SiouxRanger

And so, what is camp staff liability for failure to find the cameras? Will camps have to swap out (apparently) clear or translucent hand towel dispensers with opaque or metal ones? Will that even solve the problem if those can be tampered with in some fashion? Does looking for hidden cameras become a new NCAP standard? Do NCAP teams get trained on this now? And what of the liability of the NCAP assessment team that fails to find them? A number of adults and youth had their privacy violated. And there's the bad press to handle. And a camp that is reported to be one of

“This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it.”FRED THOMPSON - as Admiral Painter The fuse has been lit; the die is cast. I agree with CynicalScouter-there are tons of ways this can go wrong. Might as well try to control an avalanche with a trowel.

And the problem of a "Parents of" organization is that you are potentially liable even if you are NOT on the campout where an alleged incident occurs. As a principal in the sponsoring organization, not incorporated or having some other liability shield aspect, even 1,000 miles away on a business trip, you are potentially liable, and a Defendant. Lawyers "leave no stone unturned." Everyone gets named as a Defendant-"Let the Judge sort it out."

Heavens. Would I, as a parent want to take on liability the likes of which the BSA with its millions can't cover? I know the parents in my unit. I see them for an hour and a half once a week. Around a table, and sometimes at a weekend campout, but other than that? And I am to bet the farm on that slim knowledge base? Do I need to go into the insurance market and procure a policy for myself? That's crazy. Parents won't do that. Now that the BSA has shown us the nightmare of this all. The best thing a lawyer can do is keep their client away from the courthouse. And just behind that

As near as I can tell, BSA has blocked disclosure of Hartford's policies and the amount of liability Hartford may face. If I am incorrect, someone please educate me. But, if that is true, it boggles the mind that the BSA and Hartford would seek approval of a settlement at $650 million without the benefit of knowing what is being given up. The answer may be buried in all the pleadings.

I think that the bankruptcy stay prevents new lawsuits from being filed until the stay is lifted. If claimants could file new suits now, high volume filings might persuade insurers to soften their bankruptcy stance instead of facing a demonstrated onslaught of new cases. Since new cases cannot be filed, insurers can only speculate what they might face. The idea of "onslaught" has to be tempered with recognition that filing a case which is outside a statute of limitations is not only pointless (a hollow threat) but probably legally unethical on the lawyer's part.

Now that the LC's are apparently "all in," time to look for a sheet. And yet not a peep in my Council about the effect of National's bankruptcy.

Just spotted this: STATEMENT OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE OF LOCAL COUNCILS IN SUPPORT OF THE RSA APPROVAL MOTION Document 5756, filed 7-26-21, page 3: "As of the date of filing of this Statement, virtually all Local Councils have returned letters of intent agreeing to pay amounts that, in the aggregate, will meet the amounts required under the RSA. Additionally, the Ad Hoc Committee is confident that, by the time of the hearing on the disclosure statement, it will have secured letters of intent from all Local Councils to contribute the amount r

When I enter information in my Profile "About Me" tab, who can see it? And there are other features like articles, reputation, etc. How and where-how does this work? I am new and probably missing what everyone else knows. I don't understand how "reputationa' works and if I should be up liking or down liking posts and all of the mechanics of this forum. Perhaps there could be an introductory response to newbies like me to introduce them to the basics of the forums. (And I may have missed this entirely.) And if I am totally lame, just throw me from the bridge. Thanks.

And so it has all changed. In my day, our patrol met once a week, no adult supervision, and worked on scout skills.

Gee. May 6 was a busy day. All posts in a single day. There are no posts after May 6. Is there a reason? It is difficult to follow the discussion at points as there seem to be allusions to information not posted. I need to read this thread again. This is an important, if not critical thread. The issues raised here address the crux of the relationship between the LC's and the bankruptcy of National.

My experience has been that I rarely see a scout with a phone. And to the extent those observations are at summer camp, most units seem to have a strict no phone policy. And enforce it. At our unit meetings we have a plastic tub into which scouts place their phones, to be retrieved on the way out the door at meeting's end. We don't always use it, just when scouts seem to be using them.

