walk in the woods

59 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

First, then you didn't look. There are literally dozens of state and federal lawsuits pending.

Second, do you consider all civil attorneys "ambulance chasers"?

Lots of individual suits, yes.  But I don't see any ambulance chasers running ads on Chicago TV with blaring headlines "Were you sexually abused in the Chicago Public Schools?  Then contact Dewey, Chetham, and Howe to get the compensation you deserve!"  I do see those ads against the BSA, 3M, generic personal injury, etc.  But never CPS.

There are civil attorneys and there are ambulance chasers, we all know the difference.

7 hours ago, elitts said:

That would probably have worked 5 years ago, but now?  I think those same legislators that are passing these laws due to political pressure would get absolutely lambasted in the media if they tried that.

Nah, Chicago Public Schools have been in the news for two years now after a Tribune investigation exposed the amount of sexual abuse being covered up.  The new bureaucracy created filed over 450 reports in 2019, https://news.wttw.com/2020/01/06/cps-watchdog-opened-450-new-sexual-misconduct-investigations-2019.  Now many of those weren't substantiated but many were.  The school district isn't being pursued by a hoard of ambulance chasers to my knowledge.

50 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

What people I've known for years who are NRA members, there's a general agreement LaPierre and his ilk were in fact misusing funds. The AG"s ideology does not change that. And of course there's precedent: the NY AG's office was able to force Trump to admit to misuse of charitable funds and forced that "charity" to shut down.

Missing the point I'm afraid.  This AG campaigned on destroying a private organization, then brought the unlimited power, resources, and tax payer money to bear in that fight.  The precedent is chilling.  To approve of this behavior is the equivalent of approving of let's say a TX AG campaigning on a platform to attack Planned Parenthood (or BLM or Move on) then enlisting the power of the state for that attack.   If you can't back the latter you shouldn't back the former.  

Sadly most Americans are too blinded by party fielty to understand the fight of our lives isn't right vs left, it's the individual vs the State.

But carry on.

37 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

They'll just exempt government entities. 

Yep.  Besides the people prosecuting these cases already control the schools and teacher's unions.

I wonder if these aren't the two most important paragraphs:

Quote

The two lawsuits come after Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo signed a bill earlier this week granting a one-year extension to the state’s Child Victims Act. The law temporarily lifts the usual time limits on filing lawsuits for anyone suing over childhood sexual abuse.

The window to file had been due to close this month. But advocates for sex-abuse survivors pushed for the extension, in part by arguing that the coronavirus pandemic made it difficult to put cases together in time to meet the deadline.

Seems like the lawyers lined up against BSA could argue now for an extended extended deadline for people to file, you know, 'rona.

Quote

Weiss-Russell’s suit, also filed by The Marsh Law Firm along with Pfau Cochran Vertetis Amala, stands out because it appears to be one of the first of its kind against the Girl Scouts, said her lawyer, Jennifer Freeman.

I think Pfau et. al. is one of the firms suing BSA as well.

Quoted Article.

3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/us/new-york-attorney-general-sues-nra.html

In short: top NRA leaders were stealing money and/or misdirecting it from the not-for-profit hand over fist and the NY AG is going to try and get the NRA dissolved (exactly what happened with the Trump Charity).

Why does this matter for scouting? I can think of easily 6 different standards or practices that are built into merit badges or safety protocols for Scouts, BSA and Venturing; there are probably others.

Alleged, by a partisan AG, who campaigned on attacking the NRA.  This is a witch hunt.  But that's what progressives, populists, and all the other leftist factions do, hunt their opponents and banish them to gulags.  

6 hours ago, qwazse said:

Land-O-Lakes might serve as a metaphor here. As a friend told me, “Remove the Indian, keep the land.”

And replaced the Indian with a bunch of white farmers on the back! I'm hopeful our response will be more like Trader Joe's.

51 minutes ago, Troop75Eagle said:

It’s made infinitely worse by deploying units with no insignia

Even snopes says that is undetermined (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/feds-unmarked-vans-portland/).  If you look at the picture at the top of that article, though blurry, the officers seem to have identification right on their vests.

It would be nice to know exactly what Blackbaud services were being used by BSA?  Was this membership management?  FOS donors?  Other donors?

I wonder if Blackbaud's bigger concern right now isn't identifying all the EU citizens in that stolen data for GDPR compliance purposes.  Unless they didn't have any, or quietly notified them of the breach, I think they are long past the required notification window.

2 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

7/29/2020:  The Coalition of Abused Scouts for Justice submitted verified statement to Bankruptcy court: (in part):

1. On or around July 18, 2020, the members of the Coalition, by and through their counsel, formed the Coalition and retained Brown Rudnick LLP and Blank Rome LLP (together, the “Coalition Counsel”) to represent them in connection with the Coalition’s claims and interests in respect of the Debtors and the Bankruptcy Cases. The Coalition is comprised of more than 10,000 sexual abuse victims (collectively, the “Coalition Members”). Each Coalition Member, a party-in-interest, holds claims against the Debtors that may include, but are not necessarily limited to, unsecured claims and administrative claims.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/836358_1053.pdf

10000 now and another 3+ months of advertising to go.

