an Out of Council summer camp or high adventure program seems like a reasonable choice to be made by each unit. My current unit chooses an OCC each year and has since it was started. I do hope to change this practice or at the very least offer to the youth the opportunity to decide if they would rather an in-council camp.

As I understand it, keep in mind this is second hand information, the founders for my son's troop moved here from a larger council. When they started our troop they decided to attend the camp of their previous council since they had a hand in building the camp. For several years our troop would have OA elections at camp (OCC) and the candidates would then go through the Ordeal OOC and be accepted as members of an OOC Lodge. Aparently this resulted in some hard feelings within our Council's Lodge and may have been partly responsible for the stated policy against such things. For the past several years prior to this year our troop was ignored by the local Lodge when we asked for an election. I've only heard one side of the story so there may in fact be some facts that are not know to me and others. There could have been problems with in our lodge that allowed our troop to be missed rather than any kind of hard feeling retribution sort of thing. I do not know. It all is water under the bridge since we now have new people in place at the council, lodge, chapter and troop levels.

In closing I believe that at all levels of the BSA adminstration the focus needs to be on serving the Youth of our Nation.

This is something that I often have mixed feelings about. The OA wants well practiced ceremony teams and yet makes the point in many places that an arrowmans first responsibility is to his troop. Without the OA many units might lose the interest of older Scouts. If the OA motivates these same Scouts to still be active in the unit even half time and very active in the OA at the Chapter, Lodge, Section, Region, or National Level have we not had a net gain. Perhaps if Ordeal members are doing their duty to their units by promoting camping and living according to the Scout Oath and Law in their daily lives the will help inspire younger Scouts to be active and meet the requirements for election and ensure a steady steam of candidates each year to take their place at the unit level as they confirm their membership to Brotherhood. If the Scouts unit is a shining example of an active unit and has a weekly unit meeting plus occasional Patrol meetings plus a camping trip each month then the absence of a few Scouts even every few months will not IMHO be a big deal.

As a Fleet Manager by profession and a former driver I can attest to the facts of the matter. Coke and Pepsi syrup are classified hazmat. Flamables and corrosives. The same hazmat endorsement is needed for any hazard class. There are differences in the amount and types of training required to haul certain classes and special record keeping for some hazmat. The background check costs driver's in my area $100 and takes up to 6 weeks for which the do not get any more pay per load. For driver's that also have similiar background checks done i.e. concealed weapons permits, reserve law enforcememnt, the check is still required. IMHO this will not increase safety any at all. Someone with felonious intention will still be able to steal a hazmat ladden truck and crash it into a building wounding or killing lots of people.

It goes further than this. International ports are requiring a seperate background check in addition to the hazmat check. All this does is makes elected officials warm and fuzzy and they have the ability to tell their voters that they have "done" something to help make our country safer!

I do not have anything to hide; if I did I would not have been involved in law enforcement or ever applied or received a CCW permit. I am not in support of these TSA mandated checks as I do not believe them usefull to keep our country safe. IMHO they only place more burdens on an over worked under paid occupation with almost no political clout.

