CalicoPenn

Perhaps it's some kind of ladder?

Please let us know what it is when you find out.

Calico

I checked out the list of notable Eagles and was surprised by a couple of folks on the list - not that they were notable, but that they are Eagle Scouts.

Danny Pintauro, the child actor that played Jonathon on Who's The Boss, is listed as having earned his Eagle - When did he find the time??

Mike Judge - co-creator of Beavis and Butthead.

Calico

How large would this list end up being on Wikipedia? Wikipedia prefers to have articles of no longer than 32KB which is between 6,000 and 10,000 words, though they aren't very clear on whether this applies to lists.

How will we make sure every Eagle is listed in the list?

What about verifiability too? Wikipedia is a platform that allows any user to edit an entry - how will entries in this list be verifid? Who will do so?

While it sounds like a good idea, the practicalities of such a listing seems a rather large hurdle to cross.

Lists of notable, distinguished, famous and infamous Eagles on Wikipedia can be seen as serving a legitimate research purpose for people looking for specific information about someone or subject. A list of all Eagles is just a list for vanity sake. How about a list of number of Eagles awarded per year - a more research legitimate listing.

Just my two cents

Calico

MinnSM - First, welcome to the forum.

Does the lad still have copies of the e-mails from the District Advancement Chairman stating he could go ahead with his project with the changes requested? I hope so - if he does, get them printed up and run to the Council Advancement Chairman to appeal the decision of the DAC. Despite the lack of a formal signature on the form, an e-mail approval from the DAC to start his project would certainly seem to me to be all the approval he needs and suggests that the DAC was willing to sign off on the form.

Don't get discouraged yet - talk to the folks at Council - they may very well be ready to help.

CalicoPenn

Baden,

I had a thought (which may be my limit for the night) brought on by your post about summer camp. Sure, she showed up to camp midweek, but she also held firm that she wasn't bringing her son home early. While she may come across to some as a kind of uber-mom, I'm starting to think she may also be very curious and engaged. My thought? Have you spoken to her about possibly becoming an ASM and getting her trained? If she's willing to drive up to spend a few minutes or hours on a campout seeing what's going on, she may very well be willing to spend a whole weekend camping and helping with the day's activities. Getting her trained will certainly help her understand the program, and you could end up with another good leader at your side. Though it may sound like she's not the type to wait for one, she may be waiting and hoping for your invite in to help. How many other parents are taking the kind of interest she is? I think you have an opportunity here to channel that interest to something that could benefit your troop and program.

CalicoPenn

OGE and Ed have hit the nail square on. Like any tool, My Space can be good or bad. I have an account on My Space which I started only because local school districts in my area started making a big issue out of what kids were doing on the site and I wanted to do my own investigations before making any snap judgements. I found a number of alumni of my college on My Space and chatted with one who is a National Park Ranger and got information about what to see and do there (and an invitation for a "back stage" tour when I do come by).

Immature kids will do dumb and stupid things on it - and frankly, if you're 17 and are stupid enough to post pictures of your self bombed out of your gourd standing around a keg doing beer bongs, you get what you deserve.

All the local-media fueled hysteria about the My Space stuff here makes me want to paraphrase what may be a familiar song to some:

Oh we got trouble

Right here in River City

It starts with a T

But doesn't rhyme with M

And that stands for My Space

CalicoPenn

Doing nothing is not an option. At the very least, the CM should have been told that parents who saw or heard about this were upset by this action. It may have been an unintended lapse in judgement, perhaps brought on by a familiarity with his neighbor, but it was still an action that should not have taken place. It was the correct course of action to notify the SA, and perhaps he sat in on the meeting not doing anything to see how the CO and Unit would handle the issue.

In school situations, giving wedgies is considered a form of hazing and/or bullying. It is no longer acceptable.

