Compass

evmori: "Before we break camp they assign out stoves, etc. that need a better cleaning. They are due back at our next Troop meeting." We tend to use this approach. However, when the patrol Quartermasters dole out the equipment to various boys in their patrol, there have been problems in getting all the stuff back-- and no one remembers who took what. Of course, it would be the best if the patrol always left the campsite with clean pots and pans, but that doesn't happen. How do your patrol and troop Quartermasters handle this?

ASM7: "This system works well because the SPL is picking a team to work with, just like the POTUS. I don't think POTUS would be happy working with a VPOTUS if he had no choice of who it might be." Well, ASM7, you are right. This was another concern I had about it. When I was a boy and elected a Patrol Leader the second time, I made a mistake and allowed the patrol to elect my Assistant Patrol Leader. They elected a popular, party type of guy. My new APL decided he did not have to show me respect or obey me because he saw his allegience was to the other patrol members that elected him.

About the original purpose of the thread: It's an intriguing idea. Probably works well for those that do it. My thoughts on it are this: in the original system, my observation is that the ASPL is oftentimes being observed by the boys as the potential next SPL. If he does a good job as ASPL, especially when he has to be in charge in the SPL's absence, then he has an edge in the next elections. However, if the ASPL is perceived by the boys as being a lame leader, his chances of elevation to SPL is reduced. Therefore, the ASPL is kinda going through a 'dry run' for the SPL position befo

Yeah, mk9750, let's dust off this old thread! You are right. Automatic elevation of the ASPL to SPL is not so hot, even if the boys are doing it through elections. In all honesty, I think you'd be making a big mistake by directly interfering with the process. I know you said you "can't do that", I'm just agreeing with that observation. How 'bout a Scoutmaster conference with the ASPL before the elections? Ask him if he REALLY thinks he can best serve the troop in that position-- even with all his commitments (while reminding him about a Scout being Trustworthy and truthful)?

NJCubScouter, Naughty, naughty. I wondered why this thread was in 'Issues & Politics.' Now it's starting to, um, evolve into something else...

LauraT7, Having difficulty persuading the PLC and/or troop as a whole? How about getting your son's patrol interested in going on their own patrol campout? Get them charged up about their very own campout, then through persuasion encourage a two-nighter. An incentive could be earning the National Honor Patrol Award, which might be a first for a patrol in your troop-- it always seems to be in any troop I've been in --which means your son's patrol is really the coolest/bestest/etc. patrol in the troop! Hey, if you doubt it, just ask any of its members! A two-nighter might not happen on

sctmom, Summarization of my impression of what you are saying: - You have a choice of 4 not-so-hot troops, all having different variations of poor adult leadership; - Your son, like other boys at his (young) age, is immature and perhaps somewhat clingy to his parent. As far as the first item: without actually seeing the situation, the first two may perhaps be your best bet because they sound like maybe they could be modified. If Troop #1 suffers from ignorance, perhaps the adults can be trained and/or persuaded to do different if they can see the advantages in changing. If Troo

Welcome to Scouting! Hope you have as good a time as I have had...

Phew! Long post is right! Starting to look like some of my posts and e-mails... Is the reason your son does not want to go on campouts due to the nature of the troop or is it because he is not emotionally ready for camping?

Every time we plan a week-long Appalachian Trail trip, invariably I hear the 'Eagle Scout who died on the trail' story where, ten years ago and still compelling, an Eagle Scout died from injuries and exposure on the trail. I explain the circumstance of that story (winter time frame, carelessness, not following the rules, unsafe behavior on the part of the boy, etc.), and I talk about the safety procedures that we follow (Guide to Safe Scouting, buddy system, etc.). Like BW says, follow the rules, be careful, and you'll do fine and have the time of your life.

We have a different time pressure on campouts, in that we have a lot of leaders who have church commitments on Sunday morning. As a consequence, we usually leave at 5:00 or 5:30 on a Friday and get back Saturday evening. We do have exceptions when we have a two hour or more drive; in these situations (2 or 3 times a year), we will come back on Sunday after lunch. LauraT7, you say you are shorting your boys in the 10 nights of camping requirement. Does this mean you don't go on a weekend campout every month, or go on a long term campout (summer camp, etc.)? Also, remember it's the b

True, NJCubScouter. It makes me a little sad that someone would present themself as a Scout leader and, in fact, be practicing deception. If this is true, yaworski, were you proud of yourself? V-e-r-y c-l-e-v-e-r. Boy, you sure fooled us. You even played tag team with yourself (ZP: "Good one Yaworski, makes me wonder how many here know what a ghillie suit is. :-)"). I'm impressed. I can't tell you what an impression you have made on me. Oh, ZP, so clever and articulate. Ruthlessly correcting others' writing skills and grammer. Such utter contempt for others' speech, esp

---quotes from other yaworski postings--- Well it looks like I irritate "Bob White" too much... Bob (not his real name) White lives in an ideal world. Maybe "Bob" lives in Pleasantville, a world of black and white. That's classic "Bob." He deliberately misconstrues what you write. He also twists your words and changes the situations to fit his imaginary world. If you dare to disagree with "Bob," he stamps his tiny foot and quotes BSA scripture. ---end quotes-------- Ironic (to be making such a big deal about someone's nom de plume), if BW's findings are true.

