cyclops

Certainly.  I never suggested that slang has been "repealed."  Especially if never "enacted," it cannot be  "repealed."

 

Nor have I even suggested that there is anything "wrong" with "Class A," for example, beyond newbies have to be told what in the world "A" is vs "B." Hardly worth getting all fired up over.  Call it anything you like.  Call it a "pickle."

 

Anyone have an answer to my original question or my follow-up in post 32?

I'm going to defend TAHAWK here and I agree with him. Hardly worth getting all fired up over. And never, EVER mention the 'P-word'.

"Flashy"? Talking about socks and garters? How about "dapper"? Or "neat" or "keen"? "debonair", "dashing"?

Plus, I want to thank TAHAWK who reminded me of Hanlon's Razor (great line) which I followed down the 'rabbit hole' to the Battle of Thermopylae and on to various topographical features I sometimes deal with, to the origins of the names of some plants, back up to biogeography and the early European exploration of South America and Africa to continental drift - to coal mining and air pollution....it's a great path of adventure and all because of that wonderful reminder. Thanks.

" Easy way to introduce challenging activities in a safe environment."

 

 I think they have an app for that.....

I gotta remember that line,

I'm glad to read that things are settling out. Once the 'adult management' part is squared away, you'll really be able to enjoy working with the boys and the cubs are a LOT of fun to work with.

I agree and I'm sorry to hear about your friend. That risk is always in my mind when I am in areas of the world where tropical diseases of all kinds are available. Those unexpected tragedies are always available and knowing they're there gives greater appreciation for every moment of life. It can all be taken away so quickly.

I hunted and fished alone and sometimes with buddies as a boy. Fishing from 8 years, hunting from 10. Cleaned and ate what I caught and killed. I wandered the woods alone most of the time, sometimes with buddies. We climbed cliffs, no ropes, swam in lakes, no lifeguard, played on dam spillways, lots of risks. Scouts, in comparison, was protected and tame. But it was about the only option for testing ourselves against each other. Patrols competed with other patrols. Boys competed with other boys. We all had fun and mastered scoutcraft.

If our parents had known the kinds of things we did and if they had the abilities to control like they have today, I suspect we all would have heard those helicopters. It was a different time.

Well this discussion has sure convinced me of the value of this 'game'...NOT. It seems to have produced an effect that is the opposite of what is intended. If this is supposed to cultivate team spirit I'm not sure what I'm reading indicates much success. But if the goal is to demonstrate that 'the collective' approach is how to best succeed, when I see individuals set aside their selfish interests for the benefit of the collective of cooperators, there seems to be a Marxist similarity.

The point is to show you can win by mutual cooperation, instead of thinking about yourself or your small group.

Interesting.

Was this exercise designed by a communist?

Agree with the others. Unit problem. Don't sweat the small stuff. Wait for 'graduation' and then carry on.

Congratulations on the most dramatic turnaround for a unit that I've ever heard of. Enjoy that and ignore the noise.

This is also confusing now. Is the point of the game a lesson in ethical behavior or is it a lesson in how to screw the competition? Or is it a lesson which equates the two?

You're very welcome. As for the digression, OK. So....please refresh my memory, what does that have to do with belief systems?

"Someone should have told this scout that full field uniform is not proper to be doing heavy park clean up in."

 

And he'd be the first to disagree with you.    As far as he is concerned it is proper to wear the full uniform for any and all scout activities.  I never saw him out of uniform except when he took his summer camp swim test at the waterfront.

And I believe you on this...because that was a quote from your earlier post. Just wanted to clarify

Yes, all of our funds were held in the CO accounts.  I deliberately set it up that way when I was IH.  I will explain my reasoning.

 

We did not have a unit committee member as treasure.  A Boy Scout was the treasurer.  If the boys needed to go shopping for something, he could just go to the office and sign out some petty cash.

 

My intent was not to take control away from the unit committee, it was to give more control to the boys.

I agree. We did something similar except we do have the unit committee treasurer. There's no reason why the unit treasurer can't keep a spreadsheet to account for everything while allowing the checks and the bank account to be the responsibility of the CO. It works well as long as the CO is willing to do it. All the CO treasurer needs to do is write the checks and provide some oversight (and vice versa) for the unit treasurer.

This is interesting. How much does this cost? Who gets the money? Where does it go?

Sorry Stosh, I thought you were talking about the other photo.

Who cares?

Evidently no one. That's the point.

I don't know about that. From your earlier post it seems clear that the boy is one of your scouts. You said it yourself. Horizon was merely commenting on the lack of a helmet. That, combined with your statement that the uniform was inappropriate...

As for the adult, I was thinking about the other guy behind the one who IS wearing the protective gear.

If that is your attempt to compare religious belief systems to black holes, I appreciate your sense of humor.