Had this taken place in a public park and was witnessed by a police officer, in most jurisdictions, the CM would have found himself being taken away in handcuffs in front of the Cubs, even if the 14-year old protested that it was just a goof. This is an adult assaulting a minor, whether charges are pressed or not, and even if done "in a spirit of fun". A 14-year old boy can't consent to being assaulted, and neither can his parents. If witnessed by a police officer, no complaint by the boy or his parents need to be filed - the police officer becomes the complainant.

Talk to the CM, if he is trained and responsible, he will admit to his error and apologize to the adults promising to be more thoughtful in the future. If he becomes defensive, watch him closely.

CalicoPenn

If the Troop planned and ran it, and it isn't a troop meeting, it should count as a troop activity.

I would respectfully disagree with EagleinKY in one aspect of his reply, which I agree with almost in total. I would think if a patrol decided that they would work together on meeting merit badge requirements with an MB Counselor as a patrol activity, that it should count as a patrol activity, especially if we're willing to accept the same for a troop activity. I certainly think some of the merit badges, though still earned individually, lend themselves well to working on together as a patrol - pioneering, for example.

CalicoPenn

What does the Camping Merit Badge book say about what counts as camping? (I don't have a copy). The merit badge book is not just a book with the requirements. The book tells the lad what to do to earn the badge. If the merit badge book lists sleeping in a lean-to as a means to meet the requirement for number of nights camping, then the boy should get credit for sleeping in a lean-to. Has anyone read the latest Camping merit badge book?

I think most counselors would accept work done prior to being contacted as meeting the requirements but if someone insists that the boy be signed off on earning the badge by the Scoutmaster and meeting the counselor first for the Camping Merit Badge, then if I were the Scoutmaster, I would become a Merit Badge Counselor for the badge and hand the lad a signed Blue Card (or white form) at his first troop meeting. But then that's just me.

CalicoPenn

If you weren't listening to the game around the campfire on Saturday night, what would you have been doing?

Once you start making rules for situations like this, whether it be a ban or a once a year "treat", it becomes easier to make rules for every little thing that upsets someone. Are you prepared to make a rule banning pickup football games because "little Johnny's mommy doesn't want him to play football" or other such things?

It sounds like you have a well-run BOY-run Troop - in fact, I'd praise that Patrol Leader who saw a challenge with attendance, polled his patrol to see if there was a way to solve the challenge, and suggested it at the PLC meeting - sounds like SPL material to me!

If it were me, I would recommend to the Committee Chair that the committee take no action until the issue was brought up to the PLC to get their input - The boys may choose to limit radio listening to special occasions (a World Series game, a College Football game (any particular reason the boys were willing to stay home for this game? Maybe someone's brother was playing, or a former Troop member, or ???). Once the boys make their feelings on the issue known, I would hope the committee would stande behind the boys, and if it goes against one parent's wishes, make it clear that it is a boy-run operation, that the committee supports that effort, that they are glad his/her son is in the unit, that the boy likes being in the unit, and that they hope he/she will stick with them.

And maybe you could suggest to the boys that as part of listening to the radio, a passive activity, that they plan an activity that can be done while sitting around while listening to the game - like practing knot tying, making baskets, weaving lanyards, etc.

CalicoPenn(This message has been edited by CalicoPenn)

The issue isn't if the rep from the Scout's lied or not, or even if the Scout's can discriminate - the issue is was the school a party of the discrimination and the court said no. The court correctly separated the issue of the mandatory recruiting session from the membership requirements of the Scouts.

I'm much more interested in the press-reported footnote of the case. The court seems to be suggesting that if another, less savory, group decided to make a play for claiming equal access under the equal access statutes, that the school would have no legal means of preventing it - if the BSA can have a mandatory recruiting session during school hours, then the Junior KKK can do the same if it so demands. It appears the court is suggesting to the schools that though they can't be held at fault for outside groups recruiting practices, they should carefully consider if they really want to continue to allow these sessions since it could open them up to demands on school time by other groups.

