elitts

49 minutes ago, Pale Horse said:

Please don't associate being a strong leader with being male or female. It's incredibly sexist.

 

They didn't actually associate "strong" with either male or female.  They used it as an additional descriptor for both genders.  So you can have a strong male or female leader, or a weak one.  My reading was that "strong" in this context is used to describe "someone who puts together an adventurous and substantial program" and is in contrast to the described "weak" leader that cancels activities regularly and whiffs on requirements.

Now, they did specify a need for a male leader, but that's one of those points where personal opinion is legitimate IMO.  I know that while I wouldn't tell a female who wanted to be a leader "No", all else being equal, I'd prefer to have a male leader over a female one at both Cubs and Scouts levels.  Mostly because having a "mom" figure around changes the dynamic.

The best way I could see for the BSA respond to this publicly would be to NOT respond to it directly, but instead have publications telling people "What you should expect when you sign your child up".  Kind of an awareness campaign about , casually throwing in when it started.

Something very short like:

HOW TO KNOW IF YOUR TROOP IS DOING IT RIGHT!!
_________________________________________________________________________________________
* Every Scouter involved with your child will be subjected to a criminal background check;

* Every Scouter will have received complete training and testing in BSA's Youth Protection program;

* No Scouter will ever be alone with any scout other than their own child;

If you see or become aware of anything that makes you think these rules aren't being followed, please report it to: 555-XXX-XXX

** These methods were instituted as of :  Some date in some year

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Those are the kinds of quick, informational bullet points that might have a chance of getting thrown into a news blurb about the ongoing lawsuits.

3 hours ago, qwazse said:

Talk to the dad.

How is this hard?

Because you never know when you are going to find out that you are talking to Mr. Belligerent.  There are a LOT of really unpleasant parents out there when you throw together the combination of questioning something they want for their kid and telling them they might have been wrong.

I agree that it's the only possible answer, but that's why it's hard.

My troop ended up with this with a scout working on his eagle project about a year ago.  The kid was building 2 simple benches, but had a friend of the family who was a builder show up to run the project for him.  Pretty much his sole activity during the project was taking new kids that showed up and introducing him to the builder so that they knew who was telling them what to do.

The instant the question was raised about exactly how he showed leadership when he was standing on the side the entire time, Mr. Belligerent(step-father) stepped right in to tell everyone how they WOULD sign off on everything else required for Eagle or he would take any step necessary up to and including filing a lawsuit.

It was messy.  Fortunately, as soon as he was awarded his Eagle, he was done so we didn't have to put up with the family any further.

7 minutes ago, Buggie said:

I would say "yes"  because we still have issues with folk who have passed YPT and do it. Also folks who pass YPT and don't follow the process of vigilance and reporting, because <name> is such a good person, they couldn't possibly be doing that.

There are people who pass YPT and still abuse kids because they are liars and horrible people; not because they didn't realize that abusing children is wrong.  And people don't follow the reporting criteria to the absolute letter because using judgement is part of what we teach people to do, and any rule that takes it away completely is a bad rule.

How many times do we read those news articles where the good scouter was just helping out a scout, only to find it was all part of grooming and ultimately, worse. 

Almost never actually.  Although that mindset is certainly part of the problem BSA faces.

On 12/14/2019 at 9:50 PM, Eagle94-A1 said:

Anyone else note the drop in Venturing?  59.7% drop in Venturing and Sea Scouts since 2016. 74.9% drop since 2012.

 

I strongly suspect that has to do with the increased cost of registration.  I know that when registration jumped up to $33 per scout, many of the troops in our area started purging the rolls of scouts who were inactive.  Where the year before the discussion was "These 7 scouts are still registered but we haven't seen them in 8-9 months, lets keep them on and hope they come back" that year it changed to "These 7 scouts haven't been seen in 8-9 months, lets go ahead and drop them, they can always re-register".

I don't think it was really that the burden of the extra $9/yr was a problem, it was just the instigation of the discussion about whether it was really worth it to spend $200-$300 to save a little time on re-registering the 1 or 2 out of 7 scouts that actually came back for some reason.

40 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

At least the former YPT training was in fact training.  To be compliant you need to do A B C, if you see non-compliance do X.  If you are aware of issues report to cops and council.

