SiouxRanger

On 1/25/2023 at 10:15 PM, InquisitiveScouter said:

The CO approves and has authority over ALL adult leaders in their chartered Scouting program.  If the CO doesn't want someone involved in their Scouting program, they (through the COR) can direct them to leave.

Is the corollary that "If the CO approves the adult leader, they can participate in all unit activities?"  Or can/should the CO approve an adult leader for only certain activities?  "You can serve on Boards of Review, but not go on campouts."  (How finely can one mince the onion?)

7 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

One mentor of mine  never had children of his own. He came back from WWII, and the troop he grew up in needed a SM, and he filled the role. He served as SM of the troop until Uncle Sam called him to Korea. Came back from Korea, and resumed SM job because everyone wanted 'Sarge" back.  Stayed on for over 20 years. Even then he worked summer camp until health started failing him.

Man who made the biggest impact on me, more than may father, was my SM. He was  the role model for me growing up, and my role model now as SM. He also never had children of his own. HIs nephew's troop needed an SM, and he volunteered. He stuck with it for over 25, until a new job required him to move.

Prior to having children in the program, I was one of those "Grown men" without children in the unit participating in overnite activities. In some cases during those time, I had more knowledge, skills, and abilities in Scouting than most of the parents. And in some cases I was the one training those parents. Further, I had better rapport with the youth than the other adults because I was closer to their age and I had no children in the unit, so when issues arose, they came to me.

I can go on and on about the great Scouters who didn;t have children, but I will leave you with the following:

Not all units have the luxury of being selective of their Scouters. We are a small unit of 6 Scouts. Of all the registered Scouters, I am the only parent. One has no children at all as he recently aged out, but for current YP purposes, doesn't count. My predecessor as SM stuck on as an MC after his son aged out, and plans to stick around. His predecessor is a COR/MC whose kids aged out as well. The 3rd MC served on a variety of district and council roles after his son aged out 16 years ago. Always partial to the troop, but got tired of the BS I posted abotu on my council in another thread, and came back to the unit.

If you have concerns, maybe talk to the folks who know the person you have concerns about instead of letting your biases control you. That Scouter may be the best thing the troop has going for it.

 

 

 

I regret that I have one Upvote to give for this post.

On 1/25/2023 at 6:21 PM, nolesrule said:

The point of being registered is that they have had the background check and they have done their YPT certification. 

That is precisely the point.  If you are registered, then you have had/done both. Not registered, may YPT but unlikely background check. Registration is a a quick and easy way top determine compliance.

7 hours ago, KublaiKen said:

in our Chapter all candidates are on the ballot and the SM only uses a strike if the candidate is actually elected.

So, as I read this, all scouts who have met the OA qualifications are put on the ballot, and stand for election.

The SM does not exercise the SM's discretion to exclude from the ballot a scout that the SM believes should not be elected.

The doomed scout's name appears on the ballot and the doomed scout knows he was on the ballot. The doomed scout does not know he is doomed.

The scout electorate believes the doomed scout to be a viable candidate because he is on the ballot, and perhaps deems him worthy and elects him to the OA, not knowing that their vote won't count.

And what is the color of the Truth in presenting a ballot to an electorate when the "fix is in?"

After the doomed scout is elected, he is told that he was not elected.  (But he was.)

And what is the color of the Truth in telling a scout he was not elected when he really was elected?

Or maybe the SM has the backbone to tell the doomed scout that he was elected, but that the SM is denying him membership in the OA.  And how is that message delivered?  Such that the Scout has a path forward to qualify next year?. 

And how does the scout reconcile that his fellow scouts thought he was worthy, but the SM is the roadblock?

4 hours ago, Armymutt said:

By "came to us in December" I mean the dad sent us an email. 

Does the Cub Scout have any service time in a Webelos den with the prior Pack before it folded? Maybe he could add that to Webelos den activity with your Pack.

4 hours ago, qwazse said:

The dress, dances, etc ... should honor local tribes

I live East of the Mississippi.

In my state, I know of no "local tribes" which have a presence here any longer. I've lived here for more than 60 years. The only tribes claiming their origin in my state are far away. They have no presence here. Occasionally, a representative of a tribe will appear to speak to some issue.  Maybe once a decade.

And even at that, I have little sense or knowledge of their removal from my state, the depth of their connection to my state.

How does one even determine which tribes occupied their area, and their current representatives?

And, "honor."

So, if an OA lodge's ceremony script is respectful of not only Native Americans, but people generally, is that OK?

The Lenni Lenape script of my local OA Lodge is inspiring to me, a non-Native American.

4 hours ago, Mrjeff said:

⁹0The national committee should mind their own business.   If a lodge can come to an agreement with their local Native Americans then leave them alone.  If not give advice concerning alternatives.   But don't issue cease and decist directives where there is no problem.

