Gilwell_1919

13 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Youth can join Scouts BSA if they have completed the fifth grade and are at least 10 years old, OR have earned the Arrow of Light Award and are at least 10 years old, OR are age 11 but have not reached 18 OR have not completed 12 grade and are under 19 years.

To age into Scouts BSA:

• Complete 5th grade and at least 10 years old
• Earned AOL and at least 10 years old
• OR
• 11 years old

To age out of Scouts BSA

• Have not completed 12th grade and under 19 years old
• OR
• have not reached 18 years old

I think this is a viable approach and I'd certainly support something like this. My recommendation is to work with your LC SE and Council Commissioner to pitch this up to the regional/area levels to get support. Definitely not an easy walk-in-the-park, but change is never an easy task. I actively participated in the BSA Best Survey over a two-year period and was asked to help vet the new adult diversity and inclusion training. Not that I am anyone special by any means, but my council knows I am here to help. I'm not sure if you have the same type of relationship with the folks at your LC, but if you approach them with viable solutions that help make a better program... I bet they would listen. The problem is human beings tend to wear their frustrations on their sleeves, which can create unnecessary barriers or roadblocks when they are wanting to affect change in program. But, I really like this idea. I hope you get some traction with it!!

There are a lot of rumors and speculation about how Chartered Organizations (CO) are going to move forward with Scouting once the dust starts to settle. As a state liaison for a national-level CO, I'd like to hear from the crowd in this forum. I understand that the United Methodist Church and the Catholic Church have issued their opinions as to how local COs should affiliate themselves with Scouting (or not to affiliate themselves), but has anyone else heard how other COs are approaching Scouting (e.g., schools/PTAs, community groups/clubs, Legions/VFWs, et cetera)? Particularly, I am really interested how they are approaching re-charter that is coming up.

I'm asking because I have volunteered with my national-level CO to help improve the relationship between the local entities/groups and scouting units throughout 3-4 councils, but I am getting the impression that the local groups are somewhat ambivalent right now. They know scouting is important, or that it used to be, but there is a general attitude that it's just not worth the hassle or exposure to litigation. 

Any thoughts on this? I'm definitely open to suggestions or advice. 

2 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Today’s rules make it nearly impossible to have a 18 year old ASM unless you ignore aspects of YPT outside scouting or they have no friends in scouts. 

Again, I am not saying y'all are wrong to feel frustrated over policies that lack common sense. What I am saying is that "we" (the volunteers) need to engage the volunteers' chain-of-command (*read Regional/Area commissioners by way of our council commissioners) if we have a viable solution that could make scouting better.

I whole-heartedly agree that YPT makes scouting somewhat prohibitive for young adults that aren't really kids any longer... but aren't quite adults yet either (i.e., the prefrontal cortex of the brain is not fully developed). They are in a sort of limbo area. However, the solution should not be to find a loophole or a grey area, and it certainly isn't good for the health/future of the program for young adults to just throw their hands in the air and walk away... we should be looking for ways to engage national and help come up with a better approach.

I haven't seen the data, so this is just a W.A.G., but I surmise the level of abuse by young adults in that age-group is very low. However, given the litigious nature of our current society, compounded by the deluge of statutory age classifications for what is considered "adulthood", what was BSA to do? They had to draw a cut-off line somewhere. Think about the post-WWII breakup of the middle east. The upper echelons of leadership drew arbitrary lines in the sand that didn't account for cultural, ethnolinguistic, or religious nuances... which has spawned a near century of conflict and sectarian violence. Obviously that is apples to oranges, but the fundamental axiom is there... "when higher-ups draw arbitrary lines... it causes real problems at the ground level". 

So what would be a viable solution? We have to follow the rules of the organization with which we choose to affiliate ourselves. Policies change over time, but that is because, behind the scenes, there are folks that are driving changes to the overall doctrine. My firm belief is that we have to be the change we want to see. It's clear you are very passionate about this... have you considered working with RCs/ACs to affect the changes you'd like to see?

10 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

Rather than sink into the college life of endless partying or playing video games all day, I was out volunteering and hopefully making a small difference in people's lives. My time as as an ASM in college did more to prepare me for post college life than my college degree did. 

