Jump to content

chaoman45

Members
  • Content Count

    156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by chaoman45


  1. I thought when they switched over to China that it would cause prices to drop and the reason national doesn't have Made in the USA uniforms was because it would cost more than many would be willing to pay...


  2. @Eagledad - That's easy. The problem is that Scouts usually DON'T camp that far away from adults. My issue that I presented at the beginning of the thread had more to do with cabin camping, where the proximity is within earshot.

     

    Perhaps I should explain what the troop has done the past year. Scouts camp separately, eat separately (cabin camping they sit at different tables), and are expected to clean separately. Adults clean their areas and kitchen. The problem is adults can do things faster, hence they want to speed things up so they can get back to their families or whatever. Scouts that don't work will soon realise they need to improve something, in my opinion.

     

    By the way, a lot of gear IS stowed away on Saturday night, but this is personal gear. Some troop gear might be dismantled, depending on the campout.


  3. Two-part thread.

     

    First, I'm still a bit disappointed that Scoutwear is made in China. I'd be willing to pay a few extra dollars for something made here in the States. But I'm sure this issue has already been beaten to death, so moving on.

     

    When I look through the old books and online resources, there was a lot of Scout equipment made by the national supplier. It's sort of the same with the shirts, socks, pants, and headgear. But I also notice there were shoes, gaiters/puttees (not canvas gaiters of the 40s-60s), and even raincoats specifically designed for the Scouts. I was wondering what happened to this pattern. Sure, we still get official gear like compasses, but it seems like material with the Scouting logo on them has been diminishing since the 60s or maybe 70s.


  4. Why are parents worried about having their contact information retained? It seems kinda paranoid, especially since units shouldn't contact Scouts after leaving the troop. Also, we use Troopmaster and only the admin can view information after a Scout is "archived."


  5. On Sundays (the last day of a campout), how should the cleaning duties be separated?

     

    One school of thought is that the boys are responsible for their messes and can take all the time they need to finish it right. Adults clean their own campsites, and kitchen if it's an indoor campout.

     

    The other side says adults should be able to help Scouts clean up so adults can "get out and go home."


  6. I'm no PoliSci major, so this is conjecture:

     

    People favour or would more likely vote for somebody they've heard of rather than an unknown, even if the well-known person has negative coverage of him. In this case, Cain > moral guy the media doesn't care about.

     

    Also, people DO waffle with candidates. But it's not just Republicans. I remember a bit of this happening in 2008. Plus, some of the blemishes just recently came to light and a lot of people didn't know about them. Wouldn't you change your vote if something horrible surfaced from your candidate's personal life?


  7. Thanks all for the good advice and insight.

     

    I have no idea why the SM put the ASM issue to a vote. It was a surprise, but I figured meh, let it be. I didnt tell him about the manipulation and have no intention to because I dont think it will make a difference. The SM is already aware of their borderline renegade behaviour. We DID say we were okay with what we had (although I still dont mind having another guy on board), but like I said... parents who want to see a problem will identify almost anything as something that warrants intervention. It sucks. One is a food planner, who only buys food for adults at the campouts. The other is more or less a transportation coordinator (we invented that).

     

    Generally I agree on more action, but please remember the SM is really adverse to confrontation. When I mean he doesnt like confrontation, I MEAN he would rather not pour gas on hot issues like this. I dont blame him and I dont want to force him into an awkward position. With me being more aggressive (wc?), we tend to balance out and Ill speak out against intervention more frequently. BUT WHY LISTEN TO SOMEONE HALF YOUR AGE, RIGHT?!

     

    They honestly do need training, even Wood Badge. Or more COR/CM/SM discussions.


  8. From what I've gathered, a lot of parents tend to hover with their kid to make sure they get from place to place. Granted, it's not a large majority, but it's an increasingly growing minority of parents that make it a big deal. Whenever they aren't being bossy, they're guiding little Johnny from place to place.


  9. Tampa Turtle - Oh, we've tried telling parents to let boys make mistakes. Some agreed and backed down, but the vocal ones?

     

    "BUT HOW FAR DO WE GO?!"

    "WHAT IF THEY HURT THEMSELVES?"

    "WE DON'T WANT TO INVITE A LAWSUIT!"

     

    I use caps because they literally raise their voices in opposition to suggestion.