At least that's what I hope that footnote means. It could be interpreted by some to suggest that the BSA is itself a hate group because why would the court a) use that term and b) even research that area. I don't agree with that interpretation, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who looks at that and wonders.

CalicoPenn

Ever hear of the American Composites Manufacturers Association? Me neither, until I typed in Composite Materials Merit Badge on my search engine and this group popped up - they even have a committee formed to help councils to spread the word and teach the badge.

I've always thought that some merit badges are somehow sponsored by various professional associations. Some merit badges that seem innocuous at first glance, like Plumbing, Auto Mechanics, Journalism, Law, and Veterinary Science certainly have the potential to be sponsored.

Others, like Architecture, Dentistry, Landscape Architecture, Railroading, Masonry and Pulp & Paper surely must have some kind of association behind them.

And some just scream obvious industry or association support, like American Business, American Labor, Disabilities Awareness, Consumer Buying, Cinematography (Spielberg was on the Board once, was he not?), Metals Engineering and now Composite Materials.

Food for thought?

CalicoPenn

Perhaps there is something to be said about long, cold Minnesota winters.

CP

It might be a bit obscure to some but it would be fun to have a whole patrol decked out in Star Trek Original Series red just like Chief Engineer Montgomery Scott - they could even call themselves the Scotty's (or the Engineers).

I saw a similar group to the Rogues at the Bristol Ren Faire in Wisconsin this year - the Tartanics. After checking both groups web sites out, I have to ask - is there some kind of connection between Texas and Bagpipes I haven't heard about? Both groups sure do a lot of concerts in Texas.

CalicoPenn

The Standards and Requirements of the BSA are met when the merit badge application is signed by the Merit Badge Counselor. What the unit is attesting to is that they received the application signed as completed by the Merit Badge Counselor - as long as the application is signed by the MBC, the standards and requirements are met - the unit is not attesting to the accuracy or completeness of the work done between the MBC and the Scout - only that they have received a signed merit badge application. Would I sign the advancement report? Yes - because the standards and requirements were met - remember, I'm only acknowledging that we received a signed application from the MBC. Would I like it? No - but my recourse is to go to the district/council to complain about the work of the MBC. The merit badge program isn't a troop controlled program, unlike ranks - it is a district/council program.

The "application" for the merit badge is to the Merit Badge Counselor. It is not to the unit, the committee, a board of review, the Scoutmaster - it is to the Merit Badge Counselor who acts as the representative of the District/Council for the purposes of awarding the badge. The Unit/Scoutmaster does not get to turn away or deny the application. The first signature verifies that the Scoutmaster/Unit is aware the Scout is working on the badge, the second signature is to verify that the Scout turned in a completed and signed application for the badge - that's it.

Perhaps I should have said Awarded instead of Earned - I was thinking particularly of the situation Lisabob related concerning the Scout who was awarded a couple of merit badges through camp that he obviously didn't work on. If the lad accepts the badges (as he is allowed to do under the merit badge system) we can certainly express our surprise and diappointment in his lack of character. Expressing extreme displeasure with Council over their utter lack of control and record keeping for summer camp merit badges should be right at the top of the list.

Much has already been written about Board of Reviews on this forum. Ed's situation describes a great question that elicited a response that gives them pause. Ultimately, the badge was awarded and the BOR can't take the merit badge away. The BOR can't even withhold rank advancement because a merit badge requirement wasn't completed to their satisfaction (or completed at all). This is one of those instances where the way the merit badge was taught/examined needs to be addressed with the MBC or Council.

CalicoPenn

Short answer: It is completed

Long Answer: Interesting diversion in ethics aside: It is completed. In the BSA program, the Merit Badge Counselor is the ultimate and only authority on when a merit badge is completed - if the Merit Badge Counselor has signed the application as complete, the badge is complete and the boy has officially earned the badge - no matter what our second guesses are.

