HelpfulTracks

On 1/12/2018 at 11:13 PM, LeCastor said:

Yeah, it was pretty cool!  And I got some sweet patches there.

On 1/12/2018 at 10:54 PM, Stosh said:

Does anyone have any inside scoop on why GBB gets a tad bit of recognition in the Scouting magazine after the long snub he's gotten?

 

On 1/12/2018 at 11:06 PM, LeCastor said:

It's really cool that a whole new generation of Scouters are getting exposed to Bill's legacy now that he has that nice write-up in Scouting.  If any Forum readers haven't read this article I encourage you to do so.  Then, if you want to know more, read Nelson Block's biography here.  Then, find yourself a copy of the 1st edition Field Book and get to reading!  You'll be glad you did.

Neat story....sort of.

I met GBB at the 1981 NSJ.

One of my troop mates grabbed me to go see Green Bar Bill, I recognized the name but was not fully aware of who he was. Apparently, neither was my troop mate because when i asked he replied he wrote our handbook. So we grabbed a couple of newly minted handbooks and went off the get them signed. We waited patiently as he talked to some other folks and signed autographs. Once we had them signed we ran off to do fun Scouting things. 

It was not until much later that I realized who GBB REALLY was and his significance to Scouting. I say "sort of" above because had I know more about who he was I probably would have stuck around and talked to him more and listened to him much more. But I was young, so maybe I wouldn't have. Who knows.

I still have that handbook and it is now one of my most treasured Scouting items.

On 1/12/2018 at 5:18 PM, NJCubScouter said:

Stosh, is there a topic in this thread?  I am not sure that one can be on-topic OR off-topic, if there is no topic at all.

On 1/12/2018 at 5:20 PM, Sentinel947 said:

He's making an off-topic thread. I'm actually kind of curious what kind of thread this could be. 

Sort of the Seinfeld of threads. A thread with a topic about no topic.

One question. Who is playing Kramer?

6 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

Do those crew members want to work toward Eagle? If they do, I'd encourage them to do the same Sydney and see if there is a path for them to do so. 

For the record, I don't advocate for her being given direct credit for work/requirements done un-officially. I support her being given requirement/rank transfer credit for things done in Scouts Canada officially, same as any boy could potentially receive.

Actually, no Crew members cannot count work done unless they were currently registered as Scout. So those young women cannot transfer that effort (with a few very specific exceptions). Once they are allowed to join a Troop any work done in one organziation counts toward the other, with the exception of Eagle/Summit projects.

I strongly disagree that she was trying to give the BSA a "public relations black eye." Just because you disagree with her viewpoint (one that clearly many in the BSA happen to agree, myself included), publicly voicing that viewpoint doesn't mean she was intentionally trying to harm the BSA. I think she did what we encourage all of our kids to do; Stand up for what you think is right, speak up if you feel something is unjust. 

To the contrary, I support her viewpoint of allowing girls in Scouting and have done so for a while now. I DO NOT support her tactics.

Rather than work with Scouters that agreed with her she has called out BSA as discriminatory. Rather than join Venturing and making her voice heard through the forums BSA provides she has worked from the outside starting petitions. Rather than support BSA though Venturing she has traveled hundreds miles to go outside of the country to join foreign Scouting associations. She has locked arms with NOW who have called for discontinued federal support (whatever that means) until her demands are met.

Regardless if she was making an effort or not to give BSA a black eye, she certainly has done things that have done so in many peoples minds. I do not think that is by accident. All to often in today's society, when people disagree the immediate fall back is to accuse them of bigotry, prejudice, sexism, etc. The language has been weaponized to achieve desired outcomes, even when the label does not apply.

12 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

 

"I have never seen any reference to Miss Ireland being in a Crew, nor have I seen her in photos wearing any uniform other the Scouts Canada. "

Is she now a U.S. resident?  Even a temporary resident?  Or a visitor who has not established residency in the U.S.