Now we have 90 minutes of agenda indoctrination to make sure we know that child abuse is bad.

This was the part that made me crazy when I took the new training.  Do they actually think there are people out there who don't think child abuse is bad or that it happens and needs to be avoided?  That was just a horrible waste of my time and I actually felt the previous training was better at pointing out what form grooming can take and specific behaviors to watch out for.  Most of that was omitted now in favor of "I was victimized, child abuse is wrong" and "I work with child victims, child abuse is wrong" testimonials.

2 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

"[M]y newest group of QMs:   You are the troop Senior Patrol Leader?  😊

I just wanted to be clear so that DuctTape wouldn't think I was offering to work towards the goal of "scouts doing it themselves" with his QM.  I have enough on my plate, I don't want any more commitments.

1 hour ago, DuctTape said:

As with all things in Scouting, we as adults can do the research, shopping, etc... much more efficiently than the scouts. I always try to see how anything we as adults do can be a learning and growth opportunity for scouts.

If an adult is a "tent expert", great! How do we utilize tgat expertise to help the scouts become more skillful and knowledgeable moving forward. Ultimate goal being the scouts become the future experts. If a scout cannot "do" yet, the adults should not just do it for them by themselves, but instead involve at least some scouts in every stage of the process. Even if the first step is the scouts "watch & listen". For example if I am calling a campground to inquire for camping availability, I do it with the SPL and ASPL there to hear the conversation. As they progress, they make the call with me listening. If I am internet shopping around for new tents, scouts will be doing it with me.

Everything we do is an opportunity for scouts. They may not be ready to do it all by themselves, but they never will get there unless we show them and let them try.

Yes, I agree.  I'm hoping that with my newest group of QMs, I can start working towards that process.

I'm the Equipment Coordinator for my troop and I can tell you that we handle things in a variety of ways depending on the item. 

For most equipment, I wait for the SM to tell me there is a need, then I go find whatever the need is at the lowest possible price.  If I happen to see something we could really use, but maybe don't absolutely need, I'll send a quick email to the SM, CC and Treasurer to see if anyone wants to veto and if not, I'll buy it.  If I happen across a fantastic "till the end of the day" price, I'd probably just buy it on my own "authority" and hope no one pitches a fit.  If there is a major purchase to be considered, it will get discussed at the committee meeting, but it's typically not a "What should we buy" discussion, it will be a discussion of "The EQ. Coord. is recommending we do X.  How does everyone feel about that?".  If I'm weighing a couple of options with pros and cons to be considered, I'll discuss that as well for input, but mostly, I just tell them why I've made the selection I have.  The two most aggravating discussions we've had about gear/equipment over the last couple of years have been when "What kind of trailer do we need" and "What kind of tarps/canopies do we need" were brought up for discussion in committee.  The trailer issue is going on it's second year of consideration at this point.

I know that my primary qualifications for being the equipment buyer are the fact that I'm good at internet research, I have accounts on dozens of discussion forums and I get a positive joy out of finding the cheapest way to buy things.  (this doesn't mean buying the cheapest thing)  So if you can find that parent in your troop who is constantly talking about "buying the best value car/shoes/outerwear" and is always recommending sales and whatnot to people, I'd see if I could dragoon that person into the job.

Tents are a tricky issue in general though.  There are often serious considerations to be made regarding quality vs price.  If I had unlimited funds, we'd be using entirely Timberline 4 Outfitters with the vestibules because they will last decades if properly maintained and I just like the quality and footprint.  However, in my troop most of the people using the tents are the 10-12 year olds and "proper maintenance and care" is a tough battle to fight, not to mention the $300+ price tag on the outfitters.  So what has tended to win the argument instead are the Taurus 4 from Alps Mountaineering because if you buy them on sale, you can get them for around $50-$75.  And while I KNOW they won't last as long as the Timberlines, I only need them to last 4-6 years at that price to be the better value.

I will say, I'd never go back to buying tents without a vestibule. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

@Hawkwin Check out Hikerdirect.com

Basically you can buy anything that Alps Mountaineering, Browning, Cedar Ridge at 45% off or more.