10 hours ago, thrifty said:

Its not important what I think.  What's important is what other people think. 

Sorry, other people don't get to tell me what symbols mean to me.  They can ask me what they mean to me, we can talk about it, but they don't get to define meaning nor action to be taken.  It's lost on the postmodern crowd that by giving words and symbols control over their emotions they infantilize themselves.

40 minutes ago, elitts said:

Why would this bother you?  You know COVID is a risk anytime you leave the house or bring any thing or person into your house.  Is formally waiving your right to sue BSA specifically over COVID a big deal?  I mean, if in some freak circumstance it was discovered that an infected employee in a Scout Shop was going around deliberately licking every item and it caused an outbreak, the release would likely be thrown out anyway, so what's the problem?

Mostly because of the inconsistency.  Scouts and scouters also assume a risk for tick and mosquito borne illnesses, with some risk of long-term health impact or death, every time they venture into the woods but none of those are included on the release.

Are you actually doing recruiting, popcorn, program, fliers, and forms?  Or are you coordinating a committee to do those things?  If the former, it's time to stop and recruit a committee.

9 hours ago, thrifty said:

when I saw this I thought it had to be fake news but it is not.  The National Museum of African American History & Culture posted this and has since taken it down by request.

I didnt realize that "Objective, rational linear thinking" was due to me being white.  "Hard work is the key to success" is white culture.  It goes on and on.  There are plenty of people in my family that don't follow either one of those principles and others on the list, why lump all white people together.   If it came from some other organization there would be outrage.   

https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1283372233730203651/photo/1

It's a simple reality of postmodern (re: progressive) thinking.  All that came before is racist, sexist, etc. and must be desconstructed in order to rebuild their socialist utopia.  The only organizations that will be spared from the deconstruction will be those the postmodernist already control.(e.g. media, education).

https://areomagazine.com/2017/03/27/how-french-intellectuals-ruined-the-west-postmodernism-and-its-impact-explained/

1 hour ago, elitts said:

No, legislation usually doesn't pass unanimously, however there are frequently situations where pretty much everyone agrees that something needs to be addressed and they only disagree over the methods.  In the case of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 however, the "opposition" wasn't arguing for an alternate approach, they just plain wanted to maintain white superiority and segregation.  Senator Russell, the leader of the opposition was quoted as saying "We will resist to the bitter end,any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our [Southern] states".

And so what?  Two ideas were brought before the congress for debate, one the status quo, the other change.  The ideas were debated openly and the better idea prevailed.  That's how the system works.  

As for unanimity, remember, that's how we got the unpatriotic Patriot Act, the freedom-denying USA Freedom Act, the star-chamber FISA system, etc.  

8 hours ago, David CO said:

It sounds more like extortion to me.  I wouldn't pay it.

I'll third the motion to tell the council to pack sand.  You've already proven you can hold a summer camp without the BSA, why do you need them?

1 hour ago, David CO said:

People have to be very careful about voting for civil rights legislation.  It's not just the language in the bill they are voting on.  It's also the expanded meaning the courts will add to it.   

And how much cruft it gets loaded with because it's "must pass" legislation.  Reference the covid relief legislation today or the bi-annual Army reauthorization and funding.

16 hours ago, elitts said:

That would be the so called "Greatest Generation".  And while it's nice that they finally passed the legislation, the telling point there was that roughly 30% of congress was opposed to it.  So essentially, 1/3 of the the US (90%+ of the Southern congressmen) thought it was not just acceptable, but a right, that people be allowed to discriminate against minorities.

Legislation never passes unanimously unless the system is rigged or it's a Communist rubber stamp parliment.  If that's your definition of acceptable (Unanimous consent) we're far down the slippery slope.

But back to your original argument that we've been generationally deficient (save the Greatest Generation), there was federal civil rights legislation passed in 1957, 1964, 1965, 1968, 1974, 1977, 1987, 1991, 1995, 2007, et al.  To say that nothing has been done is simply wrong.  I'd also argue that to say attitudes haven't changed is also wrong.  The world's not perfect, nor will it ever be, but to deny progress is folly.

1 hour ago, Navybone said:

There are 17 different items BLM is supporting In their mission.  You have identified one and disparage the rest of the organization and their goals for that?  And it does NOT call for the destruction of the family, rather it calls for recognition that extended families and villages have a significant pace in today’s society.  Do we not want equality under law for all Americans, regardless of race?  Do we not understand that a significant portion of our population is disenfranchised and there is room and opportunity to heal the Division that occurs.  
 