The Scoutmaster's role in this process is three-fold. First, to provide intitial guidance on finding a Merit Badge Counselor, thus knowing that a Scout is working on a particular merit badge. And second, to acknowledge that a Merit Badge Counselor-signed application has been turned in by the Scout, thus knowing that a Scout has completed a particular merit badge. Third, to hand the Scout his merit badge at the next available opportunity and hand him his card at the next Court of Honor. That's it - there is no other role for the Scoutmaster in the process - there is no Scoutmaster Conference, no Board of Review, no retesting.

If you learn that the Merit Badge Counselor's work is suspect or sloppy, bring that up with the District Advancement Chairman. If it is a summer camp issue, bring it up at the council camping committee and let them know you're going to find a new summer camp if you can't rely on their counselors and record keeping.

Does this mean that there will be some that slip through? Yes - and it's an imperfect world in the first place.

We can express our disappointment if the lad has knowingly received a badge not earned but in this part of the program, it is up to one person and one person only to re-do the badge - and that is the Scout himself. We don't have to like it, but we also don't get to choose which policies and procedures to follow and which to ignore.

CalicoPenn(This message has been edited by CalicoPenn)

Even after an official US Flag is "retired", it is still considered a US Flag and may be flown at any time just like the current US Flag (provided it is done within the guidelines of the flag code, of course). Should you choose, you can fly the 13-star "Betsy Ross", you can fly the 48-star flag, you can fly the 21-star flag (etc. etc.) without special government permission. It was once, and always will be, considered an official US Flag (kind of like "Once an Eagle, Always an Eagle").

The exception would be units of federal government - I'm sure a military post or national park would need to make sure they have the ok from the higher ups to fly a "retired" flag in place of the current flag - I know it's routine for National Historic Sites to fly the flag corresponding with their time period, but I'm also pretty sure the approvals are spelled out in their operating documents.

Heritage may have needed special permission from the BSA to do so (though unlikely), but not from anywhere else and if someone from the camp was saying otherwise, it could very well have been a misguided attempt to further mythologize the flying of a particular flag - we'd call it a form of urban legend. Tell a 12-year old lad you have "special permission" to fly the flag and it can be impressive. Tell that same story to a knowledgeable 17-year old and you'll get greeted by eye rolls signifying "what's with this clown".

As for the situation described, hopefully the Camp Commissioner consulted with the Camp Director. The former Camp Ranger should have been escorted off the property and told not to return - he became a disruptive element to the camp.

This could also have been a great learning lesson on a point of the Scout Law that is often explained as if there is no gray area - A Scout is Obedient. The Scouts that removed the flag could easily have said they were just being obedient to this adult leader therefore following the Scout Law. Great chance to explain that obedience should not be blind and it is as important to stop and think about questionable orders before carrying them out and refusing to do something that one has been ordered to do that is clearly unethical or illegal is also being obedient (to law and ethics).

CalicoPenn

My understanding of the Merit Badge program is that once a Scout begins a merit badge, he may continue to use the requirements of the badge as they were when he started if the requirements change or he may choose to use the new requirements. He may not pick and choose between two sets of requirements - he must complete one or the other. It's not very clear if the Scout must complete a requirement a second time if he switches to new requirements if the requrement is the same in the new set of requirements as under the old requirements, though I doubt any merit badge counselor would make a Scout do the same requirement over.

Here is where even US Scouts.org even contradicts itself. The Scout may complete a merit badge using the requirements in effect when he started the badge - my understanding is that is true even if it takes the Scout 4 years to finish and the merit badge has been revised twice since he started. US Scouts. org states that the Scout may use the old or new requirements if he started the badge. In the above quoted paragraph, they say a Scout may work with the old requirements until the next edition of the Requirements Book is issued - and although not stated, it leads one to believe that the Scout must then switch to the new requirments once the book is issued.