 

I note she was "briefly" a Scout in South Africa.  Really gets around.  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Touché, I missed the photo of her as an unofficial Cub.

I know the question of citizenship is rhetorical, but to my understanding she was born here in the Good ol' US of A.

1 hour ago, ItsBrian said:

They might have no choice. If there is already a BS troop with 8 scouts lets say, and 3 leaders. What if no other volunteers actually volunteer? There is no choice for the girls then. They will either not be able to form a troop, or they can just make one on paper and be with the BS troop.

They absolutely have a choice.

If you do not have the requisite number of girls or leaders, you do not start a unit. That is true for both boys and girls, and a crew.

If people are telling you they do not have a choice it because they do not understand or they are making excuses.

1 hour ago, RememberSchiff said:

I think a Girl Scout transferring in Boy Scouts would be stunned to be told she could not use power tools for her Eagle project that she had used for her Gold.

Don't get me started there. There are so many things wrong with G2SS in that regard. But that is a topic for a different thread.

I am not a fan of giving too much credit. Certainly not to the level I have seen people expect. 

We do not count completion of requirements in Scouting to count in Venturing or vice versa (unless the youth was in both units at the time.) 

I am much more comfortable giving credit for very specific requirements and then only with some level of validation.

9 hours ago, Frostbyte said:

To Helpful's point, if you have enough girls interested in starting a unit, you should be able to get the corresponding leaders. I do think the silliness of having to have two separate troops will dissipate pretty quickly though, as it is not efficient in time, money, and other resources. 

I sincerely hope not. I have watched both genders (particularly boys) change how they act around each other. I have even seen differences when adult females are on campouts.

I firmly believe that giving both genders space from each other is the best way for them to grow and learn.

As my son astutely points out, virtually every other activity they have is coed. Other than sports, Scouts is the one place it is just the guys. He has no problem interacting with the girls, he does so with Crew and multiple other organizations. He also says it is nice to have the option to do something organized that is just with the guys. He points out that very few of his Scout friends are in sports, so for them Scouting is the last place where they can hang with the guys.

I hope units do not decide to deprive the boys and girls that opportunity because it is more convenient for the adults.

9 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

HT,

A local SM was "Scoutmaster of the Year" for 2011.  "His" troop led the Council in FOS and popcorn sales.  Six Eagles given (slightly above average for a year in this unit).  Gold Journey to "Excellence" every year.

"Best"?  Should be pretty good, right?  Scoutmaster of the Year.

There were five Patrol Leaders.  They could not tell me the names of the respective patrols of which they were "Leader." (I asked because I saw the green bars but no patrol medallions.)

Stand outside the door and listen during the troop meeting.  Whom do you suppose you hear?

SM: "Have the patrols breakout during the meeting?  Why, the patrol leaders would be in charge."

Separate patrol activities during the year was equal to the number of patrol flags at the meetings.  Nada.

When playing games at the troop meetings, it was 1s vs 2s.

35 pp of troop bylaws drafted by the SM

The UC "knew" only that he was "the best Scoutmaster in the Council."

Scout training completed by the SM = ______________________________("You only need to like boys.").

 

 

That makes my head hurt 😞 

I will preface this by saying I am not advocating, nor am okay with many of the "short-cuts" that I am seeing advocated for Miss Ireland.

However, it appears that some are certainly advocating, or at least okay with, that approach.

So, if some feel strongly about "cutting some red tape" then why not put our own BSA Ventures at the head of that list? Would it not make more sense to give THAT break to some enterprising 16 or 17 year Venturer, who has earned, or near earning, her Summit Award?

I have never seen any reference to Miss Ireland being in a Crew, nor have I seen her in photos wearing any uniform other the Scouts Canada. She travel approximately 600 miles to Canada for a Scouting experience. I can only image how many Crews are within 600 miles of her home.

