elitts

*Sigh* Yet another example of BSA only thinking about the question they want to answer and not considering what implications that answer might have in other contexts. I really wish they'd get their act together and start having their FAQs and publications reviewed by someone outside the "Group-think" at the corporate offices. While this answer does respond directly to the question being asked, anyone who actually understood how people work would realize that this answer, specifically talking about a CO "running" a Summer Camp program for other troops, will definitely be mistakenly inter

And that presupposes the idea that someone other than the abuser should be held to be at fault at all. I'm still not a fan of that whole idea in the first place except in the relatively few cases I've seen where something clearly got ignored or covered up by the BSA. As much as it would be nice to get a settlement done and over with, there is a growing part of me that would like to see the BSA say "If you can't accept a settlement that leaves us with enough resources to continue to operate, it makes more sense for us to use every dollar we would have had to fund a settlement to a

I only have one question and one comment about the news story: (Question) What the heck is she doing using a bow saw to cut down a standing tree? (assuming that wasn't simply a staged photo) (Comment) The fact that she thinks having earned Eagle Scout in 20 months means she's gotten everything possible out of the program does not say great things about her mindset with regards to participating in scouts. Though I'll admit this viewpoint isn't exactly uncommon. I've never questioned a bench project that had thought and planning with regard to appearance and durabilit

I agree that a "discussion about porn" isn't related; however, I will argue (just one time) that the existence of porn IS related by virtue of it being a potential factor in YPT. I mean, my troop can't be the only one where there has been a scout caught watching inappropriate material on a cell phone. So when that happens, is it just a teen/tween being a standard kid or is that scout now a possible sexual abuse victim (because someone exposed them to it or allowed them to be exposed to it) that the Scoutmaster needs to report to Council and possibly the Police/Child Services? That said

The pack I was Cubmaster of had the rule that each scout had to have a "responsible adult" that remained on site. That didn't mean that I didn't occasionally offer to be that "responsible adult" for someone's kid who had to leave, but that was my choice at any given time. We didn't allow kids to just be randomly dropped off the way we do in Scouts.

Yeah, I've seen that one too... Great! Lets water down the concept and criminalize more people at the same time. I can already picture the headline. Some 14-year old gets found looking at a porn site and between an outraged parent and a DA looking to get re-elected using a "tough on crime" platform, suddenly the classmate he/she got the link from is on trial for a sex crime. And since I want to be crystal clear, there is a clear and significant distinction between an adult exposing a youth to porn as a grooming tool and kids talking about and sharing that stuff among themselves.

Another factor for any non-profit board of an organization that seeks grant funding is that many (if not most) major grants want to know if all of the Board members are donors. In some cases you aren't eligible or may receive lesser consideration if your Board donation rate isn't 100%. Of course, this can be accomplished by requiring a minimum $1.00 donation or a minimum $1000 donation.

I do have to say here that the crudely phrased "Seat for sale" concept is going to be true in just about any non-profit Board of Directors. Not so much because someone willing to donate 10k or 20k is really that big a value to the organization, but because anyone able and willing to cough up that much money will probably know plenty of other people who can also cough up that much money. Most Boards of Directors will have a certain number of seats that can be used for members that may not be "workers" but who provide special access or connections the organization finds valuable.

Any council that did approve a merger with another council that hadn't gone through bankruptcy first would be exhibiting a practically criminal level of fiscal irresponsibility and negligence.

I agree about the council fee being more tolerable. But that's If (and only if), they use those more stable funds to actually provide competent administrative and record-keeping services. No more submitting MBC applications 3 or 4 times before they get processed. No more taking 2-3 months between MBC list updates. No more losing our Scouter's award requests or Insert other media taking 6 months to get them signed by the appropriate parties. Paying $60 now vs $12 before and getting the same sort of shoddy service they've been providing would be intolerable. If they could do their

I don't know if the issue of someone trying to just walk away from their responsibilities has ever come up, but in my troop, once you commit, you are committed to covering any costs associated with your commitment. So if we book a spot to Philmont for you and you pay the deposit to sign up, you are responsible for the whole thing. However, if someone has ever become unable to go, we would also search far and wide for someone else to fill the spot and get them reimbursed. As far as I can recall, this has always been possible when someone has had to back out, though I think one time they ende

In the post where someone mentioned their troop doing a car wash, they were explicitly doing the washes for "your donation" not "for $5 but we'll take whatever you give". There is something of a difference in intention and definitely a difference in the effect. I've worked for organizations that try this both ways for event programs. If you sell the event programs for $1, you will often make significantly less money than if you advertise it as "Please make a donation". Because while many people in the second scenario will just take a program and walk away, the average donation from th

