InquisitiveScouter
-
Posts
2489 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
107
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Posts posted by InquisitiveScouter
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
10 hours ago, Cburkhardt said:Dear Moderators and Friends,
Last year some of you may recall that I actively hosted three lengthy postings in advance of the bankruptcy filing. My purpose was to prepare the way for a great reorganization filing that I believed would result in a plan agreement and approval within six months or so after the filing date. The discussions were serious and hundreds participated. COVID destroyed that possibility, leading some claimants Attorneys to smell blood in the water. They have gone in for the kill and Scouting as we know it could end.
Several commenters joined claimants attorneys by going for the kill as well, primarily by posting one-liner personal attacks and down arrows against commenters attempting to balance the need to provide justice for victims of past with a desire to continue serving youth in the future. They comment in disruptive ways and despise every aspect of our the national, council and district structures and volunteer leaders. They further despise any citizen willing to work for pay to advance Scouting.
The monitors of this site have chosen to allow the proliferation of often-abusive commentary. This has led to a diminishment of quality and a need for thoughtful commenters to just take “time off” from the abuse on this site. I regret to share that I have concluded some of these individuals are acting in concert with interests seeking to drive the BSA into liquidation.
If the moderators want to restore seriousness of purpose regarding discussion of the bankruptcy on this site, amid the crisis of whether Scouting will have a future at all, some of us might be willing to seriously re-engage. For instance, the ultimate issue will be upon us in just a few weeks — whether and how much local councils should contribute to the victim’s trust in exchange for a local council discharge. This should receive a thorough discussion in order to inform viewers on a matter they can impact in their local councils.
I comment in my own name, am proud of everything I have said and thank Scouting.com for having allowed me to share thoughts during these years of change. However, I encourage all thoughtful commenters to wait for a thoughtful reply from the moderators before investing serious time in posting analysis on this next, existential phase of the bankruptcy. If management of this site wants a serious discussion on this potential “final issue”, it can have it. However, it will need its moderators to directly curtail intentional disruptors.
Sincerely,cburkhardt
@Cburkhardt, there is so much to unpack there.
In general, you cast aspersions at nebulous targets. When you make a derogatory claim against an unidentified target, it comes across as disingenuous...crying "wolf" but not showing us where the wolf is. If you want to help your claims, please be more specific.
You make a claim of conspiracy, "...some of these individuals are acting in concert with interests seeking to drive the BSA into liquidation." without identifying the conspirators (who are posting on this site) or their interests.
It also seems that you genuinely believe that comments posted here have an effect on the outcome of this bankruptcy in different venues, including local councils and the courts. Do you believe that comments posted on this site influence the actions of Council Boards and Scout Executives across the country? Do you believe that attorneys in the case will use anything said here in their presentations before the court? I do not reach those same conclusions.
If you want to instruct the volunteer moderators on how to do their jobs, again, please be more specific. What was a "disruptive" or "abusive" comment that you think the moderators should have taken action on that they didn't?
The public square is open to all ideas and expression. It is necessary to have free speech to present all points of view to flesh out sound ideas, and eliminate unsound ones. That's what we do here. When an idea is presented, it first falls on all of us in this community to expose that idea for its absurdity (without disparaging the person), or praise it for its truth and applicability. If the idea infringes on someone else's rights or dignity, then we can call on the moderators to act.
What you propose is equivalent to the "cancel culture" and censoring of ideas you don't like. That should be anathema to any citizen.
-
5
-
2 hours ago, yknot said:
This is often the case with so many issues that arise on this forum and it's why many of us are often here. So many of these issues could be resolved if BSA would clarify what it means. I understand that in many cases, legal liability is the reason for the vagueness or lack of a policy. But there are so many other issues where a a little more clarity or definitiveness would simplify things in the field.
IIRC, the BSA used to publish a book called The Language of Scouting that addressed titles.
The current online resources don't cover such things anymore.
https://www.scouting.org/resources/los/
I have a much older printed version around here somewhere...if I dig it up, I'll try to post an excerpt or two, if applicable.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Eagledad said:
but the truth is the SM is by default responsible for everyone's actions in the program.
No, but I am responsible for imposing accountability, or consequences...that role I have no problem with.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Eagledad said:
As you stated, even the adults have different expectations of accountability. So, what's the difference whether the scouts or adults are lax. You have to figure out how to set accountability in the culture of the troop for everyone.
That is the lament, brother... and why I just say I am only responsible for my own actions, not anyone else's
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, mashmaster said:
And you can't trust camp blue cards either.
What is the solution to the onslaught? Other than gathering a group of like-minded leaders, with similar conscientious behavior, to scrub every requirement with a Scout to make sure they were done?
For many Scouts, Scouters, and parents, my simple standards of "What does the Handbook say?" and "What does the requirement say?" seem draconian...
A little over a year ago, when I found older Scouts were not adhering to requirements as written, I stopped all youth sign-offs. (The were pencil-whipping, for various reasons...) Only ASMs and I can sign off requirements. Advancement has slowed (no First Class in a year LOL) , but the "product" is much better. Our Scouts know and can do more now.