I would much rather see someone who has officially been part of BSA, who has supported the program and worked within the system, be given a break before a young lady who apparently has not joined a Crew, but rather joined Scouting in another Country. It makes more sense that two organizations (Crews and Troops) that already accept requirements completed in one program to count in the other.

Now, the rules are clear about the ability to double count across Venturing and Scouting, it can only be done when you are a CURRENT registered member of both units. So I doubt it will happen, and I think that is the best policy.

So why on earth would we be willing to count "un-official" work done as an "un-official member" before we would count official work done as a member of BSA in a Crew? Why would we be willing to accept work done in another Scouting association before we would be willing to accept work done in our own?

The ever growing drumbeat to cut Miss Ireland a break because she has worked so hard, seems to be very misplaced, when you consider the thousands of young women Venturing who have worked just as hard, who have supported BSA and have done so with trying to give the organization a public relations black eye.

Hmmmm - how to respond to this?

In various unit, district and council positions I have seen a wide range of adult to boy led units. What does the "best units" mean? I guess that is in the eye of the beholder. Part of how I judge the best units is by the level of boy-led they actually are.

Boy-led units, on average, tend to be less organized and less efficient than adult led in many cases. However, the top handful of our best units are very boy-led. They have been doing for so long and so well that it is their culture, and those units rock along like well oiled machines with virtually no adult being actively visible. You rarely see the adults anywhere near the activities and the units have the highest participation and enthusiasm.

The bottom handful of our units that struggle the most are very adult led. There are rules for everything and everything is in place, on time and boring as can be for the youth.

In the middle is a mix.

As for EBOR, I always try to talk about Patrol method and leadership.  A rough guess is 2/3 to 3/4 of the Eagle candidates do a good job of explaining patrol method. Of those, about half say their troop does a good job of being boy-led. Of the rest I would say half say it is up and down on boy-led and half say rarely or never.

So I would say that pans out to about 1/3 to 1/2 of our units do a good job of being boy-led. I have always considered that pretty bad percentage, but reading this maybe we are not doing so bad after all.

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

Well enough folks ignored BSA policy about girls that they are now being accepted into the movement. Ms. Ireland is just the most well know at the moment. What else would be new?

23 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

There are troops out there allowing girls to tagalong. Ms. Ireland is the most widely known. There have been others in the past.

No doubt there have been and still are. I am disagreeing with you that the driving force behind the policy change is units ignoring BSA policy. As I said, I have heard the drum beat for policy change for several years from unit leaders that did follow BSA policy. They have made long and consistent arguments and won converts, like myself, over to their way of thinking. Had those people simply gone about breaking the rules to force a change and would almost certainly still be on the side that wished to keep girls out.

posted to wrong thread

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

Well enough folks ignored BSA policy about girls that they are now being accepted into the movement. Ms. Ireland is just the most well know at the moment. What else would be new?

I don't agree with you on that one.

I have been hearing Scouters talk about bringing girls into Scouting for for several years now. To date I have yet to see a single Troop bring girls in. So I see no evidence that Troops skirting the rules, like Miss Ireland's, are what is driving the policy change, in fact right the opposite.

We do not charge for our SM/ASM Specific. Even though it is completely online now we still offer it, because of the value of face-to-face, Q&A and networking.

We do charge for IOLS. Because there are real cost involved. However, we budget carefully and always have a few dollars left over that we put towards SM/ASM specific so we can continue ot offer it free of charge.

We have also included SM/ASM specific in larger training events like University of Scouting, which does have a fee to cover real cost. So in essence if someone is taking SM/ASM Specific at that event they paying.

4 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Theoretically troops are suppose to remain all male and all female. As I was told by several Scouters, having a CO charter 2 separate troops is not practical. Financially having 2 separate groups doesn't make sense. And since there will be a strong chance that volunteers will be working with boys will also work with the girls, it won't be possible to have busy volunteers deal with another set of meetings each week, another weekend of camping a month, and another week of summer camp. Just as packs and troops have ignored national with allowing girls to do things with no apparent repercussions, you will have "paper" girls troops who in reality will be integrated into their own patrols in existing troops.