I truly suspect that there would be no debate just two folks on the same side. Many adults just can't be away from their employment responsibilities and need some degree of contact with work. or they can't be at camp, jeopardizing scouts' attendance at camp. My unit sends 8 to 10 scouts to summer camp. Not a big unit. We have a tough time lining up enough adults to provide two deep leadership for a week. Some years an adult or two stay the entire week. Other years, maybe one stays the whole week and the second position is filled by two each staying half a week, or 4 or 5 covering pa

I am normally pretty steady, but those using the uniform rules of National (in my estimation seeking to elevate their own importance within the program over trifles), affect an attitude that any trivial or minor deviation from National's "rules" constitutes a point of attack against the alleged offender. So if some scout or adult offends National's rules on Eagle Scout Pins (Mom, Dad, Mentor), what are we to do? Those pins are revoked? Eagle Scout status is revoked? I have been the fortunate recipient of several Mentor Pins. Each was presented to me as a complete surprise.

"Nothing to be gained..." Except that the child sees their parent proudly wearing the child's token of affection to their parent and feeling accepted thereby. Dang, hopefully Scouting does not promote a child's love of their parent. (See, William Proxmire, Wisconsin Senator). Were that to happen, everyone might love one another. And there would be no war.

"As Tom played a red 7 on a red 8, there was a knock on the door-it was the Solitaire Police.'

At our camp, we have instituted Wi-Fi for the sole reason of allowing adults to connect to work and family so that they could keep in touch and feel comfortable being at camp. In fact, just a few years ago, in the adult training center building at my camp, there was a single duplex outlet for ALL adults in camp that week to charge their phones. Maybe 60 adults had to wait in line for one of two plus-ins. Noting that deficiency, our camp installed charging stations which could charge 6 phones at a time at every program area with power, so now, there are 90 plug-ins throughout camp.

Well, now, I may need to back up-how I hate doing that. I need to check with a fellow volunteer to determine if the COR's voted at a "Council Meeting" or an "Executive Board" meeting. I don't recall any particular differentiation, but I may need to stand corrected. I will update after my investigations.

And, there it is. I am not sure, and nearly certain, that my Council does not invite COR's to Executive Board meetings. Nothing of consequence happens at District meetings that a COR would likely have interest in. (Like allowing a U.S. Senator to vote at local sewage district meetings.) The nuance of COR's being invited to and attending an Executive Board meeting is more intriguing. Executive Board members are generally selected from professional and business elite. Some have Scouting backgrounds, many don't. Primary goal is to flatter them and obtain donations: the p

The result of this analysis may be different from state to state as the not-for-profit corporation law may well be different.

At one contentious Executive Board meeting some years ago, COR's voted and there were no objections. My understanding is that COR's were voting members of the Executive Board, at least 20 years ago. I don't recall reviewing any documents from National or the Council that COR's were voting members of District committees. (In my state, I believe that COR's have the right to walk into the Scout Office, and as a matter of right, be entitled to see any documents in any file cabinet then and there; not-for-profits are not privately held corporations. (Good luck getting that done, however

Yep. The news broke first on Channel 43, Comedy Central. (I laughed aloud when I first read the post and will chuckle for days to come-thanks.)

Ever been permanently removed from your scouting membership though reinstated to full membership?

And by "Scouting Friends" I mean everyone who is a Scouting Abuse Survivor on this Forum.

In reply to the many comments posted throughout this thread about the benefits of this bankruptcy to the abuse survivors. A very astute client of mine once remarked that "the law provides a resolution, but not a solution." That is, the law resolves-closes-the matter, but does not fix the damage. This issue has been mentioned in a number of posts. Whatever the financial settlement is, it does not repair the initial damage. And it won't repair life opportunities lost and damage done to them. A few years ago, I severely damaged my knee. My therapist commented how "compliant