numbersnerd

If you can point to any violations of either, please do so. I find it interesting that someone brave enough to stand by their convictions and say so is considered un-Scoutlike. While others will consistently downvote people they disagree with without engagement. Not surprising, just interesting.

If or when he whines about what he thinks someone said to or about him, yes.

My suggestion would be to grow a thicker skin if you're going to converse on the interwebs.

Having defined rules and enforcing them with boys is already difficult enough without introducing moral relativism.

Agreed. I NEVER assumed that any of his posts were directed at any specific person. Despite that, he was basically tarred and feathered for having an opinion. And the response he received here is likely the reason others that may feel similarly don't say anything. And then silence is equated with acceptance. And so the false assumption that there is a majority or consensus is then entered as fact. There's definitely a danger to the "shout your opponent down" tactic. You get surprises like the Nov 2016 election. Instead of honest discourse, you create your own ambush.

If you'd bothered to read any of his other posts, you'd see the real reason for his stance. But keep poking at it, it's a nice quality to see in people here.

Simple solution: don't use texting. It's called SMS (Simple Message Service) for a reason. It's not a secure nor foolproof method of communication. There are services such as Remind that are better at submitting messages through SMS that have distribution lists and archival options. That is, if you insist on mobile communications. Email would be a better way to go if truly concerned about YPT (or CYA, however you want to call it).

Will preface this by saying I think the current styling of BSA uniforms is about the schlumpiest mess you'll see on a collection of youth and adults. I don't think there is anything more depressing than seeing a bunch of adults willing to devote their time and efforts in service and then making them don what poses as uniforms. It's the saddest sack of ---- collection of OD wrapped lumps when they get together. I think it actively sucks out a measure of enthusiasm from anyone wearing them. I refuse to buy official pants and shorts because they fit so bad and if you happen to find a pair that

Well, if this happens to is, we'll be asking what schools those packs recruit from and recruit there ourselves. Because to be fair to all of those families, if they want a boy-only option, we should be there to present them with one. That's fair, isn't it?

Except that this CO sponsors a Cub Scout Pack, not a Troop. So your point is not valid as Packs will be co-ed.

I think that's what rubs everyone the wrong way. Council staff calling CO's and not including the volunteers (who have a vested interest in the discussion.) A completely classless move. The IH asked if we had talked to them and was genuinely puzzled by it all. Definitely made a bad impression. At a minimum, if they are going to do this, they should have the courtesy (hmmm, why does that word sound familiar?) to include those delivering the program in the discussion at the outset. I was honest and told the IH I was not happy about what had happened. We actually have our act together, this littl

Why would they do that? The CO has explicitly stated that they do not support these changes and there are existing girl-focused organizations. Hypocritical to do otherwise. Boys are our core, not girls parents.

Echoing others above, yes DL's should be in the Comm meetings if you are wanting to implement a cohesive and successful program. Too much happens at the den level to not consider and include them in Pack planning. Pack events and activities should complement what the dens are doing and that can't happen without their input. Transparency is your best tactic in avoiding any conflict or suspicions of less-than-noble behavior. Any and all parents are open to attend our meetings. Even though they typically do not (which is fortunate as the room is already pretty full!), knowing they can has al

The pastor of our CO called me (current CM) after receiving a call from someone at District or Council (he's not sure which) pressing him for a decision on BSA4G within the next week. There was irritation all around. Me because of the unilateral approach to the CO without including unit leadership. Which, OK, I guess they can do, but it's bad relationship management. Who do they think the IH and CO staff are more familiar with? Local volunteers or a detached voice over the phone? Him because he's fed up with the social engineering aspect of effected changes. Evidently he gave the pro

Ummm...Whut? Thanks for doing the research to invalidate your opinion on the matter!

By advocating for a boy-only environment, that's exactly what they're doing.

But if you can't get the brand out there concisely and effectively, then the program doesn't matter as people will (rightly) assume that you can't get that together, either.

I have had parents barred from activities. Even though *I* personally had little doubt that it would be a problem, we have policies for a reason. That's why I call in District and Council to handle things. Follow policy and get backup. It keeps it from getting personal and everyone is clear about what the situation will be.

You asked the leader a question and got an answer about an individual with a documented incident. That's the framework under which he can participate. And to be honest, it's not that unreasonable. Not being a parent or legal guardian of any Scouts leaves it up to the discretion of leadership as to how they can participate. We don't allow anyone that is not a family member to attend overnights, and like your situation, they are not allowed to participate in any activity without two-deep supervision. It's CYA for everyone. It is leadership's duty to take whatever steps necessary to protect ALL

Good concept, might take a bit more structure to work across a wide user base. I've thought about this type of solution as well. Maybe form based with all the requirements by rank provided to be checked off/filled out/initialed. Then attach a photo of the relevant BSHB page. Conflict or questions about completions? Photo takes priority. Using something like Google Forms also creates a database of the info so it can be used for purposes such as tracking, status updates, verification of group activities, etc. What would be interesting to see is how quickly someone could put someth

Offering an accelerated advancement opportunity is a requirement. Sounds like a program change to me.

So girls are allowed to join and a program is created that let's them earn rank advancement in 2 1/2 months? All those who predicted program changes due to this were right after all.

So 2 1/2 months to complete a program we are told should really take the better part of 8 months?

@Eagle1993 Planning? That mainly consists of cutting noodles and buying supplies. We already have a gutter raceway built. Two 15 ft lengths sealed on the ends, mounted on a frame. They sit on sawhorses. Day of? I allow 2-3 hrs for the event. A come and go affair. We also set up our air rocket launchers for additional fun. It's more of a mixer than a competition. Returning Scouts reconnect, new Scouts and families see our group and get an intro to our Pack.

I find it interesting when the boys that were really into it don't return. We use recharter as an excuse to contact them even though we know they aren't coming back. It's usually along the lines of, "Jimmy didn't think it was fun". Which we interpret as, it isn't fun for the parents as we ask them to invest themselves into it as well. Then there is sports. Select teams seem to be the norm in this area, requiring hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars and thrice weekly practices in addition to multiple games every weekend. Makes me shake my head and wonder why parents one-dimension their