An Analogy - Is BSA a Sinking Ship?

[Bob White 20]

I also said that some unit scouters are asked to serve at other levels of the program, and they do need an understanding of what other levels do and how they are structured.

[evmori 11]

I do have an understanding of how a District works & I do have some familiarity with Council operations. I have never been asked to serve at the National level and according to you, I don't need to know anything about what happens on a National level. If you have that's wonderful! I guess that makes you a better Scouter than me!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[packsaddle 753]

If this keeps up, it's going to be 'meadow muffins' at 20 paces, I feel sure.

[jkhny 10]

"Why are some Councils suffering? Lack of leadership and bad management. Failure to replace SE's who continue to fail to get results because they are arrogantly ineffective at motivating and working with volunteers."

 

Exactly. And the original "motivation" that pushed me beyong a focus on my own units.

 

 

But the problem it that you CAN'T get rid of a bad one.

 

BSA has rigged the system. You DON'T have any voice or control as a volunteer. It's not bad if you have a good SE and Board but if not.....

 

SE's get in and choose their own Boards - the only group that can remove them. After a couple years in place, they CAN and often DO have full control. SE's do have limited length contracts but can and DO get them renewed by hand-picked Boards. Upstate NY has one small Council whose ONLY purpose seems to be to provide a job for the SE there. He's wrecked the Council, thrown people out even refused to renew the charter of a Troop whose leaders were vocal critics. With no free desks in Supply, this guy is going to hold onto his spot forever. The Board is now his buddies. He'll drive every last volunteer out of Scouting there before you get rid of him. Our SE here is following the same pattern. So have others.

 

We can't get him out BEFORE his contract expires - and are deathly afraid he ain't gonna want to leave (or having screwed up two Councils, isn't wanted anywhere else) And forget voting them out with COR's. Once an autocratic Little Napoleon gets in and established, surrounded by personally chosen lackeys....he'll die there.

 

How can this happen? Because such SE's make up the rules as they go along. District Chairman are off the Board. Nominating Committees are hand ppicked and THE slate has to be approved by the existing Board. An "Executive Committeee" can act in place of the full Board.

 

Chicago shows this all clearly. The leadership there HAS been voted OUT - two slates have been voted down. But others can't run and they won't leave. How can that happen????? Why does BSA let it happen?

 

 

And shouldn't the same terms above:

 

" give him/her 3 years to achieve goals legally and honorably. If he fails to deliver, replace him and start over."

 

Shouldn't that apply to NATIOAL?

 

Failing leadership should be removed - but lot's of luck doing so.

 

Does anyone really believe National is meeting their self-professed goals of growing SCOUTING? They can't even put a brake on the exodus. YOUR Council may be fine, but be sure about the numbers they're claiming. Ever see any District or Council detail reports? Who are they claiming? And if your Council has more kids in LFL than Scouting, WHY? What's the focus - pumping numbers and getting $ or supporting Scouting? But no matter how good YOUR Council is, even the official NATIONAL numbers show that Scouting membership is on a real slide.

 

The purpose of my posts is to raise ALL these issues and get people talking about the FACTS - which I HAVE provided in detail. You'd drown if I put up a detailed analysis of National numbers but they show real drops and clear "manipulation".

 

Look at the Williams salary numbers and the comparisons. Sorry, that's real hard to justify and BSA has been less that transparent about salaries and anything else. BSA in NOT open and transparent about ANYTHING. And it seems like they have a lot to hide. But a knee-jerk defense of BSA does not help Scouting.

 

What IS the purpose of BSA? and is it succeeding at that purpose? IS it serving and supporting its volunteers?

 

In most Councils it is, but in a significant number (10-20%) it is not. And the problem goes back to the national leadership who are NOT doing a good job. They set the tone.

 

A culture focused on superficial goals that stifles any valid questioning or attempts at change should have no place in Scouting. Scouting deserves better leadership than it has - especially for what we're paying - and WE all are the ones paying.

 

Scouting - at all levels - should have the paid leadership its volunteers deserve.

 

 

[Bob White 20]

"What IS the purpose of BSA? and is it succeeding at that purpose? IS it serving and supporting its volunteers?

 

In most Councils it is, but in a significant number (10-20%) it is not."

 

Which specific 32 to 64 councils do you refer to and how did you come by that figure? (GOTA no doubt?). Again you have no data to support anything you state.

 

 

Also jkhny

Volunteers outnumber professional by over 100 to 1. Wouldn't raising the quality of volunteers have a much greater impact on the program?