When I mentioned this at the town hall, everyone in the room acknowledged that this would happen, except the council president, commission, and Scout Exec. All three Ignored the statement and consensus. They, and the folks at national, know it will happen. Heck, in the CSE's  20 questions video, when asked about coed dens, spoke out of both ends of his mouth. First he said no, then he goes on about units he worked with with low numbers and how they combined dens and "as long as everyone works out of their own book, they're fine."

I heard similar conversations.

Some people seem to be upset that they will be FORCED to have coed units because there will not be enough leaders, enough meeting space, enough money etc. etc. etc.

My reply is simple. If you do not heave leaders, space or money then don't start a unit for girls.

And I am told that is not an option, because we have people beating down our door for girls to join. Okay, then you have leaders and money. Do just like you would starting a boy unit, parents need to volunteer, they need to pony up and help fund raise. And if there is not enough space they need to help find a CO with suitable space. And if they cannot, then there won't be a unit.

Coed units will only exist if people decide they want to ignore BSA policy, not because they are forced to create coed units.

9 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I know of only one. A troop folded and went to Trails Life. It took the Scout and his brothers 3 months to find another troop that met their needs. He was on a VERY tight schedule due to A) troop folding and trying to find another troop and B) some troop irregularities. Those were not found out until AFTER he transferred and was going for his Life BOR. Board had to reconvene so that he could complete 1 of the new requirements and he earned Life at 17y 7mos.  Long story short, old troop A) added age requirements to the ranks and B) didn't update advancement requirements. Whatever the requirements were for Scout through Life in the book they bought when they joined the troop was the requirements they used. He asked for, and received a 30 day extension.

That sounds both reasonable and in accordance with the exception rules. Adults made a decision to fold a unit, adults created irregularities. Both for a Scout that was previously registered and was pursuing an award he was eligible for. The exception was tightly time limited and the youth previously registered in time to complete them.

The exception rules are broad but pretty clear that Miss Ireland would not fall into the category to legitimately be awarded and exception.

21 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

The application for an extension states, "“If a youth foresees that, due to no fault or choice of his own, he will be unable to complete the Eagle Scout rank requirements before age 18, he may apply for a limited time extension."

Personally, I only know of two extensions given, one for medical (hospitalization) and one for something military-related.

From the Scouting Magazine website they list these as some considerations for extensions:

Hospital stay, disabling injury, significant employment conflict, relocation, family emergency, natural disaster, severe and/or unexpected weather, unforeseen actions of others. 

TO continue where you left off.

When a time extension is requested, the Scout should continue working on the requirements as processing occurs. In most cases,
for a request to be considered the following five tests must be met.
1. The member joined or rejoined—or became active again after a period of inactivity*—in time to complete all requirements before turning 18.

Miss Ireland would not qualify under the first test alone.

Just now, EmberMike said:

Extensions aren't granted exclusively for disabilities and abuse. Pretty convenient to only mention those exceptions to make your argument. 

Not convenient, Just the ones I have seen and heard of. But if you can point some actual exceptions that have been granted and that don't fall under those categories, then by all means, please do.

9 minutes ago, EmberMike said:

They do make exceptions for people with great stories. 

I think that's what I don't get in a lot of the arguments against this. She wouldn't be the first to get an extension. She wouldn't be the first to (potentially) transfer rank requirement credit to BSA from Canada, if that is even something she's considering doing (I haven't seen anywhere her saying she would do that).

Would this all be considered "special treatment"? Sure. But it's not special only to her, as plenty of boys have had these kinds of exceptions made for them. 

The one thing that might happen that of course would be unique to her would be to be granted permission to start in the BSA officially before her gender is allowed to officially join. That's unique to her for obvious reasons. Everything else, and the various paths she has to Eagle, could potentially be done using no new exceptions and nothing that National hasn't done already for other scouts. If National says next week that she's free to join officially, and if my understanding of the story is correct and she is currently 16, she can still make it by 18.

