malraux

Wait, theres a position under DE in the org chart? How many people work in some of these councils?

Someone got the joke

By the guide to advancement, you can't look back through an eagle applicant's record for minor errors like this. You have to assume that all previous ranks were completed correctly.

We went through this about 2 years ago. We're a pack with 70+ youth, but no troop, which is a bit unique. We looked around for a CO that would take us and be able to provide meeting space. Can't find one. The churches in our area are getting slammed in membership by the megachurch nearby, and the megachurch wants nothing to do with the bsa. So even if our CO isn't interested in helping out, we haven't identified one any better. And our CO is acting as CO as a favor to the group, not because they want another meeting to attend.

Agreed, but what are we to do? I do agree that the current charter model is flawed. The idea behind it is that a youth serving organization would seek out the scouting program to become a franchise of the BSA as one of their elements. In practice, what happens is that a group of people say they want a scout group, and then find a chartering partner. The CO really doesn't care about scouting in particular. Not a good system. Not sure how to replace it, as my impression of the GSUSA system wherein the council owns all the units is even worse.

We're doing good if we can find our COR to sign adult applications. Expecting them to attend regular scout board meetings is beyond what they would ever do.

I'm on the cub scout side. Cub scouts especially have a lot of do a or b or 3 of 4, etc. If I'm logging that my scouts have completed the loop, I'm not going to take the time to fill in each of those sub things for each scout (or care about the quick entry). Unless they want to double or triple my pay, its not happening.

Its not like the current oath and law hasn't changed from their original wordings though.

The LDS would also represent deeper pockets than the BSA.

Top scout for a pack seems incredibly problematic. At least for a troop, I could see the youth able to have a say.

I'm from Louisiana, we're good at throwing beads out quickly.

My beading was a 5 minute thing. It was with kids, but it was as much about talking about bsa history as wb coolaid. No song or dance or fox party.

OMG yes. I like wood bodge and will recommend it if asked, or if its a logical next step (ie at the end of either job specific or baloo) but not after every single presentation regardless of topic.

The internet is really good at distributing information to people who want it quickly, whereas staff meetings are going to be better at making sure that everyone gets the information, but it'll take more time. So unless every SE has their staff meeting simultaneously, what happens is that one SE informs his staff, who then share the info, and then that gets picked up by all volunteers everywhere, ahead of the rest of the other councils. I don't know how to get ahead of such a phenomenon without greatly limiting the flow of information to councils.

Give me a few years. Daughter is only in tigers now.

Not that I disagree, but there is a tradeoff in making JTE more comprehensive such that it becomes too cumbersome to track. I see JTE as at best a way for poorly performing units to get some insights into why they aren't performing well.

That seems to be massively over reading the GSUSA statement. The earlier stuff is about why teaching about consent is important, not that grandpa is to be feared but that if you teach that someone must give physical affection even if it make you uncomfortable, it can be taken advantage of. This is no more saying families aren't to be trusted than the BSA requiring YPT is saying that all scoutmasters are abusers.

But they are right in this case. Don't make your kids show more physical affection than they are comfortable with people who are basically strangers. Its not "Don't hug" instead its "don't force your kids to hug."

Which one likes chips and salsa, cuz thats the one I've been feeding?

Certainly theres no shortage denigration both ways.

I can accept that the BSA and the LDS have drifted apart. The little bits of their new program I've understood seem like a bunch of priorities that just won't fit with the BSA program.

The denial of gay scouts didn't affect membership much. But what it did affect was corporate donations.

That wouldn't violate 1 on 1 and presumably there were 2 registered leaders at the event.

It might get too hard to administer something like what you detail, or too nitpicky. I might start slow. What's the hardest thing to sign off for from a time perspective (ie the holdup is seeing it demonstrated because you can't find the time to see it). Figure out a rule for that.