CynicalScouter

Close. A big point of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy is the question of how much insurance companies will pay. Keep in mind that if the insurance companies honor their insurance policies that the victims will be compensation and BSA will have to pay but not nearly as much. The insurance companies are claiming, in effect, the insurance agreements are void because a) BSA lied to the insurance companies when the contracts were signed OR b) BSA while insured failed to exercise the minimum amount of care necessary to honor their end of the insurance agreement or c) both. There's no way BS

Why do YOU want to deny abuse victims compensation for those reprehensible things that BSA leadership overlooked or failed to follow-up on? This isn't about seeking protection from Congressionally Chartered organizations. Your plan is simply a BSA bailout. No one organization should get that kind of a custom carve-out from tort liability. Yes, it is a shame that today's kids get penalized. You want to just focus on today's kids. I want to focus on the kids (now grown men) who got abused. And even if I didn't want to focus on the kids, I find the idea of such a special c

So, if you make it to the century mark, you get Congressionally-imposed immunity from tort liability? So, if the tort/abuse is more than a year ago (vs. "years"), you get Congressionally-imposed immunity from tort liability? So, if the CURRENT volunteers are squeaky clean, then all prior bad acts (and liability) for the incorporated entity's officers and agents get Congressionally-imposed immunity from tort liability? There literally are no owners of the BSA (36 USC 30906(b) "The corporation may not issue stock or declare or pay a dividend."). So, if your organization i

Yes. And what I pointed out is that your proposal to shield federally created organizations is unworkable. This is NOT like the question of whether state law should impact a federal government. This is NOT like the question of whether state law should impact a federal government agency. There, the supremacy clause is really clear (and McCulloch v. Maryland makes it clearer). What you want is for Congress to give immunity to federally chartered organizations from pedophilia suits. That's just not going to happen and it shouldn't. The fact that Congress incorporated the ent

That sounds great, and that may have been a 19th century view of things, but as a legal matter, it matters not a whit. All "Congressional charter" means is "I got pull in Congress". And BSA did. 100 years ago. Now, to try and use the fact that it has a congressional charter as some sort of shield from abuse claims? "Sorry you got molested and all, but we have a Congressional Charter, so too bad." And I'm sorry, but if I'm a lawfirm and you write a law that allows for absolute waivers of liability as long as I can somehow register as a charity? I'm all over that. Sorry you were molest

I cannot see a scenario in which Congress overrides state statutes of limitations to protect Congressionally chartered orgs. I also don't see why Congress should. There are lots and lots of not for profit and charities that are locally/state incorporated and subject to state statutes. Why should Boy Scouts of America get special legal privileges over that of say the Salvation Army USA (incorporated in New Jersey)? The problem is that the situation with the BSA is so unique that it doesn't justify giving the other 90 or so Congressionally Chartered organizations special protectio

Why? I hate this to, but what would Congress stepping in solve? Stopping the bankruptcy and denying ANY victim ANY claims? What is the end game with Congress stepping in?

There is 0% change Congress will step in to stop abuse claims. That's absolutely radioactive.

As I read it, even if there is no valid, enforceable claims against certain councils, TCC want to know what money and assets they have to possibly force them into giving them up as part of a global settlement. If I were a council in a state in which the statute of limitations has lapsed AND I was betting that a statue of limitations extension would NEVER happen (as it did in NY), I would tell them to pound sand. That said, the TCC is once again making it really, really clear they are going to go after the chartered orgs. If your chartered organization hasn't been notified, th

This is what I'd love to see I believe such a mediation statement is private/privileged, but it would be interesting to see to what extent National is in discussing the "complex legal issues" prepared (or NOT prepared) to throw local Councils and their assets under the bus. This will be interesting to see. Which as I've already noted makes things even more complicated since the charter says Boy Scouts of America is supposed to be "perpetual" can you really Chapter 7 liquidate? The only other times a congressional chartered non-profit dissolved was where the membership c

Good for you!

Displaying a caged African in a zoo? In the Monkey House? Yeah, "controversy" is doing some heavy lifting there.

Details to be released November 1.

Read further

One more item: while this might MIGHT be put in place as a COVID emergency, I cannot see that it will stay that way. Virtual IOLS is here to stay. Of course some councils may simply refuse to do it; but if I'm in one council and can find another council that will do it virtually, since IOLS certification is valid nationwide, why not right? I mean I can now become a 100% position trained SM without ever having to leave my back yard. Hazardous Weather: Online YPT: Online SM/ASM Training: Online IOLS: Online + sleep in a tent in my backyard.

Further confirmation from National Capital Council's training page: virtual IOLS is now the preferred method. https://weownadventure.com/new-adult-live-training-guidelines/

I wanted to pull this as its own topic out of the WB thread. Here's the first confirmed sighting of (National-sanctioned) virtual IOLS in the wild out of National Capital Council. https://scoutingevent.com/082-40623

Here's the first confirmed sighting of (National-sanctioned) virtual IOLS in the wild out of National Capital Council. I am creating a thread dedicated to this (since it is NOT WB)

It's coming. It was announced in that group by someone on the National Committee the same time as virtual ILST/ILSC that virtual IOLS is coming soon/within a week. I know several councils that did improper/unauthorized virtual IOLS and/or allowed for "testing out" of IOLS due to COVID in the spring. That pissed off the folks a Scouting U. (those left after the purge/layoffs) so this is now coming to allow or authorized virtual IOLS.

I would say no. The SM is required to take 1) IOLS which barely scratches the surface of the skills needed (AND guess what? Is being converted into an online course next week). 2) Hazardous Weather: Online 3) Scoutmaster Training: Online And the online scoutmaster training is not even mandatory in many councils. I know some are moving to a "100% position trained" policy but I believe they remain the exception, not the rule. So we now or will in the next week or so people who can be 100% "position trained" Scoutmasters entirely online without having to demonstrate

Exactly. In fact, I get the impression from the folks I've seen that isn't the 1-3 year Scouter who takes it (this may just be my district/Council) but the 5-10+ year person who wants in on the club. Troop Committee training (online and the old Troop Challenge) is a joke. I've had committee members fly through it and still not have a clue what they are suppose to do (position-wise), much less how to be a "leader".

Interesting. Any idea why changed?

Except, it isn't. I've taken lots of leadership development programs. None involve or include open displays of proof of completion (beads) after the fact. None include semi-constant references to the same. Even when the beads are not visible, other things are (jackets, neckerchiefs, etc.) And the main function of post-WB seems to be encouraging everyone to "go to WB". Knots on the chest don't invoke a spirit of belonging to the "club". At worst they are indications you've been around awhile and/or have certain training in position. Whatever. This also is not like University of Scouti

"Now see, this? This part? That's where the cougar started to gnaw on my leg. Sorta painful, but just look at how amazing the wide angle lens is on that iPhone 12! Amazing, right? That's not a red filter, that's my blood smearing on the phone case, but can I just tell you that the phone never broke? I mean my leg did in multiple places, but the phone? Not. A. Scratch!"

I've found that more often than not it is power mad SM's who are "Gate keepers" and insist on re-testing and reviewing the scout. I've had on several occasions had to remind SMs that the Guide to Advancement does NOT authorize the SM to second guess the MBC and that the solution if they have a problem is to file a complaint with the MBC's council (11.1.0.0 Reporting Merit Badge Counseling Concerns).