     

    I could spend days contemplating on how far boy-led should go before adults intervene. Typically, I speak up when there's an immediate threat like pouring leaves on a fire in a wood cabin. Sometimes I might ask about undercooked food, but don't usually say much unless they're First-year Scouts who don't know better (the older boys can eat blue meat and learn that it sucks). But again, good sense and trust are determining factors, really. Scouts hurt themselves - nuff said. And the lawsuit thing makes me mad because of how sue-happy we've become as a society. But since the oldest Scout is 14, it raises red flags with newer parents.

     

    My favourite quote is:

     

    "The Scouts seem like they're avoiding us on campouts. Not just by happenstance, but intentionally trying to get away from us!"

     

    No **** . That's the first indication of a problem.


  10. Beavah - One of the problem dads has 20 years of experience under his belt and is also an Eagle. He has taken the training, yet still has a hard time being in good graces. When you say training, do you mean ASM-specific training? I'm sure that's doable.

     

    Eagle92- I think they're still under the influence of Webelos III because they cite "safety concerns" for a reason for sticking around. You're right though - they need to trust Scouts more.


  11. We honestly need a "Dealing with Parents" section on this forum.

     

    Anyway, part hypothetical and part reality.

     

    Our troop has two Scoutmasters - the head honcho and the assistant. Some parents believe we need more than just two for a troop of 30. Generally, I agree, but the parents are what seasoned Scouters would call "helicopter parents," or at very least just plain annoying to Scouts. Recently the SM made a ballot asking Scouts if we need more ASMs. A few parents took it upon themselves to lobby/advertise themselves.

     

    "What are you guys voting for?"

    "Probably 'no.'"

    "Oh. You should say 'yes.'"

     

    Nevertheless, only two votes believed we needed more ASMs. The Scouts' vote will be used for consideration, not a determinant. Still, it's clear the Scouts really don't like these adults, even though they're very active. They do typically have good intentions, but they're a bit... excessively eager?

     

    That's the story. My question is how to deal with these parents? Basically, they self-appointed themselves as ASM without SM or CO say-so. SM doesn't like conflict, so he doesn't say much against it, but the CC (former SM) is pissed. What do?


  12. Could be an easier advancement programme, could be technology, could be parents. Hell, it could be all of the above! It's not necessarily that the programme has become easier altogether (though in a sense, National downplays the role of outdoors). Compared to 20 years ago, there might also be more incentive for becoming an Eagle with respect to the workforce or military. I could be wrong on that, though.


  13. Okay, I just checked and they don't call it a black book as I thought.

     

    http://www.scouting.org/sitecore/content/BSAYouthProtection/BSA_Communications/Ineligible_Volunteer_Files.aspx

     

    The Ineligible Volunteer Files is a formal name, but even with its bureaucracy cannot stop all crimes (again, expecting it to would be unreasonable). Those in YPT should have to sign something, promising they WILL report abuse or suspected abuse. The IVF page entrusts all volunteers to do so and all volunteers must have YPT, but, as I said, not all do report it. At least if they have a signature, the BSA won't take all the blame...


  14. I know the Penn State thing is older news and I'm late addressing this, but the more I think about the implications from it the more confused I get.

     

    Sandusky's actions were deplorable and the suspicion of a cover-up tarnished the names of many men, as well as an entire school. The actions of a few should not be representative of the entire body, of course, but it's worrisome because... it happens in the BSA more than it should. After the media caught wind, the **** hit the fan and it created a plethora of emotions in an entire student body. Though the victims' stories have come to light and the BSA (or somebody from the council/district, at least) have addressed this, how much is going to chance really? Probably not very much.

     

    Sexual abuse will continue getting attention, especially in organisations directed toward boys. I just Googled "boy scout molestation" to prove that point and found news stories as recent as a couple of days ago. Mostly, these stories have a commonality between them and the Penn State issue - leaders FAILED TO REPORT. Very bad. Even though Youth Protection is required, there is no guarantee it will prevent all abuse. Then again, it's not like I expected it to. My biggest problem I guess is that I question the extent of background checks that are supposedly performed. Applications all say that they will be conducted, but how extensively? I wonder what would happen if Pee Wee Herman put in an application? Moreover, the co-operation with law enforcement is mixed. YPT says to tell the Scout Executive and authorities are notified if needed, yet National refuses to share the information contained within its Black Book. Why? Not to sound anti-BSA, but the polarised willingness to work with the law won't help anything.

     

    btw, if you want to read the indictment, feel free. They don't pretty up the situation and it's actually pretty disturbing.

     

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/72104007/Sandusky-Indictment

×
×
  • Create New...