 

 

[jkhny 10]

"Volunteers outnumber professional by over 100 to 1. Wouldn't raising the quality of volunteers have a much greater impact on the program? "

 

Can't argue with THAT logic. All of what is wrong IS the fault of volunteers because we let it happen.

 

Now please head up to Chicago and help them get the leadership they voted DOWN out of their positions. They've done everything as they should - behaved as nice Scouts and overcome impossible rules to succeed in ousting their leadership but the leadership there won't leave. No point in adding to the list.....

 

I notice you've avoided any response to the FACTS on Williams' compensation. But then a real "Leader" is priceless - right?

 

Unthinking "obedience", blind allegiance to any "cause" without ever examining what that "cause" is about (and whether that "cause" is being well served by its adherents) explains some of the worst episodes in human history. Your own words make my case for reform stronger than mine.

 

Further rhetoric and semantic arguuments are pointless.

 

Time will tell if my points are well taken or the ravings of a lunatic.

 

 

[evmori 11]

. Again you have no data to support anything you state.

 

A classic line, Bob. What facts do you have to refute what jkhny has posted?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

GOTA?

[Bob White 20]

GOTA= Grabbed Outta Thin Air

 

Ed

The question here is not what evidence do I have, The question is what evidence does HE have. To this point he has not offered one iota of factual data to support a single conclusion he has put forward.

 

He makes wild accusations leading him to unprovable conclusions. And you will notice that I am not the only to have seen through his charade. You are simply one of a few who as yet have not.

 

 

 

[Backpacker 11]

Ed

 

The truth of the matter is that Bob rarely has any facts to back up his claims, except the ones he makes up. He just is trying to prevent jkhny from expressing his views as he does with anyone who disagrees with him. While I do not agree with jkhny on this issue he should be allowed to express his opinion, and he does make a few valid points about professional scouting. The BSA is not perfect, no organization is, but a certain poster mistakenly feels that any disparaging remark about the BSA should be squelched. BSA can take the hit just fine and go on, it's too bad that poster can not do the same. He (BW) feels that he is the Don Quixote, savior of the BSA without whom the organization would surely crumble.

[evmori 11]

The question here is not what evidence do I have, The question is what evidence does HE have. To this point he has not offered one iota of factual data to support a single conclusion he has put forward.

 

He makes wild accusations leading him to unprovable conclusions. And you will notice that I am not the only to have seen through his charade. You are simply one of a few who as yet have not.

 

I'll rephrase one of your "lines", Bob.

 

Again, you have no facts to disprove jkhny's posts.

 

Sure he rants on! Sure some of his stuff makes no sense. But you, Bob, have not offered on iota of proof to back up you statements, either. So get off the pot & prove jkhny wrong.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

If we assume for a moment that the Good Ship BSA is having some difficulties, whether those be taking on water, or navigational problems, or whatever, I guess the question is, do we head for the life boats, or try and patch up "the old boy"?

 

Does BSA, the National office (the Captain), allow for open dialog in an attempt to correct problems, and what might the channel for that dialog be? Or, are we to stay down in the boiler room, ignoring the water at our feet, and hope we're not being steered to an iceberg?

[Bob White 20]

Oh for pete's sake Ed, read his first post again. It's a fairy tale he concocted to support unsupportable conclusions.

 

Ed.. just be cause jhnky writes that the BSA is a cruise doesn't mean it really is. There isn't really a boat Ed! So how can anything he said be proven or disproved, it is as one other poster said...all kaka.

 

 

 

[evmori 11]

Bob,

Do you mean (shudder) the cruise ship is a metaphor (shudder)? Not real? WOW! Am I disappointed! I was already to toss on my Speedo & flip flops & head out to the pool!

 

Well, guess it's time to leave La La Land & get back to the real world!

 

So because this is just a metaphor that means none of it is true therefore you don't need any facts to refute the claims made but jkhny needs facts to prove what he/she posted is true? Interesting.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

 

[Hunt 11]

I have a few suggestions...

First, for jkhny: You cannot effectively discuss problems with BSA National by repeatedly listing dozens of things you think are wrong in a single post. You can discuss a general issue (maybe, "leaders are out of touch") or a specific issue ("Scout executive is paid too much"), but you can't ball it up together. Examples of problems are not enough to prove a systemic problem.

Second, for defenders of BSA: Please defend BSA policies on the merits, not by claiming that critics are whiners or that you have superior knowledge. That's not useful, nor is it very persuasive. If you think you know the real reason membership nationwide is declining, say what it is.

Finally, extended metaphors rarely work well.