DuctTape

If I were in charge, I would have used the CIS idea as the catalyst to merge all 3 (now 4) citizenship mBs into one grand Citizenship mB. This is probably not a popular opinion, so be glad I am not in charge. 😜

https://www.scouter.com/search/?&q=Citizenship in society&search_and_or=and&search_in=titles

Bear in mind I have zero experience with Lone Scouts, nor with scouts who have such significant challenges which could necessitate a need to be separate from the group. That said, IMO any part of the Scouting, including Lone Scout should be available to any scout regardless of disability.

In other non BSA organizations, etc... Resident Camp was contrasted with Day Camp, meaning you stayed for the nights.

Scout-led. 'nuff said.

I recall some events, patches were only available to "early-bird registration".

I agree Matt. I have always looked at advancement and the requirements as part and parcel of the scouting adventure. If the program is diverse, and adults do not shortchange the kids, the requirements will be accomplished by and within a quality program. You are correct there is a disconnect from advancement and program. or worse, the program is advancement. Example: Every campout the scout should be presenting themselves to their PL with proper clothing and a complete pack. This should be SOP. It is SOP when I lead trips for adults. I provide lists and help to ensure they have what

I do not believe the SM clears the scout for the BOR. The SM conference is not necessarily the last requirement signed off, nor is the SM conference a check of readiness or completion of the other requirements. It is the responsibility of BOR to ensure completion of the requirements. While we may quibble over pass/fail, the BOR can just be suspended and scheduled to reconvene at a later date. Another aspect which I believe needs further discussion is the concept of not penalizing scouts for adult error. It appears that this has been taken to the extreme. What constitutes error vs outright

IMO Charting and membership (youth and adults) should be completely separate. The Charter is an agreement between Council and the COR. Membership is something else entirely. IMO, the Charter should not include any membership names of youth or adults, except the COR who attests to the current numbers of youth and registered adults delineated by troop and committee.

Ours has as well.

What is allowed vs what should be done in executive sessions? Having served on an executive board (not associated with scouting), a well run board with ethics (and sometimes by law) will only discuss matters in executive session which outside disclosure may harm the organization financially, or a person. For example, discussion regarding personnel matters: the specifics, legal and fiduciary consequences would be discussed in executive session however the vote (and arguments for/against) would be transparent to the rest of the committee. Sale of real property, the discussion in executive s

Having served on a jury where multiple charges were presented. This type of thinking was not present at all. What the multiple charges allowed us to do was to deliberate on the specifics of each charge to determine if the defendant was guilty of any of them. In our case, and I surmise in most others, the difference in the charges was the particulars in the law specific to each charge. The judge was excellent in providing instructions so we understood exactly what was needed to have been proven by the DA beyond a reasonable doubt to support each of the different charges. Some of them were unbel

If she is in the position, it counts. If she is failing to perform, then she should no longer be in the position. My initial thought was also, 5 scouts and an SPL? Superfluous position. You have one patrol, and the PL.

What I observe in the highest performing units: Patrols planning and executing outings independently (and sharing/advising via the PLC.) Scouts taking personal responsibilty for their own advancement (and encouraging/helping others in their Patrol) SM/ASMs using the Socratic Method to help a PL, SPL, etc. make decisions. (and recognizing the instances when these questioning techniques need to be at the SM request). Regular, ongoing SM conferences throughout the year, not just as an advancement check-off. (Every meeting conferences are happening.) Troop Committee has m

Welcome! Having a a strong and functional Comm will make your job easier. You can focus on program as is your responsibility. Look forward to hearing your success stories.

The "approval" as I have always believed is solely whether the Committee is able to provide the necessary logistical and financial support. ie, two-deep leadership, transportation, permits, etc. The only reason for "disapproval" IMO is b/c the troop committee is unable to facilitate providing e.g. enough drivers for the activity. The primary purpose of the Comm is to support the Scouts plan, not approve/disapprove their plan.

IIRC BoRs were originally conducted by volunteer community members of high esteem with the primary purpose of helping scouts learn and grow in the interview process; to learn to sell themselves to prospective employers. It had little to do with actual rank, but was just another means, purposely created to which scouts would grow. It is beautiful to see how all the methods and processes when understood and used with fidelity underscore this basic tenet of Scouting; Growth. I try to remember this with all I do. Every conversation, every suggestion, every decision is predicated on whether it

My first take on your latest post: It appears (please correct me if I am mistaken) the SM and PLC are not leading the program? It appears parents are making decisions. If the parents are ASMs, then they are to be following the direction of the SM. In their absence, a specific ASM should be the acting SM, and this person should be chosen beforehand by the SM. Other parents are "observers only" they should not be interacting with the scouts much at all. They should never be interferring with the program, which undermines the SM or the PLC. Troop committee members are also just observe

If scouts and scouters are not following the Scout Law, and the associated behaviors are ignored then an additional code of conduct will just be another list of specific behaviors which are repeated and tolerated by inaction. IMO Focus on behaviors and the damage to relationships, not a piece of paper.

Ugh!!!! Might as well begin folding up the tent now. There is no way in hades this promotes any of the aims utilizing any of the methods. IOW, it ain't Scoutung. I won't argue about it b/c any hypothethicals, "but if the scouts did..." would be pure hogwash. None of any potential hypotheticals would manifest in reality, except as an anomaly. Edit: and *I* worked in the computer gaming industry at one time.

I guess I am used to a cub program which was 95% done at the den level. Dens met completely separately from the pack. The only interaction with otjer dens was pinewood derby and B&G. Pack meetings were rare and short, and we just stayed together as a den or with our parents.

As far as procedures for the scenario. The GTA is intenionally vague about a specific process but provides descriptors to help a unit leader navigate how to be respectful to the other adults and scouts while ensuring the mB requirements were actually completed as written. The gta is not written in a step by step, must do list, process, but invokes the scout law through discussion. IMO, this is the way it should be; less legalistic, more scoutlike.

I use a tarp quite a bit. I do not bring poles for it, and rarely need them. I pitch the tarp using available trees. For raising the center in a dining hall style pitch, I typically use a center tie out and raise it up from an overhanging branch, or a run a ridge line between trees to which the center gets tied onto. In the last 20 years, I have used a pole, but it was a dead branch I cut to length. I would encourage folks to have the scouts not bring tarp poles. For a variety of reasons: The rigging of the tarp itself is an exercise in problem solving and utlizing scout skills

I remember when the world crest was given after attending an international event. Regarding neckerchiefs, when did they change from the cub scout yellow for all cubs, then a blue webelos? Having a different neckerchief for bobcat, wolf, etc... seems excessive. At the troop level, they have only one, except an Eagle Scout might wear an Eagle neckerchief.

There is a problem when a newsletter and the GTA contradict, and worse when sections of the GTA contradict. In this case, I do not see a contradiction. The "should" is specific to "before starting", but the conversation is still required and the SM signature acknowledges said conversation.