Wow! What a whopper of a friendly conversation we have going on here! First things first I'll answer the OP's question. If a Scout asked me what I knew or thought about GW I'd say that yes it could be happening. Some folks think that the western industrialized profit driven world have caused it but it is purely speculation as to the true cause and we likely, well at least myself, will probabaly never live long enough to find out if it is true. The anti-capitalists of the world are having a real problem convincing anyone that we are really running out of oil so the arguement must shift to it's the burning of the oil that is causing the warming, which will lead to more burning of oil to make electric power to cool our homes and workplaces. But we in the NW don't need to worry about that because with sea levels rising there will be more water surface to be evaporated into clouds that will fall in rain and keep the rivers full enough to make electricity with our dams. Of course that's if them pinkos don't tear them all out to try to save some fish that have to find their way back to their native headwaters which have been deforested by the warming and wildfires. Really! Now you see how complex the planets ecosystems are? One little thing can trigger events that make major changes. Just think nature can do that all on its own. Add into the mix that us humans in fact have had at least regional impacts to the environment by our actions; it is possible that we could also be contributing to GW. And yet one big volcano, like Mt. St Helens, can errupt and do more damage, or more properly described, cause more change in a matter of minutes than centuries of man's presence has. In 1980 spring hard wheat in eastern Washington had excellent protein counts which before and since farmers have not achieved on such a broad scale by adding sulphur as a fertlizer. It seems that the volcanic ash that fell supplemented the soil better than modern farming can. Now what really matters is wouldn't it be a great idea to try to leave the earth in the same shape as it was when you were born. Clean water, clean air, fish to catch, animals to watch or hunt, forests to walk upon or harvest in a way that is sustainable? As for oil the economics will take care of that problem all on its own. We will either find more or it will get so expensive that alternatives will be cost effective, either way it will not last forever.

Packsaddle wrote: " In fact, a scientist engaged in a good experiment is trying to make observations that provide evidence that can allow him(her) to REJECT an idea. If he fails to find such evidence and if previous evidence supports the idea, then it is tentatively accepted pending further examination."

So put another way there is an idea. I'm gonna try to prove that the idea is false. I try many differnent ways to prove that the idea is false and fail so it must be true. That's the scientific method? If Edison would have quit one try earlier he would have proved that a light bulb was not possible? Oh wait a minute he was trying to prove that it was possible, which is why he kept trying things until he found a way to make it work. So isn't the scientific method Start with a hypothisis, try to pro and dis prove that hypothisis and after all that if your data consistantly uphold your hypothsis then you can be fairly certian that your theory is true. Scientific thought changes with time. Perhaps it is sometimes a matter of perspective but the rainbow trout and its reletive the steelhead were named something different than they are today. Taxinomic identification changes as does all science. Fish biologists still do not know why some rainbow head for the sea and some don't. I may be wrong but I think we've been studying fish for a bunch longer than climate. I do think we should be looking for answers about all these things but on any given subject I am skeptical whenever one start to talk of cause and effect and certainty. The debate needs to leave the political arena.

What has me scratching my head is if our schools, primary, secondary and colleges are doing such a poor job of teaching science where did all these climatoligists get educated? Did they somehow become experts in the time after their formal education by doing research that withthe methods they learned in that education? Do they have masters degrees? So they got a whole bunch smarter by doing a poor job of teaching undergrads? Do they have doctorates which theygot buy doing a bit more research that they learned the methods of while undergrads and then really learned while they were doing a poor job of themselves teaching undergrads as their PHD teachers were stuck in research? Tell me again when exactly climatology became a dicipline. Methinks economics has been a science for much longer and there are a whole host of differing schools of thought about that. Political Science, perhaps a misnomer, has also been a science for a really long time and yet I am mostly disappointed with some of the idiot ideas these PHDs come up with. Often they are so far wrong about things that I have lived through that I wonder where they were and what they were doing while they were formulating their opinions. My point is that more education does not make one smarter or correct it just means one has more education. But I would bet that most ofthem are better spellers than I.

(This message has been edited by BrotherhoodWWW)

Why not quote exactly? Good question that I can not answer. How often is anyone quoted vebatim? I'll wager not very often. I have been mis-qoted in the past by a local newspaper reporter. He asked why I and my family were at a support the troops rally to which I replied because I had family in the service and that my father had been in the service during Vietnam, although not overseas. This went to ".... because his father served in Vietnam." My FiL which also happens to be a big part of the support our troops movement in our small town has been mis quoted on numerous occasions. If you want a list of past occurances you'll have to do your own research as I do not keep lists of things like that. many times in the past I have watched or heard debates or press conferences or public addresses only to find the next day in both print and TV reporters reporting things that simply were not said. The fact is he said that his (Algore's) efforts led to the creation of the internet.