On 10/24/2019 at 8:25 PM, Eagle1993 said:

This topic came up after a recent PLC.  My son just crossed over to the Troop this spring and I was asked to be SM.  After refusing multiple times I reluctantly accepted.   The first PLC meeting three adults were present (CC, a very experienced ASM and me).   We sat at a table next to the scouts. 
 

After the meeting, I mentioned that I thought in general the scouts were very quiet.  In addition, the one topic they talked about, asking for a change in electronic policy, their idea was shot down the the CC immediately.  They asked me for some clarification and I had to correct some errors the CC made in his argument.

I talked with the CC after the meeting and suggested we sit in a far off area, out of ear shot.  The SPL can come over if needed, but in general we would come over for the last 10 mins to close out any discussions.  The CC didn’t agree and that ended the conversation.

Your point that scouts act differently when adults are around is 100% correct.  I remember as a youth this is true and can see it as a new SM.  Unfortunately, some adult leaders who claim units are youth led are afraid of actually allowing a youth led unit.  

 

Ugh, that stinks.   I think that the CC keeping his nose out of the day-to-day operations of the troop would probably have been one of my conditions for accepting the role.  My son just got elected SPL and I've been regularly reminding him that "it's his troop" for the next 6 months and if he needs all the adults to leave the room so they can get things done, (whether it's PLC or troop meeting) he's got every right to request that they leave.

On 10/21/2019 at 10:13 PM, ParkMan said:

I don't disagree with any of what you just said.  Just not sure what I can do with it.

As a local volunteer, I have three choices:

1. ignore the rules and run a program like in the old days
2. follow the rules, but try to find solutions to the obstacles they present.
3. blindly follow the rules, decide I can't do what I want, and run a crappy program

I like choice two.  So while I agree with your premise (and most often others on this forum) I find myself saying "yeah, these new rules are a pain, but how can I make them work."

There's nothing I've ever seen about "2 Deep Leadership" that specifies a physical adult presence actually with every gathering of scouts.  The adults merely need to be present "at the activity" so that they can be reached to deal with emergencies.   I realize there have been opinions (Bryan on Scouting for example) given that indicate that scouts should actually be accompanied by adults, but that's not what the GSS specifically says.

So if you are at a meeting of any sort, two adults need to be on the premises to respond to emergencies, they don't need to be in the actual presence of the scouts.  If you are on a camp-out, there needs to be at least two adults hanging out in camp, but if the kids decide to go a short hike around the lake, they don't need to be accompanied by adults because "The Camp-out" is the activity, not each specific thing that happens during the camp-out.

On 12/3/2019 at 11:56 AM, Eagledad said:

Interesting that you think the BSA will survive. I'm not so sure. They certainly don't have the resources of the church. If the BSA does survive, the program won't be recognizable as the traditional youth camping program of the past. I guess it's more a matter of what level of sacrifice is satisfactory justice. 

Barry

Well, I think the organization could survive if it's not somehow toppled by public perception.  The biggest issue the BSA faces right now on the perception standpoint is that the attorneys for the accusers are doing everything they can to make it appear that the BSA acted similarly to the Catholic Church in actively hiding and protecting abusers.  And unfortunately, with the advent of the #Metoo movement, BSA can barely even argue to defend itself because those arguments are immediately called "gas-lighting" or "re-writing the past" or "blaming the victim".

The public outlook on the situation is just not really rational at this point.  I mean, in most of the news articles I've seen written, you get the attorney talking about how the BSA covered up abuse, followed by a list of litigants talking about how they never filed a complaint or told anyone.  Then the lawyer reiterates that BSA "didn't do enough to protect kids".

If you are ordering 100+ shirts, you can get printing done at around $5.  But as someone said, you're going to get some seriously cheap shirts at that price.  $2 more per shirt ups the quality significantly.

But I'll add that ClassB.com isn't necessarily cheaper than your local printing company.  I know that I've priced out at least one local company around me that was cheaper than ClassB by almost $2 on the shirts we bought and that was if we only bought 15 shirts.  If we'd been ready to order 50 or more the savings went up to almost $3 per shirt.

3 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

I came to one council one to do an event only, was surprised that in an 1,800 acre reservation they had the troops all corralled in the big field when there were acres (literally) and acres of land they could have used.  There was another whole camp they didn't use.  Looked like some sort of really bad festival.  Each troop have like 100 SF and the next troop guidelines were right there.