Put simply, a Scout uses the requirements that are in effect when he starts the badge - if the requirements change, he, and only he, has the option of switching to the new requirements, or sticking with the old requirements. Only a Scout who starts a badge before new requirements are issued may use the old requirements - once new requirements are issued, a Scout starting the badge must use the new requirements. At no time is a Scout who has begun a merit badge in good faith using the requirements in effect when he starts the badge forced to change to the new requirements - and certainly not when a new requirement book is issued.

CalicoPenn

Not to pick nits (or maybe I am) but most of the stuff "developed" at Sony wasn't developed at Sony at all. Sony only developed a system to mass produce the stuff cheaply - much like Henry Ford did for the Automobile. No one claims Ford developed the car but they certainly deserve credit for mass producing it and making it a household neccessity.

Inventions often attributed to Sony are remarkable in that most were developed here, in the US - with the exception of the High Definition Television. What is even more remarkable is that we tend to view these inventions as having been developed about the same time as we were able to purchase them - the reality is most were invented long before they became common household items. For instance:

The Digital Compact Disk was invented in the late 1960's by aa US inventor named James T. Russell. We now call it the CD - and most of us think it was invented in the late 80's when they were first being sold with music on them.

The Optical Disk - the foundation for what we call CD's and DVD's was first conceived in 1958 by US inventor David Gregg - he patented it is 1961 and 1969.

It should be pretty obvious that the invention of the disks also corresponded with the creation of players for the disks.

The Microwave Oven was invented in 1946 by US inventor Dr. Percy Spencer, who was working with radar technology for the military as an employee of Raytheon. Microwaves didn't start becoming common in US households until the late 1970's and early 1980's. Interestingly, much of our new technology was developed while scientists were working on technology for the military or NASA.

High Definition TV, that new-fangled modern television that's become hot news since the late 90's was invented by a British scientist names Sir Isaac Shoenberg in - are you ready for this? 1936!

Plasma TV? The first Plasma TV was developed by two scientists and a graduate student from Illinois - Donald Bitzer, Gene Slottow and Robert Willson (the student) in 1964.

Video Cassette Recording (VCR)? Developed by a US company named Ampex in 1956 - and has been the basis of modern television broadcasting since that time.

Let's not forget the latest development often attributed to Sony - the Digital Camera. The first Digital Camera was developed by a Kodak US employee names Steven Sasson in 1975.

What is correctly attributed to Sony is the portable cassette player commonly known as the Walkman, and the camcorder. It should be noted, however, that these developments piggy back on earlier technologies like the cassette tape developed by Philips and television video recorders developed by Ampex. It not really new technology they developed, only a new way of packaging it (what is a Walkman, after all, but a portable cassette player/recorder that many of us may still be familiar with - remember the rectangular box - with the record function removed?)

The long and short of it though is that it's often been US scientists at the forefront of new technological discoveries and new health discoveries over the past 60+ years or so - and the potential of lost opportunities regarding stem cell research in this country because of political pandering to a minority constituency (in this instance, public opinion strongly supports stem cell research) threatens to undermine what may be one of our greatest strengths - our intellectual and technological creativity. If the opportunities to do this research unhindered existed in the US, I doubt that all the money in the world would cause most US scientists to work in Singapore, a country not very well known for it's freedoms.

CalicoPenn

Why would it have pained AP to print something positive? If they were really as opposed to the Boy Scouts as supposed, they could have simply left off the fact that these boys were in Scouts - they could very simply have said "Two boys swimming at the State Recreation Area beach saves a toddler from drowning" without ever mentioning they were Boy Scouts.

No matter the news - postive or negative, being a member of the Boy Scouts adds an additional dimension of interest to the story - it really has nothing to do with the Boy Scouts (except for the Jamboree stories - that was all about the Boy Scouts because it was a National BSA Event). Boys get lost in the woods more than we know - that the boy was a Scout is just another piece of imformation.