First, by it very nature this is unlike any exception ever given to a boy.

Second, I have seen exceptions for disabilities, and for time lost for extreme medical conditions. I have heard for exceptions for time lost for kids coming from very abusive homes and extreme poverty, i.e. homeless.  

Are you seriously comparing those exceptions to Miss Ireland's situation?!?

1 minute ago, EmberMike said:

If National signs off on either A.) Approval to begin with a troop immediately or B.) Approval for an extension to continue working towards Eagle past 18, and then she does it, that's not breaking the rules, right? 

I know that what National does isn't always met with praise around here. I've been critical of some of the things they've done, even within the context of the "girls in scouting" discussion. But what they put on paper and sign off on is the rule, whether we agree with it or not. So if they give her a path to Eagle and she fulfills it, she's an Eagle Scout, same as me and everyone else who earned it and had National sign off on it. 

A & B would be the exceptions I was referring too.

And if that is an exception that BSA is willing to make, I would rather them just do away with the age requirement altogether. Why make an exception for her an not everyone with a great story.

2 hours ago, Stosh said:

Oh, it is a great analogy.  I took all my classes at the local University and I will bet dollars to donuts that I wasn't going to bet my diploma from Yale or Harvard no matter how much pull my dad may have had.  Try that transfer stuff, maybe half will transfer at best. 

Maybe a better analogy is citizenship.

You see my bother over here, he has applied for citizenship. He met the eligibility requirements, but I didn't. But, I still went everywhere he did and we worked together at XYZ company. He passed all the interviews and test and I took them too, because the local department bent the rules. Oh, by the way, I went off to Canada and became an official Canuck. So you should make me a citizen here also.

Makes perfect sense.

5 hours ago, EmberMike said:

There's no precedent for this kind of thing. And it also doesn't have to be a Pandora's Box as @HelpfulTracks mentioned. This girl is unique, she's been in and around Scouting her whole life. She's active in other scouting organizations. Maybe this would set a precedent for other girls in the same situation, but how many girls could we really be talking about, who have the relevant experience she does? Can't be more than a handful. 

Let her try it. She's proven herself resourceful, motivated, smart, and certainly brave. All qualities I'd like to see in any Eagle Scout. I think she's earned the right to at least apply for an exception/extension and let National hear her out on it.

 

4 hours ago, EmberMike said:

Just to give a little clarity to the argument that she is not just any girl trying to fast-track an Eagle badge, her Scouting resume includes the following: 

• 12 years in Scouting as unofficial member of a Pack and Troop (Troop 414 in NY). 
• Arrow of Light recipient
• Member of Scouts Canada
• Member of Scouts Canada Venturing program
• Earned Canada's Chief Scout's Award (highest award in program)
• Full participant in Pack and Troop activities, trips, camping, etc. 
• Patrol Leader in her Troop
• Completed rank and merit badge requirements, but without badge recognition

If this opens a "Pandora's Box" and there are numerous girls with the same credentials who want consideration for Eagle, I'd be both incredibly surprised and incredibly impressed. 

1 hour ago, EmberMike said:

I'm not personally aware of any other girl with the Scouting background Sydney has, or with her list of awards and achievements in both the BSA and Scouts Canada. She'd be a rare exception, if she is made an exception at all in this case. 

I do get your point, if you let one girl in early, the question of letting them all in early does come up. But I believe that question is easily squashed when it is pointed out that they'd be letting one girl with a stellar 12-year Scouting resume in as an exception, and that her background plays significantly into that decision. 

Yes, she is unique. Every situation, every person is unique.

The requirements are not, they are standard.

So we change the standard just for her, because she is unique. So now everyone that is unique has a precedent to work from.