Not sure what the thinking is for these

I know that once upon a time the nature preservationist theory was "keep the human impact contained to one space that just gets destroyed and leave the rest untouched".  I guess the ones in scouting organizations haven't figured out that the new theory is "spread everyone out thinly so the impact is light enough that nothing gets destroyed".

On 10/14/2019 at 8:21 AM, Pale Horse said:

You're right, it's a donation to support Scouting. We're fine with that; we know it, and our customers know it.  Nobody is "lying", if they want cheap popcorn, they know it can be bought inside the supermarket we're selling in front of.  Yet for some reason, his Pack still sells thousands of dollars outside supermarkets.

My son isn't trying to run a business. We're out funding our adventure in the most efficient manner possible, so we can get back to doing Scout stuff.  

I wasn't trying to say that you or your kids are lying or that people buying it are being lied to.  I was only saying that calling it a "product sale" really isn't accurate anymore (it was once) and that it's ironic for an organization with written rules mandating that troop fundraisers must sell products in line with their value to exempt itself from it's own rules.  (I'm also not arguing that they don't have the right to exempt themselves from their own rule)

That's why when National Public Radio does it's seasonal fundraiser it doesn't talk about how people can "Call now to purchase this NPR Coffee mug for $120"; they solicit a $120 donation and offer the coffee mug as a gift.

One of the issues that will be relevant is the payment of property taxes.  If the property isn't held for exempt purposes, the annual taxes will have to come out of someone's pocket.  It would probably be worth speaking with a tax lawyer to figure out how to get around that part, then decide where to go from there.

On 10/9/2019 at 11:26 AM, Pale Horse said:

As I mentioned in my post, people gravitate towards the cheapest option.  By standing right next to the kids selling popcorn, the meat sticks will of course sell more.

Our Pack of 38 Cubs will sell $65k in popcorn. My son is on pace to sell $8k in popcorn, and will barely crack top 10 in our council of 60,000 scouts.  Do people reach those levels selling meat sticks?

Let me re-write that for you more accurately.

Our Pack of 38 Cubs will sell $65k in popcorn solicit $65,000 in donations. My son is on pace to sell $8k in popcorn collect $8,000 in donations, and will barely crack top 10 in our council of 60,000 scouts.  Do people reach those levels selling meat sticks?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The core of the problem people have with popcorn is that calling it a "product sale" is so disingenuous it's practically lying.  The popcorn is SO overpriced that it's no longer a product sale, it's merely a conversation opening for scouts to solicit a donation. 

In fact, if a troop approached most councils with a different yet equivalently priced product, it wouldn't meet the requirements for an appropriate fundraiser. 

If you have no access to ANY water, I'd plan on 1 gallon per person per day just for drinking.  So for 2 nights, I'd go with 1.5 gallons per person.  Plus another 4-5 gallons at least for cooking and washing.

But if you have some access to water, it's just not potable, then you don't need to bring nearly as much water because you can boil much of what you'd need.

22 minutes ago, Treflienne said:

Would I really want to send a small group of teenage girls on a camping trip to be supervised by young men in their early twenties?

I mean, I get that it's not inconceivable, but I've never even heard of a boy's camp-out where there wasn't at least one person who was a parent of a scout.  And while I suppose that might possibly mean someone in their mid-twenties if they knocked someone up at 15-16, in most cases that's going to be at least someone in their 30s.  Anywhere around me, the average parent of an 11+ year old would be closer to 40 than to 30.  So while I don't necessarily object to your concern conceptually, is it really a potentiality that we should be creating rules around?

Plus, I know for a fact there are plenty of parents willing to send their teenager girls to sports events and practice with no one along but male coaches.

We make a half-hearted attempt at popcorn, but most of the funds just get credited to the scouts.  We sell Christmas wreaths for our primary fundraiser for troop money.

We are still building this fundraiser up, but we sold 450 last year with a $6 profit on each one.  My former Cub pack sells about 1100 per year.  The really nice thing about them is that they are priced at slightly under what they cost at the store so the only issue is catching people before they buy one somewhere else.