Pretty much every news comments section I've ever read starts out with complaints about how "the Liberals this" or "the Conservatives that" and then devolves from there. Particularly when anonymous comments are allowed. It's usually a little better if comments are only permitted by people with active (and in particular, paid) memberships. It can also be a little better if people are required to sign up under their own names. Heck, it doesn't even matter if the subject of the article is political. There's always at least one troll out there just waiting to chum the comments with someth

I feel like the core of the problem here is that you asked the "wrong" question and, as bureaucrats and customer service folks are wont to do, they answered the question as asked without anyone thinking "I wonder if there is another way to get this done". If the important issue here is getting the scout his Eagle Board of Review, I think PACAN is correct in his approach. If the scout can prove 6 "non-contiguous" months of active scouting, I could easily see the Advancement Committee granting a BOR even without a SM conference in these circumstances. But if your desire is to be

Except that when we were selling the popcorn in the 80s, it was only "pretty expensive". The popcorn has gotten progressively more overpriced as time has passed. In the late 80s/early 90s, the box of microwave popcorn was something like 50% more expensive than the popcorn in the store. Now the markup is more like 400+% higher on virtually everything. AND, I'd argue that the quality has fallen somewhat at the same time. (I remember it actually tasting better than most of what was available in the stores, but I'll admit that could have just been inexperienced taste buds.)

Particularly when all the advice on selling from BSA is that you shouldn't be marketing the product, you should be "Selling Scouting".

I'm seriously surprised that more councils didn't do this as soon as regular litigation started popping up in the news. Transfer the camps to 3rd party non-profits with charters that forbid them selling the property and requiring them to be maintained as camps for youth activity and then lease them back to BSA. There's a good reason why places like hospitals have technically separate corporate entities to hold title to property and conduct fund-raising and endowment building activities.

The US Marshals Service is not "the police"; and while I know there are idiots out there advocating the elimination of every law enforcement agency, that's not what most people chanting that phrase are talking about. They are clearly talking about the local police forces they interact with on a regular basis. Not that I think "defund the police" is a reasonable idea, but misrepresenting things doesn't help anyone. I mean, considering the motivations of a crime has always been involved in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Someone who steals $100 of diapers and bab

Just as a reminder, what the BSA's publication actually said was: "The Boy Scouts of America stands with Black families and the Black community because we believe that Black Lives Matter." In fact the article you linked specifically states they ARE NOT supporting any political viewpoint or organization but that they stand behind the idea that existed before the organization that co-oped the phrase. Much like someone can stand behind the idea that the USA is best served as a Republic, without supporting the Republicans.

Chicago might be something of an exception. I'd guess that the history of rampant political abuse and corruption there has left the population a little more numb than places that didn't have a R. Daley in their past.

That would probably have worked 5 years ago, but now? I think those same legislators that are passing these laws due to political pressure would get absolutely lambasted in the media if they tried that.

Honestly, I hope that in one of these states that stupidly removes the Statute of Limitations they get such a massive response of people suing schools and government sponsored youth groups/programs that the rest of the states around the country learn their lesson and a decide not to make such stupid choices. I'm sure there is plenty of liability out there just waiting with: schools, local recreational sports leagues, former Juvenile detention inmates, children in foster care, juveniles held in adult prisons,

Except that without all those pesky details you'd like to ignore, giving someone a blanket "Yes" is about as useful as telling someone: You can use a 33 gallon garbage back to carry your gear on a backpacking trip, just throw it over your shoulder; You can use bedroom slippers to hike the Appalachian trail; You can use a racing bike with skinny tires to ride down a beach; You can use your mess kit knife to eat your soup.

This is a tough line to walk between what actually gets the job done and what someone could argue "meets the requirement". But it's much like dealing with a MBC in that some subjective decision making is inherent in the process. (like how a Communications MBC gets to approve what kind of public meeting the scout can attend) If I was trying to find an reasonable compromise between "ideal" and "what is the minimum acceptable", I would approach it like this: If a 75' long or lake/pond is available, that's what should be used. (Using a less than ideal situation just because someone p

Well, kinda. See below. Actually, this isn't changing or adding requirements. It's specifying how the test is to be administered. See below The 1st class requirement isn't "Jump in to water... swim 75yards..."; the 1st Class requirement is "Pass The BSA Swimmer Test". And while the test can be administered by a non-BSA lifeguard, the test administrator is supposed to conduct the test using BSA guidelines. The guidelines for conducting the BSA Swimming Test are very carefully laid out in the BSA publication "Aquatics Supervision No. 34346" . In fact, The "Unit Swim Classif