"The liberal" is referring to a collection of individual liberal's not to a single one. "That depends on what the definiton of is is" WJ Clinton. Just one example, I'm sure I could find others if I were to spend the time researching. Yet why bother? Just to show to you. I do not know a single person that retains every little scrap of information that they have ever absorbed and used to make up their mind about a topic. Perhaps my mind is full from the tings that really matter to me such as Scout skills, woodworking skills and knowledge of methods, fly patterns that I could tie for any number of different species of fish that may or may not imitate a specific type of insect, practical knowledge of home repair stuff like wiring, plumbing, turf management, etc.(This message has been edited by BrotherhoodWWW)

Beavah wrote:

"...snip..Can yeh even name a single adult in the program who wasn't a scout as a youth? Hard to generate new ideas with that mix, eh? No point blamin' outsiders, almost all of it is our own marketing and organizational choices.

Yeh make a good point, though, Pack378. Youth numbers ultimately depends on the number of quality adults givin' their time... willing to put on that uniform. I don't know of any council anywhere that has a bunch of excess enthusiastic adults around lookin' to start new units...."

Actually I can name several Adults in our unit that are not former youth members. In my small town (14,000 pop)and a neighboring town there has been at least one and posssibly two new troops in the past year plus at least one Pack. Yet your comments about rural conservative hit a bit close to home. I hope the future does not turn out as bleak as you anticipate. I get more good comments with the folks I talk to on a daily basis when I tell them of my plans to be gone next week to go to Scout Camp than I do negative ones. In fact I do not think I have had any negative comments.

I'm not sure Scouting needs an influx of new ideas to remain as a going concern and in some ways I think that there may have been too much of that already. Even though Scoutcrft skills may not be needed lifeskills as they were 100 years ago the ideals of good morals, leadership and service thaty Scouting teaches will always have value.

Scouting is also reacing out to females and some ethnic groups with some of the programs, Soccer and Scouting and Venturers. If more units would use advancement as just a method rather than primary focus retaining older scouts might IMHO be less of a challenge.

packsaddle wrote:

"OK, enough is enough. Everyone who wishes to rewrite history is free to do so. But regarding the whole internet thing, I wish they'd rewrite it after they read:

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

The alleged claim by Gore that he invented the internet was, in fact, a statement that was made in Bush campaign commercials, not by Gore. Oh well. If you have evidence to the contrary, Snopes is eager to see it."

As is most often the case Snopes has a slant as does the any other media outlet. Snopes' asertion that Gore meant something other than "invent" is meek at best. Words mean things, something that the liberal in our society fail to understand. A Search of dictionaries for the word invent leads to the conclusion that the exact phrase that Algore uttered means he invented the internet. Since the exact word he used has for a defination in several sources invent. Perhaps Algore did not mean to say what he said, but he said it! Most politicians at one time or another say things that they should not yet when the dems say outrageous things we are supposed to overlook it. Please! The right side gets no slack when they mis-speak. By the time one reaches adulthood one is expected to mean what one says. When folks make boasts that they can not back up when called on them some would have us believe their attempts at clearification should be accepted without comment.

I voted for him twice and even though it could not happen without modification to the Constitution I would again without hesitation or reservation! The things he has done that have not been reported in the main stream press are awe inspiring. I listened to or watched each and every post 911 address he gave before invading Iraq and I have to wonder did anyone else. My recollection is that he did not make the claims that the press and others have stated and his reasons were much broader than WMD and the attempt on his father's life. There were real human right's issues. Sadam was a threat to our security and that of our allies. He is not nation building yet the other side seems to want that to happen with their requests for timelines and progess markers.

The alternatives then were much much worse IMHO. The other side has not had a candidate in my lifetime that I would have ever voted for. I have serious disagreements with much of what they believe in. McCain belongs in the liberal side of the isle, about the only area he is conservative is when it comes to defense matters. His campaign finance reform law is an insult. The fact that W signed this and other liberal laws does not make me happy but no President has ever been perfect.