A theorem is inherently correct if it checks out mathematically. Theories are quite different. I'm not sure why the fact that a theorem is not a hypothesis is relevant to this topic.

"Turning a big ship" is a perfect analogy. Just keep at it and know that in the long run it will eventually turn.

Horizon, lol, the way I 'read between the lines' on that photo was that it is a photo of Stosh and one of his scouts on the vehicle. I suspect that's why he knows so much detail about it.

But I admit I could be wrong about it.

You're right. Those two were such spectacular failures of those religious-base ideas I guess I just didn't consider them. (my apologies to Galileo)  I'm not sure what you mean by "logical implications" of those hypotheses. Beliefs that get in the way are mostly something that happens to 'scientists' and not science, per se.

I know next to nothing about plasma physics but what little I've read indicates that the topic remains consistent with the way science usually works: an idea, a hypothesis, tests, an explanation, lingering questions, new observations, new ideas, new hypotheses, new tests, new explanations. This is a process that can be found throughout scientific fields. The concept of 'belief' is one that might be held by an individual but in science, 'belief' does not necessarily have the same basis in faith that 'belief' does in religion - and while a scientific opinion might be held very strongly, it is something that is always subject to modification or rejection if evidence is found to support such action.

And as you pointed out, if we construct good hypotheses to test ideas that arise from religious doctrine, they can indeed be rejected.

Thanks LYV, I'll give that a try. It might help with my view of these things. I note that complaints about photos posted in this thread don't begin to compare to what I saw in Issues and Politics. How that stuff was allowed to be posted is beyond my ability to understand. But you're right. Maybe it's best to just avoid that forum altogether.

 

If I put a mentor pin on my uniform does that mean I'm no longer in uniform and can drink alcohol?

Stosh, according to what seems to be your reasoning, the answer is 'yes'. The pin has violated the uniform code.

According to my view, the answer is 'no'. The uniform is still there and intact.

But it is not relevant to me because I do not drink alcohol. I'm sensing that alcohol is an important part of life for many members. If so, I'm sorry for you.

TAHAWK, I understand your point. The 'golden rule' is a two-edged sword that sometimes cuts twice as much but only in one direction. I have been reading the old threads in these forums and your advice would be very well applied to many others - do I need to name them for you? I'm a newbie and the reality of the so-called 'standards' for these forums can be found by reading the old threads. It isn't pretty. But I have learned by example (or role-model, as many like to refer to it)

I can read the results of members who do their best to be scoutlike, thus granting through courtesy a modicum of lenience to their antagonists, and then basically get 'run over' by scouters who seem to take pleasure in doing so and with especial ease because of that lenience. The lesson in those examples is something different if you don't want to get bullied by someone in these threads. Or haven't you noticed? A scout is also brave and will stand up to such persons and tell the truth if that is what is needed.

But all this, including this particular conversation, is about someone wanting to wear a pin on a uniform. Can you believe it?

To apply the same twisted logic that Stosh thinks is a version of 'fuzzy logic', you can take a person who is in perfect full uniform and add a grain of sand and it will still be a uniform. You can add a whole handful into the shirt pocket and it will still be full perfect uniform. You can add a leaf from a tree. It will still be a uniform. You can add a pin. The full uniform will still be there. Add two pins, the uniform is still there. And this, to me, is inconsequential.

What is just astounding is that by adding that one pin, people think we are on the road to perdition. (which I think was a really nice touch that ya lazima vumbi...whoever....added to show how ridiculous this entire argument is).

And I hope YLV will continue to wear that vacation pin from his cub as long as he wants to.

"Over hill, over dale, we will hit the dusty trail and those those doughnuts keep rolling along".

Thank you for adding to my vocabulary.

 

I have a word or two for your consideration: "kind";  "courteous."

Courteous? Have you been reading these threads much, particularly Issues and Politics? That point of the law seems to have dropped off the list somehow. Courteous, in these forums, is a thin veneer that presents a polite face but which covers much that is most definitely not courteous in reality.

As for kind, believe me, I am being kind.

It's one thing for someone to refer to a concept they know nothing about. Everyone does that, it's only human and that doesn't bother me.

It's another thing entirely for them to think they know something after doing a Google search and then to pretend to teach it by pontificating at length. Bloviate.

Have you Googled the term, 'bloviate'?

 I live in a major metro area.

Interesting. I was surprised to see your return and did some reading and found this:

eagle77, on 23 Jun 2015 - 8:52 PM, said:

  Wrong, they are both men living right around the corner from you or in Anywhere, USA.

To which you replied:

"Nope. Not in my town. It's small enough we would know." and later implied that your town had a population of 300, basically a small town in Montana. Did you move since that time? To a major metro area?

Nope, it's more like ridicule of your ridiculous extension of the topic.