Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The course syllabus clearly allows for the facilitator to introduce "breaks" or conferences as needed between rounds, typically one or two conferences. The conferences are optional. The facilitator has to judge the benefit of these conferences versus lessons being learned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The course syllabus clearly allows for the facilitator to introduce "breaks" or conferences as needed between rounds, typically one or two conferences. The conferences are optional. The facilitator has to judge the benefit of these conferences versus lessons being learned. "

 

My understanding of the game is that the conferences are NOT optional, it's how its supposed to work.

 

My Fraternity uses the game (we just call it the Red-Green Game) in our training course on conflict resolution, and the inter-group conferences are in there. And they are most certainly NOT optional.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a true "prisoner's dilemma" if you can't make your case to your other prisoners.

 

In WB terms, it's a chance for the bead throwers to confront the axe throwers and ask them to play nice so everyone can get a slice of the pie. Remind them of the first point of the scout law, etc ...

 

Or, they can offer the threat: "For the next rounds, we will throw axe until you show a gesture of good faith and throw beads. The round after you throw beads, we will throw beads. If you throw axe, will throw axe next round. Get the picture? If you want to lead, we'll let you. But you will gain no points for doing so."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The course syllabus clearly allows for the facilitator to introduce "breaks" or conferences as needed between rounds, typically one or two conferences. The conferences are optional. The facilitator has to judge the benefit of these conferences versus lessons being learned. "

 

I'm extracting this info from the syllabus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last summer I went through this in my course. I was the patrol leader and was sent to conference with the others outside the group. While this game at first seems to be 100% against everything that scouting stands for, I think that is the point. We ended up not even being able to finish the game without staffers walking out of the room and patrols furious with one another. Thank goodness for our course's Sr. Patrol Leader! He was able to bring to light exactly what was happening between us. Our patrols lacked trust in one another and ego's got in the way of allowing us to all win. This happens on every level in scouting, and it was an excellent demonstration of what not to do. Leaders of different packs, troops, and even among themselves (this is especially apparent at scout-o-rama and Pinewood derby) to become way to competitive to allow the kids to benefit from the original goals of these activities.

Our course had 8 patrols, 4 on each team. We were told that the team with the highest cumulative points would win the game and the patrol with the highest individual points would win the patrol prize. I can see how our staff set us up for this! When we went to the lodge, our tables had been moved around, and I personally believe that they put those of us with a strong personality on the side of the room together to let the strong personalities come out, and come out they did! The other side of the room worked together in perfect harmony while my side of the room went for the gusto!

Our Sr. Patrol Leader was able to show the difference in the level of cooperation and how strong personalities can throw a group off. While heated words were exchanged, and there may be some lasting effects from playing this game with other strong personality people, its a life lesson I will not soon forget! No matter what, I think or feel about the actions of some of the other people involved, I must continue to work with them in my council, ever known a scout to have an issue with another scout then they have to learn to get along later? I can remember this and relate to my scouts a whole lot better now!

I was the person in the conference but was not the member of my patrol who got to hold up the voting card. No matter how bad things got, and no matter how far behind my patrol was in the points, my patrol stood behind me and voted the same way I had agreed to in the conferencing. I cant say that this was true of the other patrols. We as a patrol were also able to express to the rest of the course how important it was to trust one another and listen to your leadership even when it looks like you are loosing. The patrols who's voters did not vote the same way as their conferencing member agreed to got the short end on the individual points. There are tons and tons of lessons to be learned from this game, and I strongly feel that it should be included in every woodbadge course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! this threads been resurected a few times over..

 

mirinda.climer - Welcome to the forums! Hope we see you around often. I like how your group got debreifed. Sounds like they choose a good person who could calm everyone down and get everyone to "see the light".

 

We are soon to start a Woodbadge course that I am on staff for. I hear the guy we have cominging in is wonderful with the debriefing. I missed him last year when I did it as I was scribe and was busy putting the Gazette to bed.. So I am interested to see him in action this year..

 

Someone on our staff stated when she was a participant, the debrief was not well done at all, because the person who did it, told the strong personalities that this game brought out their "true selfs".. So she thought if awful to tell someone you are deep down inside someone who lies and cheats to get ahead.. When she was on staff since, it was done better with, the statement that given the right circumstances we all can can go down that path.. That the game is to show (as you said), the why it can damage the scouting program, and what we want the boys to learn.. (But did not point fingers at those who stayed ultra-competitive, and state you guys are the bad guys and it's your personality so nothing will ever fix you.)..

 

I don't know about the rest of the debreif when I was a participant.. (I was so tired, and all I wanted to do was end the game and go to bed.. Not happy about that forced cracker barrel afterward either.).. But, when she said that statement "that this game brought out their "true selfs".." That brought back memories that that was what was said when I was a participant.. I had the same reaction, that that was an awful thing to say to someone, while shining a spotlight on them in a public place..