And for Duckworth, her comments are for being willing to having a dialogue.  Do we not want open discussion and debate?  Are we so closed minded?  Cultural Marxism is a new-con wet- dream to encourage right wing conservative government, not an engaged government willing to talk to the people, and understand their concerns. 
 

what are you listening to?  

The founder of BLM

Edit: I'm more than willing to discuss issues and find solutions , but not with Marxists.  Sorry, it's an ideology that murdered millions around the globe over the last century alone.  The hammer and sickel (and the communist red star) are every bit as repugnant as anything Confederate or anything Nazi.

1 hour ago, Navybone said:

There is a huge difference between whose who loot/riot and those who protest.  And why are the riots occurring?   And for the monuments, specifically the ones honoring confederate leaders or soldiers, do you not understand why they want them removed?  Is it too much to ask they they want a statue of a person or representation that honors, or remembers, or celebrates the subjugation is a single person due to the color of their skin removed.  

The first amendment prevents the government from stopping peaceable assembly and redress of grievances.  Rioting and looting are prominently absent.  People keep saying I should listen.  Oh I'm listening all right and hearing just fine.  BLM the organization explicitly calls for the destruction of the family (how's that worked out for the black community over the last 50 years?), and one of their organizers has explicitly stated they have a Marxist ideology.  There's no interest in conversation or dialog from BLM the organization.  And beyond the Confederates statues my own Senator Duckworth has said she'd be open to listening to arguments to take down memorials to Geo. Washington.  There have been calls to take down the Jefferson Memorial.  Sorry, cultural Marxism is real and must be actively opposed.  BLM will set civil rights back 70 years.

2 hours ago, elitts said:

Well, in the context of what BLM is arguing for, I think that's measurably true.  My grandmother's generation (Silent Generation) was "accidentally" racist enough to be horrifying sometimes (and that ignores any deliberate racism).  My parent's generation (Boomers) were better, but if you look at the time period they've been "in power" they certainly haven't spent much time or effort to fix or work toward fixing the issue; but at least the Boomers started to be cognizant that there is actually a problem.  Gen X is only just now getting to the high table of politics, so we don't really know what they'll manage once they can overcome the existing political inertia.  The <40 folks (maybe even <30) are the ones that are fully engaged on the issue and energized about it, so from the viewpoint of "Who is most likely to drive us towards fixing this" standpoint, they are "the best hope".

 

So what generation were all those politicians that passed the civil rights legislation and voting rights legislation in the 60s?

2 hours ago, fred8033 said:

Family camping and scouting camping may not be side-by-side compatible.

Especially those pull through gravel pads with 30A electrical, water and sewer hook ups.

3 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

I agree, but I wonder how it will be phrased. I can see two directions.

1) Measurements of Failure: Those councils that meet the following criteria will be merged forthwith (membership BELOW X, finances BELOW Y, etc.) All others will be deemed to be OK.

2) Measurements of Success: Those councils that meet the following criteria are exempt from merger (membership ABOVE X, finances ABOVE Y, etc.) All others will be merged forthwith.

I wonder if there isn't a 3) New membership/financial standards that are far beyond all/most existing councils, requiring acquisitions by the largest council in an area. 

@Cburkhardthad a thread a while back on mega-councils centered around major metropolii as I recall.  

Man, I filled out at least 3 buzzword bingo score cards on that one!

• Nimble and Flexible (uh, look at that process flow on the left!)
• Data-based decision making
• Value-based delivery
• Collaboration and teamwork
• World-class
• Shared accountability
• Areas of Focus
• Facilitate!
• Action Steps!

Biggest red flag to me is this one:

Hire a youth adolescence expert at the national level to guide program development.  I have a sneaking suspicion it won't be Lenore Skenazy!

19 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

Boy Scout local councils own most of the youth organization’s wealth, with more than $3 billion in land, facilities, artwork, investments and other assets, compared with the $1.4 billion that is on the books of the national group.

They didn’t join in with the February bankruptcy filing of the national organization. However, more than 250 of them are sharing the bankruptcy shield that automatically blocks lawsuits over alleged decades of abuse at the hands of Boy Scout volunteers.

So 250 of what 270 councils turned over their financials to the process.  I'd be interested in why the 20 didn't.  Do they believe they are that safe or that they are already on-the-rocks so they are covered by some participating council following a merger?

I'm just a simple guy but the math isn't adding up for me.  The WSJ article said there are more than "10,000 claims of sexual abuse."  If each of those claims settled for $1million, that $10 billion dollars, more than double the assets of National and the Councils.  I get that's a border case.  But if the average claim is $500,000 that's still more than the total assets.  If half of the claims are deemed false and the other half settles for $1MM that's still more.  If only half are legit and settle for $500,000 each that's 60% of all the assets.  I also understand the settlements will be structured over time and the assets in the victims fund will have some ROI, etc., I just wonder where the threshold is for continued viability.  Can the BSA (Nation and Councils) liquidate 40% of all assets and survive?  20%, 50%?