And yet, in line with their "human nature", they still seek out the ASMs who are the most lenient, or dare I say, lax on requirements.
I find this character element of integrity the hardest to teach.
Our Boards of Review focus more on the Scouts' experience in the program and reflections on Troop leadership, rather than their co-equal task of "...determining if a Scout has met the requirements."
Esse quam videre
-
13 minutes ago, qwazse said:
it deprives volunteers of the coveted time mentoring a youth. So instead of 12 youth helped, its 8-10. On the district side, the commissioner goes from collecting a handshake and contact info to making sure a half dozen t-s are crossed and i-s dotted. So, instead of the commish and his/her buddies going around neighborhoods shaking hands with dozens of prospective adults every month, they are probably pushing paperwork for a fraction of the people who they would have on-boarded for the same effort in the past.
So, instead of recruitment being a fun exercise of growing a fellowship of caring adults -- it has become an administrative hot-potato.
And there is zero desire to conduct a process improvement team here...
We did this with the council's L2E process, with great success...project and application returns to candidates is way down...
Our MBC process is WAAAYYYY broken. But there is no incentive seen to fix it...everyone seems to have implemented their own "county option" to it.
The worst is this...in Scoutbook, unit admins can approve any merit badge. Skip the counselor, and just award Jimmy the badge when you think he has done the requirements. I have talked with unit leaders from other units who, frustrated with council and district inability to get MBCs signed up, use this "stroke of the pen."
-
Refreshing, although dated...
-
1
-
-
I believe in the ideals. It's the people who work so hard at tearing them down, who seem to be gaining in influence, that erode faith...
I, for one, am standing in the gap as best I can.
-
3
-
-
40 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:
If the core of the BSA were to lose faith in its long-term future
Well, given events of late, it's not just the BSA's long-term future I am beginning to lose faith in...
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:
Claimant attorneys who are seeking a liquidation and destruction of the BSA know this and are taking public relations steps to make the post-bankruptcy operations appear hopeless. They are, very directly, seeking to undermine the confidence of our professional and volunteer core through some of the outlandish things they have been saying.
???
-
Initial membership numbers and recharter are not looking good here. My spies tell me our council has about a 50% loss from last year...ouch But, first reports are always wrong...
Wonder if the court will request or look at those kinds of stats to inform the decision??
-
1. I never address or refer to our youth as boys, girls, or kids. They are always "Scouts." They have picked up on this, and notice that it is my way of showing them respect.
2. I call Scouts by their first names until they turn 18. At the age of majority, I refer to our new Scouters as Mr./Ms. in front of the Scouts. This takes some getting used to
3. Adults refer to each other, when talking to Scouts, as Mr./Ms Lastname... Adult-to-adult is always first names.
4. I never throw in a title request...if anyone asks me to use their title, then I ask them to use mine, "Colonel." Only one person has ever insisted I call them a title (outside the military), and I asked for the reciprocal courtesy. They looked sidelong at me for a sec, then complied.
5. Some of our Scouts and adults call me "Colonel". I have never asked them to. They know of my military service, and those who understand what it means show me a great deal of respect by using it.
6. When Scouts ask me what they should call me, I say "Mr. XXXXXX", but because my last name is a bit difficult, "Mr. X" is fine.
7. I grew up in a part of the South where we called adults we knew Mr./Ms. Firstname. It was and is a sign of "familiar respect". If you didn't use Mr./Ms., and only used "Firstname" you'd receive a word to mind your manners. I never got a switching for this, but know a few who did
----- You called the adults you didn't know Mr./Ms. Lastname.
8. If none if the above are suitable for you, you may refer to me as "Your Majesty"
-
2
-
-
I understand the words...just don't understand why they would imply being at a council camp brings on a different rule set...
-
2 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:
"properly executed Scouting cohorts at council camps may be an exception" ???
Yeah, what the heck does that mean?
-
1 minute ago, TAHAWK said:
One issue was candidates calling me without anyone else on the line or emailing me withouit copying anyone else - both contrary to YP procedures.
I struggle with this daily...Scouts emailing me directly without cc-ing parents. I have a cut and paste now to add to all those emails:
Please include a parent or another registered adult on all communications.
At least, when they contact me through Scoutbook, the system automatically includes parents. I do like that feature.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, mrjohns2 said:
I know it has diamonds showing what changed, but it didn't seem to change much, did it? Does anyone have a tldr version? I glanced over it and it seemed the same.
The biggest change I see is that the Medical Screening Checklist was updated. follow the link to find the updated Dec 2020 version.
https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/HealthSafety/pdf/680-057.pdf
Although, question four is a subset of question one, therefore redundant... anyone see it differently?? Am I mis-reading it?
-
And again, @DuctTape for National Commissioner!!
