CynicalScouter

4 hours ago, qwazse said:

@TAHAWK, it does smack of the Colorado bakers' case that went to SCOTUS, doesn't it?

 

That's not how ads work. More likely there is just a iframe or box integrated into the website. That box is controlled/operated like a roadside electronic bulletin board that is customized to either a) show ads that have the same key words as the site or b) show ads that have the same key words as your recent searches.

The site owner has no knowledge of what ads might popup. There may be a way for them to request that certain advertisers not be in the ad cycle, but they would have to go out of their way to do so.

10 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

I notice that this site is running an advertisement for one of the law firms seeking clients to sue BSA.    It begins,  "The Boys Scouts of America didn't uphold their promise, but we will."

 

The express promise of some of these lawyers is to destroy BSA.

 

 

It is possible that there is simply an auto-generated ad box at the top and that the ad is based on the content of the site and/or you browser or IP search history. I do not think the admins are picking these ads.

On 6/12/2020 at 4:30 PM, scoutldr said:

Our Gov in VA just announced back to school guidelines.  Buses will be restricted to one kid per seat, skipping every other row, and all must wear masks. 

That is not what he said. Here's what the actual requirement is. Note the phrases "to the extent possible" and "when possible." And that is for Phase 1 and 2; we are in Phase 3.
 

Quote

Phase 1: "Physical distance should be created between children on school buses (e.g. seat children one per seat, every other row) limiting capacity as needed to optimize distance between passengers. In Phase 1, limit bus capacity to 10 persons to the extent possible."

Phase 2: "Physical distance should be created between children on school buses when possible (e.g. seat children one per seat, every other row) limiting capacity as needed to optimize distance between passengers. Children (such as siblings) living together may sit together on the bus."

3 hours ago, sst3rd said:

Somewhere along the line, units will be able to start meeting and going on camping trips again. I'm concerned that in my area, many units will not start up again.

Depending on where you are at, there's going to be units-on-paper that last because they can recharter in August with what they have on paper now as people wait it out.

For the December recharters, let's see. THAT will be the real telling factor. Random, wild,  speculation: 20-40% unit collapse.

36 minutes ago, MattR said:

Is a McDonald's franchise considered a separate legal entity from the corporation?

Maybe it's time for someone with legal expertise to help us understand the relationship between councils and the BSA. Just a hunch, but since the courts haven't thrown out the idea that councils are part of the BSA, it's not simple.

Here's the thing, even those with legal expertise disagree.

It comes down to how much control did National hold over the Councils and the adult leaders.

At this point  National is prepared to concede and in fact has conceded in its bankruptcy filings it had SOME control (the fact they kept the perversion files with data from the councils; the fact hat councils only exist at National's say so, that council implement National's policies, etc.) Rather than spending the better part of the next decade hashing out how much (15% liable? 25%?) they are going for this global settlement and inviting councils to pitch in.

The alternative is 3-5 years of lawsuit and appeal and this goes on forever. If they do this quickly National and most Councils can have a global settlement in mid-2021.

Just now, DavidLeeLambert said:

(Disclaimer: my employer is a competitor to, partner of, and customer of Oracle, and I personally have some expired Oracle certifications; however, my statements below represent my own opinion, not that of my employer.)

Somewhere, you just made your general counsel happy. Great disclaimer work! 😀

And thanks of the rest of the info; this makes sense. I just literally did not know. I did notice that a lot of my former "taleo" no longer appear (e.g. bsalearn.learn.taleo.net)

49 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

BSA (the Debtors) has asked Court permission to sever certain Oracle Cloud Services agreements - the "HCM Services" and the "Volunteer Learning Management Services"

 

Does this mean Scouting U is getting nuked?

On 6/24/2020 at 9:33 AM, scoutldr said:

Maybe it's been discussed before, but how does the Chapter 11 affect local council properties, since Councils are considered independent corporations?  

Our main camp is on the banks of the James River in Virginia and is a former plantation, the deed of which can be traced back to Capt John Smith.  The state archeologists are excavating a home site on the river bank dating back to the 1600s when some settlers at Jamestown expanded across the river.  The common thinking is that the owners deeded the 800+ acre plot to the Council in 1958, with a similar provision that should it not be used for Scouting, it would revert back to the owner, but I cannot confirm that.  

Heart of Virginia?

There are three options AT THIS MOMENT (things can change):

1) The Council joins in with the National bankruptcy plan and pays some amount TBD. Any claims against the Council for past actions are considered closed. That TBD amount is unknown at this point, but councils who are interested in this deal have until a date in the near future to take the first step (turn over all financial records) to the bankruptcy court.

2) The Council decides to go it alone, the plaintiffs finish their suit against National and the Councils that agreed to join in the settlement, and plaintiffs immediately file suit against the Council. They may try to force sale camps to pay damages.

3) The Council decides to go it alone, the plaintiffs finish their suit against National and the Councils that agreed to join in the settlement, and plaintiffs decide suing that particular individual Council isn't worth it.

There are lots of elective merit badges with redundant or near-redundant elements (pets vs. dog care?).