Hear, hear! Good for you!

10 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

I thought so as well, but couldn't find any acceptations for family.

At this point, it looks like he will not register.  I talked with a few in our Troop and technically, if he keeps his participation to less than 72 hours he is fine.  

18 year old Eagle Scout ... sorry buddy, take a hike as the BSA doesn't need you.  What is crazy is that 18 year olds don't even count as adult leaders for 2 deep leadership... so 18, 19 & 20 year olds are pretty much considered nothing but a liability to the BSA (outside the hundred left in Venturing).

 

To me, BSA should allow high school seniors to finish as youth in the program (as long as they are under 19).  That would solve a ton of issues that I am starting to see (including having to Eagle before senior year).

The reference is in the online version of the training wherein they state it is okay if a parent or sibling stay in the same tent (or even spouses can be in the same tent). 

As for the latter about 18-20 year olds... that is why I have been trying to revive the "rover program", which is specifically designed for young adults that need to learn how to be adult leaders. Every other country has them... but for some reason it never really caught on within BSA. I surmise because they felt venturing was enough?

1 hour ago, David CO said:

This sounds very familiar.  Many years ago, there was a member of the forum who spoke very much like you. He was constantly telling people they didn't belong in scouting.  So you should know that this is not a new argument.  It has popped up on the forum every few years since I joined.  When was that?  I can't remember anymore.  I do remember that this was the statement that prompted me to write my first post.  (Sighing nostalgically)

 

Far be it from me to say who should be in scouts and who should not be in scouts...

Consider this...

One of my sons participates in trap (shotgun shooting)... they have rules. One parent didn't like one of the safety rules regarding where they could and could not stand during a trap shoot. The coaches and officials were unbending with the particular safety rule, which they themselves agreed was "overkill", because it was a national association rule that had to be followed regardless of how anyone felt. In this particular scenario, all the coach could tell the irritate parent was, "I don't make the rules, and I agree it's a stupid rule, but I have to follow it because people way higher than me tell me I have to... if you don't like it, you can choose not to allow your son to participate in the program." The coach wasn't terse or obtuse... he was simply following the safety rules laid out by the national trap association.

I learned a long time ago that "there is no magic scouting dust that makes stuff happen", we, the adult volunteers, have to often make things happen behind the scenes to ensure the youth have the best program possible. I didn't like certain aspects of how the local district did things at camporees, so I volunteered to help promote my ideas instead of Monday-morning quarterbacking what other volunteers were doing. After a short time, I realized some of it had to do with how the LC did things... so I volunteered to help them as well.  My point is, sometimes we have to be the change we want to see. If we know, at the ground level, YPT needs some adjustment (*especially for scenarios like the one you've propounded for discussion)... why not work with the area commissioners to develop as solution and put it forward to national? I'm not saying it would be successful, but at least you would be actively working towards making the program better (for all scouts and scouters). 

My intent was not to attack or impugn what you were saying... I was simply trying to offer you a different perspective. Sorry if you took it otherwise. 

35 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Depends. Here's the problem; it is NOT clear who represent about 15,103 claimants.

Kosnoff claims he does. https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/f26f9981-f41d-42bd-adbd-d7996d12f44f_5924.pdf

So Kosnoff's claiming to represent 15,103. BUT read the AIS Rule 2019 https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/47fa66fb-180b-411f-80c4-59e56cd1d63d_5923.pdf

In other words:

1) Kosnoff is claiming those 15,103 are his clients.

2) The AIS filing is claiming those 15,103 are clients held jointly by the three firms (Kosnoff Law, PLLC; AVA
Law Group, Inc. and Eisenberg, Rothweiler, Winkler, Eisenberg & Jeck, P.C.)

Yeah, it's definitely a mess. Maybe if they find fraud with the claims aggregators that will sway the judge to order discovery/deposition of the law firms? Again, if the goal is to weed out the fictitious claims and find an amicable way forward with the rest of the parties?

10 minutes ago, David CO said:

No, it is not even close.  In making these over-reaching rules, BSA is the one who is not following the social contract.  BSA is the bad guy here.  Not the parents and scouts.