-
1 minute ago, DuctTape said:
Regardless of what the system changes too, I will continue to advocate for the process to require scouts making contact with the mBcs and reduce (eliminate?) any adult appointment settings. We must remember the process provides (or denies) growth and learning opportunities as much if not more than the badge requirements themselves.
I am guilty of this...mostly because of convenience, and to thwart the parents who previously did this on behalf of their Scouts. That is, when I provided Scouts with MBC info, about 75% of the parents would make the call on their Scouts behalf to set it up.
I agree with you, and will modify my behavior on this one...putting this back on the shoulders of the Scouts.
What do you think about this idea?
When Scout asks for counselor info for a MB, I will send an email to the Scout with about three counselors' contact info, and explicit instructions that this is their responsibility, not their parents'. CC the parents, and BCC the counselors. Sets expectations for all three parties in one fell swoop.
Couldn't do this before, as our MBC lists had only telephone and address info. Now Scoutbook gives you email & phone for MBCs.
Thoughts?
-
3
-
-
17 hours ago, T2Eagle said:
but I really don't think you could set out to design IT systems as unhelpful as BSA's.
Reminds me of a military joke about government issued equipment..."Remember, your weapons are made by the lowest bidder..."
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, qwazse said:
So, tracking advancement is a different animal than listing each requirement for every award that a scout could earn.
Frankly, one doesn't need any pre-printed material to track advancement. Lined paper or graph paper would do. The date goes in the left margin, the scout writes the award and requirement number, and the PL signs in the right margin. If all that matters is lists of req #s and PL's signatures, it could literally be as small as a membership card for each rank. The scout comes to the SM and says "Sir, I've worked my ticket for ___ rank and am ready for my conference and BoR."
Those Scout and Tenderfoot tickets will look gnarly, but as scouts mature, we'll see their upper-rank tickets look sharp. As I've mentioned in other threads, the killer app would be the tech that could photograph the card to a cloud drive, scan the writing, and register requirement completion.
The other "universal scout tool" that I've mentioned before, is a standard-issue notebook designed for working MB's. This would replace those MB worksheets. The scout records the MB at the top of the page, lists the requirement in the margin, and makes notes relevant to the requirement in the body.
The real value is that library of specialty MB pamphlets. Fewer troops means fewer libraries and less demand. The contents are swell, but it if they were exclusively online, it would be a hassle for end-users to print and bind the 23-136 pamphlets they'd use in their career. The issue of oversupply is an indication that BSA needs to move to print-on-demand and direct mailing. This would also enable every scout-shop and trading post to resupply with exactly the inventory that they needed.
Darn it, @qwazse, didn't we tell you to stop peddling your pesky common sense around here...sheesh!!
-
2
-
-
That was one of the most well-balanced, well-told stories I have seen on the news lately. Very glad is was done by Scouts!
Thanks for sharing
-
1 minute ago, mrjohns2 said:
Markup isn't the question, margin is. It doesn't matter if they have 300% markup if they are still losing money on the item.
Agreed...point is, they have to mark up all the other merchandise to help cover the costs of the stuff that doesn't sell.
If they move to a smarter model of on-line publications, the cost savings could be translated into lower costs for other Scout Stuff...but you and I know that would never happen
-
5 hours ago, fred8033 said:
919 awarded in 2019. I'm betting less than 200 sold nation wide. Maybe 400 as I'm betting counselors buy them more than scouts.
And probably thousands upon thousands printed...
Having a close friend who works in a Scout Shop, I can tell you the markup on all Scouting merchandise is high. Some things over 100% (double what was paid to National Supply at wholesale.)
-
On 1/16/2021 at 4:40 PM, mrjohns2 said:
It is interesting that some of these items, even if they seemed expensive, must not have been "self sustaining" meaning that they were selling these at a loss.
Yes, hmmmm...
Stamp Collecting, one of my favorites...only 919 Scouts awarded in 2019.
How many books do you think they printed? There are five sitting in our Scout Shop (although I'm not sure they are current versions.)
(I did not mention Bugling, another favorite, at the bottom of the list, because it is incorporated into Music MB pamphlet; 12882 awarded.)
Chapter 11 announced
in Issues & Politics
Posted
A parallel... The US Olympic Committee is a 501 C 3 facing consequences for it's role in cases of sexual abuse of gymnasts. If the USOC ceased to exist, sporting competitions and the Olympics would continue. Another group would fill the gap. the USOC is not sports, and sports is not the USOC.
https://www.moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?id=4A4EB912-624B-4706-A6A1-64DC88E20C74
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:07BDl3Txjr0J:https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/olympic-organizations-face-multiple-investigations-by-justice-department-state-attorneys-general/2019/09/13/7e190fa2-d654-11e9-9343-40db57cf6abd_story.html+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
The BSA is not Scouting. BSA is a corporation that markets their Scouting program (monopolistically?). If the corporation does not exist, Scouting still will. Scouting existed in this country before the BSA, afterall.
At the local level, I am not concerned. Nor am I at the national level...the movement of Scouting will continue in some form or another, with or without the BSA.