If a council person ever actually demanded or even requested a portion of those sale funds within my hearing, they wouldn't enjoy the response.  Phrases like "Astounding level of incompetance", "dismal communication", "complete failure at follow through" and a few others would all be mixed in there somewhere.

9 minutes ago, 69RoadRunner said:

This past trip, there were 2 makeshift patrols and a shared grubmaster.  He got unfrosted Pop Tarts and will probably never hear the end of that as long as he's in scouts.  🤣

 

I'm not sure why those even exist.  Unless there are people who like to dip them in frosting or something.  Gah!!

We had a similar offense committed in our troop at the last camp-out.  The scouts planned "Oatmeal" (which usually tends to be Apples n Cinnamon, Maple & Brown Sugar, Cinnamon & spice) but the food buyer showed up with a couple boxes of the "Peaches/Strawberries/Blueberries n Cream".  Most of the boys ended up eating either Ramen or just fruit.

8 hours ago, Liz said:

I asked her if anybody had given any thought to the fact that they'd used breadsticks as table decorations interspersed throughout the food table. She looked at me like a deer in the headlights, asked for my name, and asked if she could contact me before the next event for advice on how to better serve employees with Celiac and other food allergies (this was a big company with LOTS of employees). I said sure... and never heard from her again, not even after I emailed her to ask if I could help with food planning for another upcoming function. This was just one example - pretty much all our functions were like that. At another function everything they had on the buffet line was marked with a sign that said gluten free... except the buns which were at the front of the table and were the first thing every person put on their plate before going through the line risking cross contact with everything else on the table. They even had gluten free buns available, and an empty serving table they could have used with the gluten free buns in order to avoid cross contact, but nobody stopped to think about it. 

Sometimes it really is just one small change you can make, which will make a HUGE difference when you want to be inclusive. This applies to food and other disabilities as well. 

If having bread-sticks on the tables as decorations is enough potential gluten to require avoiding the table, wouldn't just eating things that came out of the same kitchen pose the same risk?  I mean, I've worked around kitchens before, and even when the staff are making an effort to avoid cross contamination, the best you are going to get is a quick brushing off of the surface before they start pulling the next food item out of its container and the likelihood of the staff washing their hands between handling the gluten rich and gluten free items isn't going to be anywhere near 100%.  Even if the kitchen staff has been told to do so.

If you attache the 4 diamond awards with a basting stitch, it won't leave any marks.

On the off chance that a few of the holes don't seem to want to close on their own, if you scrub the stitch lines with stiff bristle tooth or laundry brush, it'll push the fibers back into shape.

I've resewn patches onto the same shirt many times that way.  The only time you really end up with a problem is when you use a very tight stitch to apply the patches.

P.S.

When you get to the point of applying "Position of Responsibilty" patches on the shoulder, I strongly suggest just sewing a 2"x2" chunk of velcro on there, then using velcro on any position patches your kid gets.  Sewing a new patch onto the sleeve every 3-6 months gets old really fast.

33 minutes ago, mrkstvns said:

* Pack some of those Hot Pack hand warmers, they're good in a pinch if your gloves and/or clothing choices aren't serving you well

 

 

Personally, I hate seeing these on camp-outs and tell the parents not to even buy them for the scouts.  Invariably what happens with these is the kids use them for short term comfortable hands rather than actually dressing appropriately for the weather.  They don't put them inside gloves or shoes or pockets, they just sit there or walk around holding them and refusing to do anything else because "my hands are cold so I have to keep holding these little packs".  And so of course after 30-45 minutes when they are no longer warm enough to keep hands warm outside of an enclosed space, they open a new package, or start whining about being cold again.

Personally, if I ever see a scout walking around holding those things, I go find a PL or the SPL and recommend that scout for any laborious activities that need doing since some hard work will warm them up.

I don't mind nearly as much the to warmer sort that you actually stick on the inside of your boots.

On 10/1/2019 at 6:26 AM, ParkMan said:

 

There's been an ask from our district FoS team that we all donate something so that we can say that 100% of our district committee has contributed.  But, they've never set an amount and suggest that $5 would be fine.

 

This is actually something that usually gets reported on grant applications and donation solicitations so it's pretty common in charitable institutions.