How many times have we read comments on this board to the effect that "it's too bad the boys who did something great for their community or rescued this person weren't Boy Scouts - we sure could use the positive press"? When we read those stories that don't mention the Boy Scouts, we automatically assume that the boys in the story aren't Scouts - and when we read stories about Scouts doing well, we say "it's about time we got some good press coverage"?

The media uses all kinds of information when reporting a story - positive and negative stories - even if that information isn't very germane to the situation. It's all about adding interest to the story. Ever read about some kid who was arrested for drug possession who's father is a Police Officer or an Alderman or a Church Pastor? You never read that the kids father was a research chemist or truck driver or inventory control specialist - in fact, you're not likely to read about the kids parents at all except that they posted bond.

Good or bad, if the Boy is a Scout, it's likely to be mentioned. People tend to pay more attention to stories with a "hook" and being a Boy Scout, Eagle Scout, or Scoutmaster, or Assistant Scoutmaster is a hook (and conversely, if you're the Committee Chair, or Advancement Chair, or Treasurer, it's less likely that it would be mentioned if arrested - it's not as large a part of our common knowledge as Scoutmaster).

All we can do is accept that the Boy Scouts is a hook in the story and understand that the hook is likely to be mentioned in stories both positive and negative. We should celebrate the lads/units in the positive stories and shake our heads in dismay at the lads/units in the negative stories and we should stop blaming the media for our ills.

CalicoPenn

Does anyone know where "Johnny" is?

Calico

Did the Belief-O-Matic. Says I should be a Neo-pagan. Or a Universal-Unitarian. Or a Liberal Quaker (can't say I've ever heard of a Conservative Quaker. Orthodox Quaker, yes - but not Conservative Quaker).

Oh well, I guess I'll stick with Wiccanism. Oh wait, that IS Neo-paganism. Well go figure.

CalicoPenn

Chicken Gumbo with Venison Sausage and Dirty Rice? My mouth is watering. Can I volunteer to be a judge next year?

CalicoPenn

Packwife,

I agree with you that the issue should be done and over with. It was handled at camp, and that should be the end of it. You tell us that your son is now considering leaving the Scouts. The big question for you to find out the answer to is "why?". Is it because he feels humiliated over the punishment? Is he feeling persecuted because the leaders aren't moving on? Is he feeling harrassed and bullied at this unit and if so, by whom? I've witnessed instances before where a Scout who has been "razzed" by members of his unit, including some of the adults, eventually snaps at another Scout.

Talk to the Scoutmaster and find out why he feels it's important they sit down with your son and rehash this incident again - perhaps there is something your son hasn't shared with you. Talk to your son and get more detail about what happened at camp and if he had talked to anyone about what was going on before he laid out the f-bomb.

Be prepared to move on to another unit. Your son has already told you he's ready to quit Scouts after this incident - no matter what happens in September, this is going to linger in his mind for some time - he may end up quitting anyway, even if resolved to everyone's satisfaction. If you don't like what you hear from either side, then look for a new unit sooner than later if your son is still interested in Scouts. More importantly, don't wait until September - deal with this now - by September, your son may have already decided to quit for good no matter what happens.

As for sending a kid home for using profanity, my opinion is that such an action is a bit extreme. I have little tolerance for zero tolerance policies (yes, I recognize the irony in that) because they don't serve to teach anything (my exception is pointing a weapon at someone, even a "fake" weapon). A Scout drops the f-bomb at camp and ends up being sent home is a Scout now at risk of leaving Scouts altogether. Better the lecture and appropriate punishment (say Latrine Duty or KP for the rest of camp) and keeping the kid in Scouting.

CalicoPenn

"Ssssssssssssssssssssssssss"

Which can be one of a number of things but the four I thought of are:

1) The sound an air mattress makes when punctured

2) The sound a rattlesnake makes when you get too close

3) The sound of flesh searing on a hot pot/pan/dutch oven

4) The sound a rubber raft makes in the middle of a river when punctured.

CalicPenn