I'm not trying to blame anyone or label anyone as the "bad guy". I am simply trying to tell you how I explain this to adult leaders or scouts that don't understand. Also... you have the choice to be in scouts. And yes, the social contract that binds together a society is absolutely apropos here. You are born with inalienable rights as a human being, but you have to make small concessions with your absolute rights if you are going to live in a civil society. This is precisely what Locke, Hobbes, and Payne talked about. It is similar in the sense that if you choose to be in scouts, then you have to give up a little bit of your freedom and follow the rules that have been laid out... whether we agree with them or not is really moot. This is why I suggested involving the commissioner corps to hold a "common sense to scouting" forum wherein issues like this could be addressed... and then pushed up to national for review. I'm not saying you are wrong to feel the way you feel, but until we provide national with a solution for scenarios such as this... we have to follow the rules in their most current form ... or remove ourselves from the equation and not participate.

17 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

My issue is this:

So ... my 18 year old Adult ASM, per YPT, CANNOT hang out with scouting youth (like his 17 year old best friend) outside of scouting activities.  

 

This is why we have JASMs and an Eagle patrol. All Eagle Scouts go into the Eagle Patrol and become JASMs. They eat with the adults and can congregate where the adults are. While they are not adults, we treat them as such. Fortunately, we have enough adults to ALWAYS have two-deep leadership. In the case of your 18-y/o ASM being 1-on-1 with a scout (*his best friend)... if we are following the patrol method and those two senior scouts are mentoring junior scouts... there should be very little opportunity for them to be 1-on-1. 

From my experience with this type of scenario, our senior eagle scout, who was the patrol leader of the eagle patrol, just aged out last month. We brought him into the mix as an ASM even though he is still in High School. He has 4 best friends in the eagle patrol. The thing is... the eagle patrol already eats with the adults and congregates with them, so there is not really an issue WRT youth protection. They all understand YPT... but that is because we have made YPT part of our Troop Culture. No one looks down on it... and they surely don't look for grey areas. Everyone knows we have a part to play to ensure everyone is safe. Perhaps, and this is just my opinion, you may want to look at not just doing YPT because it is a requirement... but really embracing it from the ground up with everyone in the unit actively applying it to all that they do. It doesn't stifle our program or scouts. We camp 1-2 times a month (12 months out of the year) and we have 60+ scouts in our troop. We also invite smaller troops and AOLs to join us, so some months we have a large number of campers. We've had zero incidents because YPT is part of our pre-campout safety brief... just like weather, water, and other safety measures we talk about before going into the field.  

12 minutes ago, David CO said:

I agree as far as the young adults participation at scouting events is concerned.  I do not agree that it should effect their friendship outside of scouting.  BSA is over-reaching their authority on this one.

I definitely understand the sentiment. The way I explain it to my ASMs and scouts is simple... take Locke. Hobbes, and Payne... they influence Thomas Jefferson's viewpoint of the civil society and the social contract that binds them together. If you participate in the society... you have to abide by the social contract. This is similar to scouting... if you choose to participate... you have to follow the rules (whether you agree with them or not). There are a lot of laws, statutes, and ordinances that I may not agree with... but accept to follow them because I want to participate in scouting. YPT may have some practical application errors at the ground level, but it sets a standard that we all choose to follow if we choose to be in scouts. 

Again, just my two cents.  

10 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Half-right. She approved the deposition of the claim aggregators ONLY at this point.

My mistake, I thought they had included the law firms. 

My ultimate sentiment is that I hope they are able to get to the bottom of anything improper or fraudulent so the claimants, BSA, and everyone else can move forward with the best possible outcome possible. Whatever that may be. I know Tim K. has emphatically stated that he wants BSA to go away. But... that shows very little concern for the scouts that are actively in the program and who are thriving (in at least my neck of the woods). Reminds of me of the proverbial questions, "should the son be punished for the sins of the father". No... no he should not be. Just like the current scouts and scouters should not be punished for the sins of former BSA leadership and evil adults that destroyed the lives of innocent children. If there is an amicable way forward... I am in favor for that.