Interesting questions Usetobeafox! Methinks you were looking for a short answer and that you did not get one. I've sometimes seen answers to questions here. I've also seen as with any forum plenty of thoughtless answers like yeah what he said etc. Other answers that really have nothing to do with the OP's question. I've also seen plenty of thought provoking OP's which do not seem to generate thoughtful answers. Perhaps this is just the way forums are as I've seen the same things elsewhere.

I think lots of folks just want to know more of the story or have a sincere interest in the unsaid issues even though in many respects they really have no bearing to the OP question.(This message has been edited by BrotherhoodWWW)

When I first thought about paying my dues in the Lodge I am currently a member in I contacted one of my previous lodges, actually the Council Service Center of the new Council where I was a youth. They referred me to a person whom was said to have the records. I never followed through with my research and found I did not need any more than the year(s) of my ordeal and brotherhood plus the training I went through. I've since found all the dates that I needed written down of all places inside my first OA handbook.

My current Lodge took my word for what I said to be true. Good thing because I never had any documentation for the time when I was active in the lodge that predates my current lodge. Both Lodges that I was a member of while under 21 as a youth have merged to form two new lodges.

I agree that the clay targets is not the issue here. It may or may not matter depending on the camp's set-up and rules, but that is a seperate issue IMO. The facts as presented are a problem and should be addressed. The testimony that S held a knife to another's throat is a very serious matter and removal from scouting would be the very least I think should be done, depending on witnesses. In the adult world that is assualt. Charges in a juvenile court would not be too severe in this case. The throwing of a knife is almost as serious. requiring parental supervision for every Scouting event for at least two years seems to be at least prudent. I'd strongly consider telling the Scout that he is no longer welcome. The safety of the whole is more important than the individual.

As for the instigators of this there should be some serious counciling of these boys. Everyone envolved needs to understand how every action has a consequence and sometimes it is not intended.

I stand corrected on how many names each Scout can place on the ballot that he turns in. The advice to contact your local Lodge will get you the corrcet answers to all your questions.

For an election your local Lodge must be contacted. Since you seem to already know the requirements I'll not repeat them here. Adults are selected by nomination to the Lodge but not in the same way that youth. Adults must meet the same camping requirements within the past 2 years in order to qualify.

The number that can be elected in a given year is harder to explain. If you have 10 elegible Scouts each youth member present can cast a ballot with as many as 5 names. It is possible that everyone qualified gets elected and it is also possible that no one will be elected. Each elegible Scout must receive 50% of the votes. So if your Troop has 50 youth voting it would take 25 votes for a Scout to be elected. All youth members present vote. You must have a majority of your Troop present for an election to take place. Since the OA runs the election you do not have to cantact anyone after the election.

"The great thing about the OA is that there are no secrets." Crew21_Adv wrote int the thread that this topic was spun from.

Perhaps I am in the minority in my way of thinking but I believe in secrets. I have been trained in Youth Protection annually since returning to Scouting as an adult leader. I think it is possible to have secrets and still have all the necessary protections for the youth involved. I think over the years the OA experience has been cheapened by overbearing well intentioned adults. Tapping can and has been done in such a way in the past that was not hazing or hurtful. Elements of the ceremonies have been kept secret for years and as a matter of fact are still. Even though there are secrets parents questions are still answered, as are the questions of other people with a ligitiment enquirey.

There are many great things about the Order of the Arrow. It helps to keep older Scouts interest in the program. For many camps it provides needed service that keep the camps running. It honors deserving Scouts for living their lives acording to the Scout Oath and Law regarless of their commitment to reaching higher ranks. Of all the Boy Scout programs it truely is youth led, not just ideally as many Troops. The fact that it is not "secret" IMHO seems to pale when compared to these things that are great.