firstpusk: "I think the interview approach is fruitful. That was the one my wife always used when I was the SM. She couldn't test them because she didn't know the scout skills well enough. She did get to know them pretty well in a very short time. She was able to tell me the hard news more than once about problems scouts were having. I was always a bit surprised that some of the other people didn't give me this info." Thank you for this paragraph. This summarizes my understanding of the Board of Review process and how it is supposed to work: additional visability into the hearts and mi

Bob White: "When all else fails have him read the advancement reference "Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures". " Actually, I did. As I mentioned earlier, we had this discussion about this issue, and we referenced the "Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures" book (sorry, I had the title wrong in my original post). Since item one says, "To make sure that the work has been learned and completed", he insists that item one must be the focus, and he doesn't understand (and ignores) the words prohibiting retesting the Scout. I guess I wish that item one in the ACP&a

ASM7: "He has already learned, and been tested by people who are supposed to have more skills and training than you as a committee person. " Actually, I am not a committee person, nor have I ever been. My difficulty was that the committee person over the BOR was auditing the boys. He appears to place himself as the ultimate and final authority as regarding Scouting, focusing almost entirely on the boy's technical knowledge of Scouting rather than the implementation of the program. He appears to use the BOR as a club over the boys and the adult leaders. I like acco40's compari

First, let me quote from the Committee Guidebook: ----begin quote---- "The review has three purposes: 1. To make sure that the work has been learned and completed. 2. To find what kind of experience the boy is having in his patrol and troop. 3. to encourage the Scout to progress further. The board of review is not a time to retest the Scout, but to determine the Scout's attitude and his acceptance of Scouting ideals." ----end quote---- "...not a time to retest the Scout,..." is in bold, indicating (to me, anyway) that the boy is not to be retested. Yet, item

Like you say, Eamonn, the increase doesn't seem to be that big a deal. Makes you wonder if there are other issues that are bothering that troop, and that this is their 'final straw.'

Ok, here's a story: We had a new troop, about 19-20 months old, with the highest rank being 1st Class. We were going to a camporee, the second competitive camporee they had ever attended. The camporee was going to be a Pioneering-themed event, with the troop campsite to have a required minimum number of lashed projects. None of the boys had done much lashing, except the minimum to pass off the requirement for 1st Class. The first-time SPL wanted to build a tower, and started to tell everyone about his great idea. I took him aside and told him that a tower wasn't required, t

I always carry one. On Scout occasions: either a Leatherman or a Swiss Army or my 30 year old scout knife, depending on my mood; non-Scout occasion (work, home): little Swiss Army knife. Yaworski: it's mystifying to me that none of your boys carry knives. Every boy I've seen just about pass out to get their Totin' Chip so they can carry one-- seems to be a rite of passage for them. Are there any other rules or restrictions beyond Totin' Chip requirements at your troop?

Eamonn: >Boy how I hate having to think what all these letters stand for.< If you're referring to what I said: COR = Charter Organization Representative SM = Scoutmaster WWIII = World War III Sorry, I don't mean to be cryptic. I guess I was being too cutesy. Also, I quite agree with you. They tried to get me to be a Commissioner, but to be Scoutmaster (or, later, Assistant Scoutmaster) AND Commissioner-- YIKES -- too much for me at the time. You are also correct that, as you say, "It just would not work in a conflict situation"; there could be a perceived

>I hope that his god or gods would fogive him for shedding his trousers when he fell off a boat for real.< Oh, I would imagine He would. I guess they had strong convictions about modesty. Never seen (or experienced) this before.

Excellent discussion and points made. A little story about merging patrols: we had a SPL who *really* wanted the troop to do well at a camporee. An obstacle (in his thinking) to this objective was allowing the new boy patrol to participate as a patrol. His solution was to merge its members with other patrols. It was pointed out to him that the new boy patrol members' morale would be damaged by this, and that they were going to do ok because the Troop Guide would be going with them, and that if he was still worried, he could also send the ASPL with them. He still had misgivings (he was

Why does BSA change requirements in mid-stream? I don't know. Compelling reasons, I hope. I do know that we had the same problem as Eagle90 in finding a pool that would allow a boy to jump in with clothes on. I also know that every one of our boys completed it at summer camp, but I was plenty worried that a third wouldn't make it. One boy, due to his family's religious convictions, had to wear pants on top of pants (shedding the outer pair for the test)! Eeeek! But Eagle74 is right, it wasn't a 1C requirement until somewhat recently. I tell my son that, when I was a boy, it was a s

LauraT7: I don't think it is a conflict of interest as such, but you don't get the independent ideas of a semi-disinterested outsider, which is useful. I don't know of any rules prohibiting troop leaders from being commissioner. With the terrible shortage of such individuals here, I think they almost take anyone who will do it. However, this can be perceived as a conflict of interest for other troops: commissioners who are adult leaders from some other troop can be seen as spies, particularly before competitions. Regarding CORs also serving as SMs-- potentially toxic. You would lo