Perhaps the commissioner corps (at the upper levels) should have a "common sense approach to scouting" RT wherein they discuss such things (to include inputs from scouters with boots on the ground - *speaking literally*. Post RT, they could draft a proposal for national to review...?

I would agree this particular area is grey in terms of "common sense", but... when it comes to YPT... there should only be black and white. I have about 15 ASMs and 20 committee members I deal with as a SM. We have had "0" YPT incidents during my tenure because I have constant discussions with the adult leaders and scouts regarding, "do try to seek out the grey areas and always err on the side of caution." The youth still have a great time, and there is zero tolerance for anything less what is expected under the YPT. 

In this particular case, if the scouts wants to remain in the unit during his senior year... he could have a lot of fun coking-and-joking with the other adults. Heck, maybe push him to attend Wood Badge and/or Powder Horn. Maybe even get involved with NYLT? There are so many different ways he could stay engaged in scouting that doesn't consist of hanging out as, "one of the scouts". 

Just my two cents... which ain't worth much. 🙃

4 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Paywalled

WSJ News Exclusive | Boy Scouts Are Close to New Deal With Insurer Hartford on Sex-Abuse Claims

 

Perhaps too early for speculation? I really do really like that the judge approved deposition of the claim aggregators and law firms. I hope they get to the bottom of "whatever transpired"... with hopes there can be some path forward that doesn't drag this thing out for years on end. I won't agree that Tim K. is some sort of oracle. NTM... history marks the measures of how a winner won each battle during the war (if we can call this the start of a long path towards victory). I hope, for the sake of the claimants he represents, that he hasn't been throwing stones while living in a glass house. Given that his name is all over the original AIS paperwork (*read contracts), if he is legitimately no longer part of the AIS coalition... does that negate the contract AIS has with the claimants? If they are null and void, what happens to those claimants? Definitely a few questions that should be asked. 

3 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Sure, continue the movement, but do not shuffle it into the hands of that organization.  Get a new team together, and do it much better than they...

Heck, I'll sign on...full time...at $100K per year.  That's $900K less than Surbaugh got in 2018...

https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/Form-990-2018.pdf

Correct.... it should never be about the money or prestige... it should always focus on helping young people become the best versions of themselves. That doesn't take a million-dollar salary to do... especially if you adhere to "servant" leadership principles. 

On 8/27/2021 at 2:13 PM, MYCVAStory said:

Now, did an unknowing SE or DE make a Powerpoint with incorrect information?  Maybe.  Were they directed to do so by National?  There is NO evidence of that and it would be unprecedented and run against ALL of BSA National's actions to this point.   PLEASE tread lightly.  Whether we have your passion for the BSA or not we try to trade in facts here. 

Thank you. I think that may be the case. When I hear, "let me get clarification from national" from an SE... I tend to take that as gospel.  As for my passion for BSA... I will always be a scout... no one can take that away from me. If BSA doesn't make it out of this... I'll file 501(c)3 paperwork, start "Scouts USA" the next day, and then turn it over to the folks in Texas... that is how committed I am to scouting. 🙃 

On 8/27/2021 at 1:49 PM, CynicalScouter said:

THAT clarifies 95% of it. The other 5% is how did AIS get the info from those two people. It wasn't BSA is my point and there's no proof it was BSA.

Sorry for my waaaay late response. Scouting in my house never ends and I had an entire weekend of service projects and council stuff. 

As for your response, yes... yes it does. I really do apologies that my timelines were not being written as clear as they were in my head. 

Overall, I am a scout and just want to make sure I am doing the right thing. What I was reading and hearing didn't add up, so I sought clarity from this group since y'all seem to be in the know. 

Just now, CynicalScouter said:

But you aren't claiming that the domain was held. This conspiracy is beyond that. It includes people filing claims at the nonexistent page (www.OfficialBSAClaims.com) or the blank/placeholder website (bsarestructuring.org) and then BSA forwarded the information collected on to AIS.

Ok, there is the disconnect. I said I saw this flyer in Nov 2019.