 

 

I am struggling to understand the concept of "cultural appropriation" and continue my studies…

But in the meantime, does an OA Lodge have some obligation to either obtain approval or conform to the Native American Personna of a tribe LOCAL to the Lodge's location?

That is, can an OA Lodge in Minnesota adopt a Seminole personna?

In my 50+ years of attending OA tap-out ceremonies in my Council, the ceremony always referenced the Lenni Lenape, which are from the upper Northeast.

So, are all OA Lodges to conform to the regalia of the Lenni Lenape?

Thanks.

On 1/15/2023 at 12:06 AM, SiouxRanger said:

I find this photo to be unsettling. Are these Order of the Arrow members of the KKK folks? I just can't tell.

I do dislike auto correct.

What I typed was "Are these Order of the Arrow members or KKK Folks?"  (Not "of.") Maybe that makes no difference to InquisitiveScouter.

But, I was NOT intending to equate the OA with the KKK.  I just can't make sense of the picture. I must be missing something.

On 1/12/2023 at 8:02 AM, InquisitiveScouter said:

The first ones were in black robes.

Here's a pic from the birth of my home lodge:

 

You could easily ditch the headdresses.  And you do not need a fictional story of Native Americans to promulgate ideas about Brotherhood, Cheerfulness, and Service.

You could easily find stories to demonstrate these during the Colonial period, or during the American Revolution, or the westward expansion, etc.  It should not be offensive to find and tell a story from some native tribes to demonstrate these principles, either.  They need not be from your area particularly, since you are ditching the wearing of clothing to mimic.

Or, if a lodge wanted to incorporate stories from their local first peoples, there's plenty... 574 recognized tribes in the US.

https://www.usa.gov/tribes

P.S.  Gotta love the ties!!

P.P.S.  Also see https://oa-bsa.org/history/first-ceremony

I find this photo to be unsettling. Are these Order of the Arrow members of the KKK folks? I just can't tell.

Just increase the level of "amenities" ordeal candidates can take to reduce the adverse effect of weather elements.  An 8' x 10 ' piece of plastic tarp should do the job. And 4-6 lengths of para-cord to pitch it.

On 1/11/2023 at 11:29 PM, HashTagScouts said:

The arguments for the overnight are it is the entire purpose of the Ordeal: a night away to reflect on what challenges you are asked to place upon yourself, and whether you are worthy for the honor.

That is the CORE of it, and, for me, changed my life.

So, just what are folks consider things to be "cultural appropriation?"

And just what are the or harmful or damaging effects of that "cultural appropriation?"

Thanks.

On 12/29/2022 at 3:15 PM, HashTagScouts said:

Sad day for sure. Expected announcements tonight that regalia of any kind will no longer be permissible. Also that the 24 month window to complete Ordeal from election date will be permanent. A lot of us are questioning exactly what it is we are trying to keep alive at this point. I'm interested to see if they make any comment on the proposed idea of eliminating the Ordeal overnight - that's pretty much the deal breaker for me.

I've never been too involved with the OA, though an Ordeal member. My Troop was small, there were few of us in the OA, and fewer yet were interested in attending OA activities.  Somehow, time just did not allow. My huge involvement in Scouting otherwise just cast OA to the shadows.  That being said, I do understand that the OA is a huge factor spurring the involvement in Scouting for many who pass from youth to adults.

So that I can understand you better, with respect to your post, from whom were you expecting announcements regarding regalia?

The 24 month window, is that more or less than previously, and does extending or shortening it have some effect on the OA, and what effect?

The Ordeal Overnight-what are the arguments for and against eliminating it?  (I did the overnight, and thought it was great.  I bought into the whole Ordeal Weekend and live it to this day.)

Thanks.

17 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Just make sure you remember my correct pronouns when we get lost together.

Your Majesty / His Majesty

"Get lost together?"

Hopefully, you'll have a sticky tag with all the pronouns you prefer for your body bag.

And so, at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, a cocky boatman asked me what I'd do if I were lost in the Grand Canyon?

"I'd set a huge fire. It would be seen. Rescue folks would arrive."

"You can't do that.  This this is the GRAND CANYON!"

And I love the Robert Frost quote. Thanks so much.

At the rate things are trending, we'll have:

Citizenship in the Solar System

Citizenship in the Galaxy

Citizenship in the Universe

Well, probably not in the Universe until ZIP codes are assigned.

I just have to agree with sentiments that Merit Badges are more and more academic.  Less and less experience.

Me, just a nobody, I can build a fire in a pouring rain. Period. And yeah, in a torrential rain.  I am a master at it.  OK, not a master, GENIUS.  I am really good at building fires.  Get lost in the Wilderness, get lost with me, if you are so lucky.  (And my 2 degrees from a land grant university will not save my life.) What will save my life (and yours) is what I learned in Scouting.