And no one has to take American Heritage or American Culture

Not a single current merit badge requires any discussion of racism.

20 minutes ago, Troop75Eagle said:

Anytime you have forced instruction on community, cultural and demographic differences, it becomes political.

Then you must object American Heritage, right (Choose THREE groups that have different racial, cultural, national, or ethnic backgrounds, one of which comes from your own background.)

1 hour ago, scoutldr said:

So, rather than teaching scouts and parents that following the rules and laws of the land is what we should do (A Scout is Obedient), we should spin and obfuscate and do what we can to "minimize the chances of an audit", even though it may be illegal.  Got it.  From my reading of the tea leaves, it will all soon be a moot point anyway.

That is ultimately what this boils down to: individual scout accounts funded via proceeds from fundraising for the unit (e.g. Scout gets XX% in their personal account to use as they direct) violates IRS rules, but since those rules won't be enforced (via audit), we are just going to go ahead and do it anyway.

6 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Many of the scout properties were "donated".  Is there any information about rescinding rights for donated properties?  For example, if BSA chose to sell, the property ownership would revert back to the original owner. 

Bankruptcy offsets any such restrictions. If it is a BSA asset (and these are), then it can be forced sold to pay for debts. And it would not be BSA technically selling it; at that point BSA will be forced to turn the rights to the property over to a Bankruptcy trustee (by court order) who will then sell and transfer the proceeds to the creditors/claimants.

Playing a shell-game where BSA suddenly tried to transfer these properties back to the original donors would be seen as a ham-fisted effort to try and hide/divert assets subject to a bankruptcy proceeding and would fail. It may actually be worse than that because now it would drag final resolution of the bankruptcy for months and I can guarantee the media will run with the story ("Scouts hiding assets from victims.")

7 minutes ago, Thunderbird said:

Yes, I agree.  If the merit badge college (virtual or otherwise) is not following the Guide to Advancement (for example: by having a single class with 900+ Scouts and only 1 MBC), then that should be reported to the council.

What I am saying is that the Scout should not be punished at the end of the process.  If the Scout intentionally did not follow the BSAs procedure or policies, then that would be a different situation, but the issue here does not appear to be with the Scout -- it appears to be with the council having virtual merit badge classes that have way too many Scouts.

Yes, and GTA explicitly provides this as an example

Quote

The same holds true if a Scout, without intent to violate national BSA procedures or policies, fulfills merit badge requirements with someone who is not registered and approved as a counselor. This could happen, for example, if a Scout, in good faith, contacts someone who has inadvertently been dropped from a unit or district charter or otherwise has an expired membership, but who remains on an approved list of counselors.

But the SM still has the responsibility to follow up and ensure that the MBC was registered and report if they find a problem after the fact.

Quote

In cases where it is discovered that unregistered or unapproved individuals are signing off merit badges, this should be reported to the council or district
advancement committee so they have the opportunity to follow up.

The other problem is that many of these online mills are being run direct by the councils themselves.

Just now, TAHAWK said:

Many Scoutmasters select council summer camps BECAUSE they are merit badge mills.

And shame on them.

9 minutes ago, Thunderbird said:

If a council is sponsoring / running the virtual merit badge colleges, then that council is responsible for making sure that those merit badge counselors (MBCs) are properly registered in accordance with the Guide to Advancement.  Any vetting of a MBC that is done, should be done at the beginning of the process -- not at the end (7.0.0.3 The Scout, the Blue Card, and the Unit Leader).

At this point, however, the Scout has already completed the merit badge.  It would be difficult to say no to the Scout now, assuming that the Scout has acted in good faith (I haven't seen anything in the posts so far indicating otherwise):
 

If the SM believes the MBC was invalid or failed to meet the basic minimum standards for the merit badge (read: merit badge mill) they can and arguably should/must file a 11.1.0.0 Reporting Merit Badge Counseling Concerns. Neither 7.0.0.3 nor 7.0.4.6 preclude a review under 11.1.0.0. And this is in addition to the SM review under 7.0.4.7


From the 11.1.0.0 Reporting Merit Badge Counseling Concerns form itself.
 

Quote

Nature of concern (check all that apply):
❏ The merit badge counselor is not registered with the BSA.
❏ The merit badge counselor is not approved by the council advancement committee.
❏ The merit badge counselor did not ensure that each Scout actually and personally completed requirements.
❏ Requirements that could not have been completed were signed off.
❏ Requirements as written were changed or not used.
❏ The Scout was at the event but did not attend class.
❏ The Scout was signed off for a merit badge but did not attend the event

15 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Can you take picture of blue and card and send image of the card?  ... from what I'm hearing ... SM is trying to help and well intentioned, but may be a little over zealous ... OR, just trying to learn how to do things in this new COVID-19 safe-distancing world.

As I understand it the issue is not "do you have a signed blue card?" The issue is  "I as SM have no record showing the person who signed that blue card is a registered and valid MBC because they are not in Scoutbook, therefore I want to track this down/I want more information."