 

So I think our debriefings have improved also.. How is it that other WB courses are debriefed? I am wondering if some are still using the "old" style way, if this might be what keeps the anger resonating in those who really got upset with this game.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debriefing seems to absolutely be key to a growth experience. Our Scouts will face temptations that draw them away from good values. The perfect person may not understand. But if you have felt the pull of the Dark Side . . .

 

The first time I saw it done, the staffer running the Game was dressed like Mr Scratch himself - black tail coat. You could almost smell the sulfur. ("You know you want it!) But he, too, was key. He had to know when to stop tempting and start turning the participants back to Scouting values. (He did a great job.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just played this last weekend at Wood Badge. I am not a fan. I think our debriefing was ok, but the problem was that I was mad enough at that point that I wasn't really listening to the debriefing that closely. (Note to self - the scouts are probably the same way when I try to explain to them something that they are upset about) I felt that it caused quite a bit of tension between the groups, and was a disconnect with the bonding that we had going.

 

I won't go as far as some posters have about it being anti-capitalist or whatever, but you have to put things into context. Based on this game, I am not following the Scout Oath and Scout Law if I go to a car dealer and try to mislead him about what my top price would be to purchase a car. We were set up to believe this was a competitive game. Our patrol has a couple of very competitive people in it. We mislead the other patrols and got an advantage the first round after negotiation. After that, we played nice, as did the other patrols. We drew quite a bit of ire for this behavior. I am hoping that this does not follow me home, as a couple of the people who appeared most upset with us are people I need to work together with on a regular basis.

 

Probably the thing that salvaged the night for me was my scouting mentor (who was on staff) pulling me aside later that evening. He asked me what I got out of it, and I said something about cooperating and everyone wins. He told me he didn't think I got it at all, and asked me to take a walk with him. Basically his take on it was that the Oath and Law matter, 24/7. I'm bungling the quote, but Socrates said said something like "Character is what you do when you think no one is watching." He always reminds the boys of this when they have a scoutmaster conference, and reminds them that those obligations don't end when they walk out the church door at 8:00, or when they turn 18. The Oath and Law are a lifetime commitment. You can't use dishonesty in this situation to get ahead, and then not expect they boys to pick up on that and follow suit. I still think that context matters, but I did see his point. I still hate the game and think it does more harm than good, but for me personally I got a good lesson from him after the exercise was over. I'm not sure about the other 30 people in the room.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game went pretty well on our course last August/September. After the debriefing, I gave a Scoutmaster minute about the importance of being able to Trust our Leaders. It felt like the combination of the debriefing plus the SM Minute got the important points across.

 

The syllabus is silent on a SM Minute after the game. I obviously thought it was important enough to have one. I'd recommend all courses do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw this done once, left a thoughtful atmoshere.

Put the words on magnets and let the participants WATCH as someone plays with the positioning of the words.

 

WIN ALL YOU CAN

 

CAN YOU ALL WIN

 

CAN YOU WIN ALL

 

ALL YOU CAN WIN

 

YOU ALL CAN WIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got back from the 1st 3 day class, 

 

This was administered horribly by the staff. Last year a fight almost broke out and this year a scouter left. I like the above idea where they change around the words to give them hints on where to lead them with towards the end result of the game. All weekend we played team games that were against the other teams. Most of the time when you won we were allowed to eat first or some special recognition. So when the game starts, you do what it says "Win All You Can" the card drawer gave up after the 5th round, I jumped in to volunteer to draw cards. Went up for the team chat with the other groups (not knowing what was going on)  After holing up the "Log" card and not the "Beads", well our team won. Just like the name of the game "Win All You Can" For an administrator to point me out and say "I was the most untrustworthy person in the room" well I felt like throat punching the guy! Either way, I went back and packed up and left. Not only did I feel about 2 inch tall I also felt very embarrassed in front of my peers and insulted that someone can judge a character of someone by this type of game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My staff did a wonderful job with this game. We all learned the lessons we were supposed to. This game is controversial, it takes a good staff to pull it off. 

Our staff started off with big posters. "WIN ALL YOU CAN!!!!." At maybe round 4 or so they started going around with the posters shouting, "YOU CAN ALL WIN!" 

Overall the point of the game is to make us analyze the themes of being trustworthy, mutual cooperation vs individual needs, and most importantly, how do we define success? In Scouting, everybody can win.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it can be a tough game, and yes, it takes a talented staff to pull it off effectively.  Not an easy task.  I've seen good and bad, and I think the game is too risky to be handled by 'amateurs.'  It can turn sour in a hurry, and the point is easily lost or misinterpreted.  If the staff gets excited about the game, or think it's fun, then they're totally out of touch with what's going on.  I've seen that, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback, i was really upset that night wondering what the heck did i do wrong. After reading the web for several days i can see this was done wrong, sad this is I paid the price walking out of Woodbadge,k been trying for 3 years to take the time off to get this done with the results ending like this. More upset that nobody from the Woodbadge staff has reached out to me asking me what happened. Might take it in another council as I live on the boarder of 2 different ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...