And that is how it is.

Experience. 

I just find this thread so sad.

Us unpaid volunteers are treated so poorly.

At least is my standard.

And it is a cruel standard.

But is how it has to be.

Most of us folks have not had any training on such conflict situations.

So, we are all left to invent a response.

(And do these issues not commonly arise and no protocol to deal with them?)

"And why would that be?"  --Downtown Abbey's Carson.

Be Prepared.
 

"Be Prepared" = If you are EVER caught off-guard, it is your fault. Period.

(You have to see NOW, Tomorrow, the day after, next week, next month…Forever.)

That is the standard of "Be Prepared."

A legal analogy, for what it is worth, in a lawsuit, once a given judge has made a substantive ruling in the case, all the parties are stuck with that judge, unless later removed "for cause." The rule prevents "forum shopping," that is, skipping from judge to judge until you get one who issues a more favorable ruling.

You became the judge on this scout's case, having made a "ruling" on the merits of his advancement,

And it is dishonest of the Scout to approach another adult leader after having discussed matters with you and you having established the course forward for his advancement.

I'd discuss it with the other adult leader to determine whether the scout explained your comments and requirements to the other adult leader, or simply made no mention of the scout's conference with you. If the adult leader was made aware of the scout's conference with you and your requirements, how did that other adult leader deal with them (if at all)? Did the adult leader undermine your position by giving the scout a "pass?"

Perhaps the other adult was "duped" by the scout.  Hmmmm. Trustworthy.

In my troop, there is a sheet where notes of conferences with scouts are recorded and those notes are available for the adults conducting the next conference.  If such was available regarding this scout did the other adult volunteer ignore it? Where is the other adult's notes?  Those notes should address your notes/concerns.

No adult volunteer should take it upon themselves to countermand the work of another volunteer with respect to the advancement of a scout.

A scout rewarded for this behavior, if he did not fully inform the other adult, will learn little from the program or lessons of negative value.

Other than the damage done to a scout who games the system, self-inflicted, I am not too concerned about it, as the scout has deluded and damaged him/her self. If the scout is counseled and advised of his/her shortcomings and does not acknowledge the problem, little more can be done, realistically.

Some youth and adults will not embrace the principles of Scouting regardless of discussion, opportunities, counseling, etc.  And so be it. The "lead a horse to water" issue.

Nearly 50 years ago, a box of Scout Mirrors would arrive at Philmont for the Ranger Staff (at least).  On the back of each was the Dale Wimbrow poem, "The Man In The Glass." (Sometimes called "The Man In The Mirror." or, "The Guy In The Glass." )

I still have mine. (Maybe several.)

I think that they were sent by a professional scouter out of Milwaukee. (And if anyone has a name, I'd be appreciative.)

So, the text of the poem is (and, I've corrected spelling, and changed the vernacular-sorry, had to do; and, well, changed guy and fella.):

The Guy in the Glass

When you get what you want in your struggle for self,
And the world makes you King for a day,
Then go to the mirror and look at yourself,
And see what that man has to say.

For it isn’t your Father, or Mother, or Wife,
Who judgment upon you must pass.
The man whose verdict counts most in your life
Is the man staring back from the glass.

He’s the man to please, never mind all the rest,
For he’s with you clear up to the end,
And you’ve passed your most dangerous, difficult test
If the man in the glass is your friend.

You may be like Jack Horner and “chisel” a plum,
And think you’re a wonderful guy,
But the man in the glass says you’re only a bum
If you can’t look him straight in the eye.

You can fool the whole world down the pathway of years,
And get pats on the back as you pass,
But your final reward will be heartaches and tears
If you’ve cheated the man in the glass.

So, sadly, the scout who cheats the system will probably not know the consequences of their action until mid-life.

6 hours ago, 5thGenTexan said:

I try to get the idea across to Scouts that there is a difference in a "Leader" and a "Boss".

Being from a very small organization and even at that, "leader" is better that "Boss." Long ago, I learned that lesson-as an SPL I think.

Even just this day is the lesson's principle brought home to me, awaiting documents I requested and was told that they would be emailed to me several days ago, which never arrived, in following up on my request for those documents…

I sent an email in which I could have said:

"You told me you that would forward those documents to me and they have not arrived…so where have things fallen down?" (Accusatory and puts the recipient on the defensive

Instead I called, and said,

"You were going to 'look into' getting me some documents…"

Both present the same message but in a manner that is a non-threatening to the person responsible.  And the sought documents arrived.

The lesson is, Threaten and folks will "clam-down" and resist; Commiserate with their work-load and they will attend to the issue.

And such is "Leadership" in my world.

6 hours ago, Mrjeff said:

I really think it's comical when someone talks about firing a Scouter.

I've seen it done multiple times.

And put on the IVF. Multiple times.

Quality people.

Kind.