What about the poor girl from Iowa, who lives in a community of Troops that followed the rules? Lesson learned, follow the rules, and you have good character. Don't follow the rules and you get what you want, and a Eagle Scout to put on your resume. But little else. I think we fail them both in that circumstance. Maybe more importantly, you are telling Troops around the country, that it is okay to ignore policy, do it long enough and with enough good press any its all okay, we will reward you.

If there is a legitimate way for to EARN Eagle Scout, then more power to her, I will wish her well and congratulations.

But, if that path requires, bending or breaking rules, or making exceptions, then no.

On 1/8/2018 at 8:47 AM, RememberSchiff said:

In the second session, representatives from Electrolux, Brandgenuity (represented brands: BMW, Banana Boat) and Boy Scouts of America discussed how corporate brand licensing has become a core business development strategy to raise brand popularity and expand their customer base.

http://news.sys-con.com/node/4216773

Why? Who?  How much did the trip cost? 

Okay, since I have been involved deeply in branding in my professional life I feel the urge to chime in here.

BSA has a very strong brand, both nationally and world wide. Brand equity, value, recognition, recall and a whole slew of other metrics are strengths for BSA.

If BSA did not have a strong brand do you think GSUSA would have spent so much effort and money after the last policy announcement? BSA is certainly using it's brand to their advantage in bringing girls into Scouting. If Trail Life had made the same announcement instead of BSA I don't think you would have heard a word from GSUSA, because the BSA brand is seen as a threat and Trail Life is not.

Licensing is not just about selling products, it is just as important to protect the brand and keep companies from using the brand in ways that would damage BSA.

But, BSA does license their brand for products. All those backpacks, sleeping bags, compasses, water bottles, prints (and apparently burial urns) etc. with BSA logos on them in the Scout Shop are licensed. Businesses like Polaris, Buck Knives, Jansport, Osprey, Case Knives and on and on, pay BSA big dollars to be associated with the BSA brand.

The cost of the conference? Maybe nothing more than the employees salary. Large conferences and conventions almost always pay hotel and food cost, very often they will pay travel as well. Sometimes the pay the speakers a stipend to attend, particularly if they have high brand recognition. Regardless, organizations pay to send employees to these events because there is value in learning what is going on in the market, in networking in being visible. In that regard BSA is no different than any other company. If BSA did pay the full cost of attending then my guess it is still money well spent.

I firmly believe those Scouts that are left to their own devices (and time frame), enjoy and value Scouting more.

My son didn't get into Scouting immediately after Cubs. When he did he spent almost a year at Scout, mostly due to sports and trying to find a Troop that did the things he liked. He then shot up to First Class with the minimum time in TF & 2nd Class. He spent almost a year as First Class. He got Life 6 months after Star. He has been Life for about 9 months and has only a vague idea of what he wants to do as an Eagle project. He has almost 2 years left, so he is in no rush.

My wife was initially all over me saying he needs to advance. I said he needs to advance when he is ready to advance and only he can decide that.

Meanwhile, he has severed in multiple PoR, he is deep into the Order of the Arrow and has been/is a Chapter and Lodge officer and Sectional committee chair. He has a bunch of merit badges, been to Jamboree and is headed to Philmont with Trail Crew and going to NOAC this Summer. He has joined a Crew for more high adventure. He is looking to the WSJ and Sea Base or Northern Tier the following Summer. He is learning what it means to pay his own way and how hard it is to do.

He has his own goals, which include Eagle, earning more MB than his old man, and to serve in higher office in OA. He is thinking about the National Medal for Outdoor Achievement (because he already close with everything he has done), as well as maybe the Hornaday, because he thinks it cool to do conservation. Sometimes he sets a goal and then changes his mind or has to re-prioritize. He was hot to get BSA Lifeguard and Mile Swim at one point, but I think those have fallen off of his goals.

The bottom line is he is having fun, learning many new things, choosing what is important to him and having a great Scouting experience.

My wife got it at some point and we rarely talk about advancement unless our son brings it up.