Tron

That's not what that article you posted says at all. You're just making stuff up at this point. The non-settling insurers are not an asset of the BSA, not an asset of the trust, and they are not a party to the trust. They are literally a completely different legal entity that has opening and legally refused to settle or contribute to the trust. Nothing you have linked out to or provided citation for states anything otherwise. You're just making stuff up.

The skinny guys unable to carry the weight is an indicator of not enough conditioning. Bigger guys can fake the funk as treks can cause them to shed fat weight and over the course of a week or two they get through on stored calories compensating for lack of conditioning. Really skinny people get butchered on treks if they are not conditioned; there's isn't much extra on their frames for their bodies to consume to make up for the exertion, at the same time their are stimulating muscle growth through the exertion. It becomes a downward spiral of worsening performance and lesser and lesser recovery from overnight rest.

We all knew this was coming right? The Church, then BSA, now the next biggest target? These vulture lawyers have a business model, they will continue to hop from target to target like locusts consuming as much as possible.

So that's not a lawsuit, that's not BSA, and that's not how the insurance industry works at all. An insurance company can be billed any amount for any reason, and it can be denied, approved, sent for review, sent for arbitration, etc ... The article you posted does not say what you said before and it doesn't mean anything.

Neutral on the article; a bleeding together of BSA modernizing and Trump derangement syndrome. The sort of article that makes the vastly neutral and large middle ground of America turn away from anything progressive. The minority leadership thing is simply not a big issue. The reality of America when you dig into the real census numbers is that America is roughly 65% white (mostly protestant but increasingly becoming Catholic), 20% white/mixed, and the rest not white. The population is 51% female. The organization roughly represents America quite well considering that female Eagle Scouts are a relatively new thing. In 40 years I expect more females but not now.

What was the cub scout pack doing there? I thought the new range and target activities policies that went live last year only permitted cubs to do range activities at district and council events?

What do these people do at work when they need to train someone? Do they just go "hey Jimmy, find someone around here to teach you!" or do they pair Jimmy directly with a mentor, or themselves as a mentor.

You know that all of those homes and businesses built in the floodplains are going to get rebuilt. This has been happening for over a century and it just keeps repeating. Texas is like the only state that allows new and rebuild construction in floodplains.

The safe swim defense is not the greatest at explaining things. Even at a personal pool you have to have ability groups, a health review is recommended, you need 1 responsible adult 21yrs or older as the swimming supervisor. You have to have a trained responder (the rules on this are really basic, a strong swimmer 1st class or higher ranked scout can be the aka lifeguard), and you need 1 observer for every 10 swimmers. There are a number of other items as well.

I get what you're saying; I would counter though that national should have been able to see that and should have planned that timeline to release the coed program earlier. So right now female membership growth is significantly outpacing male membership growth (I think the NAM numbers were 3x the number of females are joining right now), and most of us have no where to send our female AOLs. I don't know about you guys but my council adopted the dumbest policy during the coed pilot. Only existing linked units from prior to the coed policy can be coed, so we have female AOLs just dropping from the program. Who could be so stupid to think retention of female scout was going to go up in some of these councils where we're stuck telling parents that if they want to keep their daughters in the program they will have to continue to drive an additional 10+ miles just to go to a troop meeting when their sons are swinging around the block for a meeting?

So we have a framework right. It's clear that adult leaders have to step in and instruct the senior scouts when there is a knowledge gap or lack of retention. This goes back to BP and his original Aids to Scoutmastership. The program has always allowed for adult leaders to step in; how we step in is critical though. My advice, which I would say is backed up by the solid century+ of the program and going back to the root (BP) is, in the absence of capable elected youth leaders, adults step in to teach those youth leaders and get them to the point where they are capable. In short it's a 2 part solution. Part 1) Adults are on hand and always willing to teach the PLC members what they need to do to teach, mentor, and lead the rest of the troop. Part 2) Constantly assessing if you're not being a lazy fat slob by flopping on the phrase "Have you asked your SPL".

Post NAM, post the status update of the coed pilot, post everyone now being told that the pilot is an overwhelming success; we're definitely going coed. The thing that confuses me is that the pilot was supposed to end in July 2025 and results available, and now that has all been punted to December 2025. What does that punt mean? Is someone fighting the success? Do corporate lawyers need more time to get documentation of the program together properly? Is national trying to sneak a few extra bucks with 1 more double charter fee for the coed units? what what what does it mean?

I am going to guess that it's a teacher/student thing. I know several teachers who are also scout leaders in my community; technically if they are walking down a hall after school when there are barely any people present and a student who is also scout is walking down said hall and there is no one else there; wouldn't that technically be a YPT 1v1 violation? The real answer is that Scouting America was put over a barrel by the lawsuit; a lot of victims were assaulted outside of the auspices of BSA but the perpetrator was someone they knew from within BSA. Now we have these rules that make no sense.

I can add that in my area a couple of hold out packs decided that they wanted to be boy only. A couple of packs tried to do single gender dens. In both scenarios everyone watched as those units shrank, and shrank, and shrank while the family packs maintained or grew. The last couple of hold out packs are basically cookie cutter of each other now, 5-6 scouts with 5 adults; everyone in the district knows that those packs are folding when a member of the Key 3 crosses over with their AOL. My buddies pack tried to stay boy only until they got down under 10 scouts; they went to district and some of us peer leaders at other units for help and the shock was insane. I had to tell my buddy that I was not wasting my time trying to help him recruit when he could easily pick up another 5-10 scouts by just letting the sisters that were tagging along to meetings and participating join the pack. The COR of that pack, his head, it was deep raspberry with rage, I thought he was going to burst a blood vessel in both of his eyes; he really didn't like me telling him to his face that he was killing his pack by being sexist.

This is absolutely correct. Also note that there are height restrictions beyond just weight. I know of 1 person that was denied the ability to go to Philmont due to his height; he was told that his total length when prone exceeded the capabilities of the rescue helicopter cage.

Sounds like a poor decisions. What's the number, 9 out of 10 sexual assault victims personally know their attacker? Never 1v1 ever has a serious track record backing it up.

When I google that, the only non-lawyer propoganda sites that say anything say that it's a legal action to compel the remaining 1 billion. Where are you getting 7 billion from?

I don't think the trust is. No one on the BSA side is suing anyone. If anyone is suing it's most certainly the same lawyers that have been chasing deep pockets.

BMI is a litmus test. Fun fact, you can be 300lbs of fat or 300lbs of muscle; regardless, your heart is getting TAXED hard from the body mass. If you don't meet BMI it doesn't mean you're trash, it just means a deeper discussion and more accurate tests are merited by a doctor.

Again, where is this number really coming from? There is 2.4 billion period; where are you getting this other 40ish billion? Are you trolling? What is going on here ?

I would not recommend taking a break. Lower intensity, yes, taking a break, no. Cancelling anything is the kiss of death, skipping meetings leads to inconsistent attendance.

Most likely the best case of action is to hold a scoutmasters conference. Let the scoutmaster get an idea of what is going on with the scout. You never know, maybe the scout was told something unexpected.

I've reached out and been given POC in the past at Philmont and they have given me materials. I am NCAP certified, is that why I was given POC access and given materials when I asked?

I am not an accountant; however, I believe this is going to fall under injury compensation at the IRS and become not taxable.

Do you have a female linked troop?