As I said earlier, if this were unit or district/council it would be easy: poke your unit or district advancement chair or poke someone at council to confirm the MBC's status. Easy peasy. But doing it for a MBC that could be half a continent away? Not so much.

1 minute ago, Samuel said:

I my understanding from SM over email communication is, unable to find MBC in scoutbook. It would be lot easier to do things face to face. 

And the SM needs to understand that a) not all MBCs are in Scoutbook and b) even the ones in Scoutbook may have lapsed/be no longer registered.

1 minute ago, Samuel said:

These MB Sessions are conducted by BSA councils not individual MBC. Of course they are not our home council, but how it is fair for a scout who did all the work and getting into the problem of not finding MBC in scoutbook?

The session may have been, but the Guide to Advancement does not contemplate "council signatures" and that is why your SM may be having a problem. This sounds like a merit badge mill. It is not "the council" that the scout was suppose to have a discussion with or show or demonstrate. It was a particular human being. That human being is suppose to be a registered MBC.

That is what is frustrating with these mills. It is suppose to be merit badge COUNSELING. Not a mill where the scout sits there, stares at a screen, and gets a sign off "from council."

Even in summer camps when a blue card is issued there's a name for the MBC "John Smith". Not "Camp John Doe"

I am sorry this is happening to your scout, but if I were you I'd email the council that did this and raise hell. This violates at least 4 provisions of the GTA and the lack of a signature BY AN MBC (not a "council") makes the blue card void.

1 minute ago, Samuel said:

I hope SM is not suspecting the legitimacy of the MB or MBC, but I am not sure. During this shutdown period the scouts got lot of time on their hand and took advantage of the online virtual MB sessions. Almost off of them asked the scouts do do the work and submit the proof. I have no concerns on the quality of the sessions my son have attended. But tracking back the MBC after 1 or 2 months will be a difficult task. Some Digital blue cards are issued in the name of the Program or Council without the MBC's personal contact information.

Yeah, that wasn't suppose to happen. It is an MBC that issues the card. Not a council or such.

Part of this is (as I understand it) back in the day the SM had much, much more control over the merit badge counselor system and the phase "scoutmaster approved" was used.

Now, GTA says that the SM has to provide a name, but cannot force the issue SO LONG AS THE MBC IS A REGISTERED ONE.

Quote

Although it is the unit leader’s responsibility to see that at least one merit badge counselor is identified from those approved and made available, the Scout may already have one in mind with whom he or she would like to work. The unit leader and Scout should come to agreement as to who the counselor will be. Lacking agreement, the Scout must be allowed to work with the counselor of his or her choice, so long as the counselor is registered and has been approved by the council advancement committee.

And that's where the SM may make inquiry: was this MBC "registered and has been approved by the council advancement committee" in their home council? If not, then you got lots of problems up to and possibly included voiding the merit badge under GTA 11.1.0.0.

8 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Didn't your scout meet with his SM before requesting a blue card? Weren't these counselors ones that your SM recommended for your scout before he contacted them?

The SM meeting requires only that the SM provide at least 1 MBC name. The scout is then free to go to any MBC that is valid and registered. There are virtual merit badge colleges being offered literally around the world (Transatlantic Council). I've had scouts who have signed up for the Virtual merit badge college across the country, THEN go to the SM for the blue card meeting before the college started (e.g. Sign up Thursday, Email SM Thursday night, SM does a virtual meeting/virtual sign off, Merit badge college starts Monday).

EDIT: The problem is some SMs are (rightly) openly questioning the valid and registered MBC part. And many of these virtual programs are just badge mills at this point. 999 scouts on a Zoom? Seriously?

3 minutes ago, Samuel said:

The councils he got merit badges are all over the country. I'm not sure how my SM is going to verify each of the MBCs. I do not want him to refuse the fully completed digital blue cards. He will be heartbroken. 

The SM has an a duty to ensure that the blue card was validly signed by a valid MBC. See Guide to Advancement 7.0.4.7
 

Quote

Upon encountering any merit badge program where BSA standards are not upheld, unit leaders are strongly encouraged to report the incident to the council advancement committee, preferably using the form found in the appendix (see “Reporting Merit Badge Counseling Concerns,” 11.1.0.0).

Not all units and/or councils use Scoutbook. A person could be a fully registered and valid MBC and not in Scoutbook because a) they chose not to be or b) the unit they are associated with doesn't use Scoutbook or c) their Council does not use Scoutbook as its MBC list (they use Doubleknot or some other something or other)

Under the Guide to Advancement, the SM can (and arguably must) confirm that the MBC was registered and valid. In unit that's simple: the SM double checks with the advancement chair. In council that process is simple: just call (or look up) the Council provided MBC list (which as I said may or may not be Scoutbook) or bug/poke the District Advancement chair.

You go outside council things get...murky.

One more thing, and this is extreme: if the SM believes the MBC was invalid or failed to meet the basic minimum standards for the merit badge (read: merit badge mill) they can file a 11.1.0.0 Reporting Merit Badge Counseling Concerns. With so many of these virtual merit badge mills (Central Florida = 999 scouts in a Zoom session? Really?) that is a real concern.