The timeframe in which I started fielding questions was Feb 2020 through July/Aug 2020. It may have seemed unclear, so my apologies. Like I said, I often think faster than I type and not everything makes it onto paper (or in this case a virtual forum). I didn't mean that people started making claims in NOV/DEC 2019, just that this flyer was released then (from what I recall). 

As for what I said about BSA. I'm sorry, but I don't know you. The two folks that came to me after they filed claims on the BSA website and then were contacted by AIS... I know them, and I know they are good people. Why would they lie to me? From what I can see, BSA, or their website, directed them to AIS

If your concern is just to be right... please go back through the posts and carefully read what I wrote. No malicious intent from my end. Sorry for the confusion. 

3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Right, with the AIS time machine that directed people to a web domain that didn't even exist until months after.

Come on... really? How many websites/domains have you launched? 

I have thousands under my belt and not one of them was ever started or completed in the same month they were launched. That would be a QA nightmare, especially for something of this magnitude. I just released one that was a year in the making. It was approved two months ago by the client, which is when we kicked over to marketing. The domain name has been held for a year... and the site is still not launched until it makes its way through the final approval stages. Within that year... I can't tell you how many eyes have seen the domain name/URL. It has nothing to do with a "time machine" its basis domain hosting 101 compadre!

7 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

To date, you still have not provided a scrap of proof of that. You have mentioned several times what AIS phone people said, but not anything BSA ever said or "directed".

Come on... I have repeatedly said that I am waiting on the RT PPPs that I no longer have access to. Also, I have repeatedly said that my LC SE told me to direct people to file claims online. Two of those folks were contacted by AIS after filing a claim online and then came to me, as the DC, because they were concerned. If they did indeed file a claim on the BSA site... why were they contacted by AIS??? Why the heck would I make that up?? I have no dog in that fight. 

3 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

@Gilwell_1919,

The BSA has its own legal department that would have carefully reviewed any materials that were released.  The BSA also has an IT department that would have likely developed the website a month or so prior to the release.  I have seen many materials from the BSA and none have ever discussed, named, or otherwise identified claimants attorneys.

I certainly concur with what you are saying... but... I will wait for the RT PPPs. If I am wrong... I promise. I will eat my words and apologize. If I am right... well... what difference does it make. It wouldn't be the first time something was shared before its intended release date. Again, my main concern is why AIS was telling people they were acting on behalf of BSA to intake claims. If they were misleading people who just wanted to give BSA information, not file a claim, then that needs to come out it court. When I was told, by my LC SE, to direct people to file a claim, even if it was just to give information... why would BSA want that? That sky-rocketed the claims to an astronomical level. 

26 minutes ago, ThenNow said:

And, he substantively responded?

no, he wanted to jump on a call. after being persistent... and me not biting to take it from a paper-trail mode of communication... he called me a bunch of expletive words. nothing substantive... but... it clearly showed his character... or lack thereof. 

2 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Again, that info form wouldn't have existed yet.

Yes, and no. I own a software development company and we create tons of sites/serves for programs. 99.99% they remain internal until rolled out to the public.... which also includes marketing materials with information. I highly doubt BSA created a website the same month they announced bankruptcy (Feb 2020). As an industry expert for such things, generally, websites like that are created months and months in advance... they go through alpha, beta, and then gold deliveries wherein all sorts of eyes look over everything (QA/QC) before something goes live. In certain situations (and with certain clients) there needs to be "marketing material", which also goes through the many stages before "going live". I can almost guarantee this this chapter 11 flyer when through a lot of different hands before it went live in Feb 2020. From my recollection, the first time I saw it was in Nov 2019. If I am conflating the dates... my apologies... but I am nearly absolutely certain I saw this well before its "official release date". Also... that is really the minor issue here. The main issue is that the some claimants, as far as I know, were told to file their claims online at the official BSA site. They told me they did just that. Afterwards... they were contacted by AIS who was representing themselves as agents of BSA. Is it possible they just went to the AIS site and not the BSA site? Look, anything is possible... but I know what I heard in the phone call, which was that AIS was in fact telling people they were acting on behalf of BSA, which doesn't implicate BSA at all... but it did start to make me question what the heck was going on. That was the whole reason I brought up the NOV/DEC 2019 RTs because that is when I first recall seeing that chapter 11 flyer. In looking through thousands of emails in 2019, I had a lot of conversations with my SE, DE, and other folks up the ladder regarding BSA's chapter 11. I also have quite a few breakfast and lunch meetings on my calendar... so I am just trying to put it all together because what I recollect, and based on what I've seen/heard.... I feel like I am walking through a cesspool at the moment and I don't like how it is making me question my entire scouting life. 

52 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

ECREE: “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”

What you are alleging is a vast criminal conspiracy (to defraud claimants and the court), including the use of a time machine to get websites into your November/December 2019 Roundtable presentations that didn't exist until February 2020.

Things are not adding up because

1. your dates are off
2. your data is wrong, and
3. your recollection is faulty

unless somehow a TARDIS is involved.

Seriously...y'all are making me laugh. I understand it sounds 100% ludicrous. I'm simply trying to piece together the information I have and weigh it against what I have seen coming out of the courts. If my recollection of the NOV/DEC RTs is off, then I will own that. But, I am still waiting on those slides. Once I get them, I promise I will share them. Right now I am scouring through 9,000+ emails from Jan 2019 - Feb 2020 to find the info... but... most of it points to the google drive that I no longer have access to. Overall... no malicious intent here folks. 

43 minutes ago, johnsch322 said:

What kind of contact did you if you do not mind me asking?

In speaking with two of the claimants, who came to me in confidence, they didn't want to file claims... they just wanted to get the information to BSA for them to handle. When they filed their claims and were connected with AIS... they were concerned - and rightly so. I told them I would help them since I have noooo problem defending myself against rapacious lawyers or people that want to hurl judiciously acerbic spears at scouting. In reaching out to someone at AVA Law to get to the bottom of this, the email chain eventually ended up with Timmy K.

I am not too familiar with how this forum works... but I would be glad to have a side-bar conversation with you (via phone if you like). 

40 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Which is impossible since the Chapter 11 didn't even exist/get filed until February 2020. Thus there would not have BEEN any "chapter 11/claims guidance" until, at the earliest, that month.

Again, I suspect you are conflating a series of dates, times, and years together here.

I am looking through all my emails... but was something we got from the google drive from the NOV 2019 RT when we were gearing up with for our 2020 IYOS. I will never say I am infallible, and it is certainly well within the realm of possibility "conflating" dates... but I am almost certain about the timeline because I was having monthly Key 3 meetings all throughout 2019 with my DE and the topic of chapter 11 was part of all of them as I was being bombarded by UCs, leaders, and scouters for more information (which I really didn't have). I worked with my LC at that time to pull together our IYOS and I emphatically said we needed to address chapter 11 in our district's RT. That was in Nov 2019. The chapter 11 info form is what I got from the google drive. Before Christmas of 2019, which would have been our DEC 2019 RT... that is when our LC SE came and addressed chapter 11 and the claims process. Perhaps the LC SE wasn't supposed to disclose that, as BSA hadn't announced it officially, but that is what we got on our end. Personally, I like our LC SE.... and I don't think there was any malicious intent there other than to calm everyone's nerves. It wasn't until I started getting inundated with questions by scouters that I had the lunch with our LC SE to get clarification as to what people should be doing. However... as a person with the utmost integrity... I would hold a virtual meeting with all of you, share my computer screen and we can pour through all of this together... to include my 2019 & 2020 calendars... and mounds of emails. I've certainly got nothing to hide. If I have, indeed, conflated the dates... that was certainly not my intention. I do pride myself on having a locked tight mind when it comes to numbers and dates as they pertain to specific activities... but... as a matter of "verification"... I have an incredibly detailed calendar and I NEVER delete emails (other than Spam). My entire intent to coming to this forum... is for guidance. I have been a scout my entire life... and I am now conflicted because something just isn't adding up and it is making me feel really uncomfortable at the moment. 

Does that make sense to anyone?🙃 Or... do they just need to bring me to a padded room and throw away the key? Scouting is, and always has been, my life... and I will defend the merits of this program to my last breath. But, if there are Machiavellian things happening behind the scenes... I want it called out... and I want those people to no longer have any part of the program I love dearly.