Jump to content
RememberSchiff

Ireland seeks Eagle now before she ages out

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Sentinel947 said:

I don't know where this idea came from (probably the BSA.) But it does harm to people and to the program. 

Eagle Scout is not some silver bullet for teenagers. If your grades suck, Eagle Scout won't get you into college. If you bomb your interview, Eagle Scout will not get you the job. As a corporate recruiter myself, I don't look for Eagle Scouts, I look for candidates who are qualified to do the job, and if they happen to be Eagle Scouts, then we chat about that after the serious stuff is out of the way. 

Eagle Scout is valuable not because it will cause other people to think better of the Eagle Scout, but because of the personal journey of growth being in a Troop for 2-6 years can have. Can it help you in an interview or college admissions? Possibly, but you have to be qualified already. 

Just like "Go to college so you can get a good job" sets young people up to have a useless degree, tons of debt, disappointment and a minimum wage job. "Eagle will get you places in life" means parents will help their sons get Eagle at any cost, and the cost is what we actually want our Scouts to learn: liife skills, leadership, teamwork, ethical decisionmaking, love of country, and respect for creation. 

I wonder if Gary is an Eagle Scout and what benefits he perceives he's received by earning it. 

As a recent Eagle I can back this up. No college I visited cared about Eagle. No college interviewer asked about it but they did ask about what I did in scouts. No job I’ve had really considered Eagle that much of a big deal. The internship I have now only asked me about Eagle because the guy interviewing me was a scoutmaster. Only scouting related jobs ever asked me about Eagle. My friends who are eagles have similar stories. I am fine with this. I climbed scouting’s Everest but it’s not like I’m going to use that to introduce myself at parties. It helped make me who I am but it’s not who I am, if that makes any sense. Off to biology. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

Leaving aside the question whether that is ever true, it is not true in this forum.

And yet we have a "down arrow" feature and people use it. Some might say that the existence, and use, of the down arrow is equally as Un-scoutlike as anything said or discussed so far.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sentinel947 said:

Eagle Scout is not some silver bullet for teenagers. If your grades suck, Eagle Scout won't get you into college. If you bomb your interview, Eagle Scout will not get you the job. As a corporate recruiter myself, I don't look for Eagle Scouts, I look for candidates who are qualified to do the job, and if they happen to be Eagle Scouts, then we chat about that after the serious stuff is out of the way. 

I double down on this statement by saying that the BEST Scouters I have ever met are NOT Eagle Scouts. Many were guys who quit at various points in their Scouting career and came back to Scouting for their sons or daughters (Venturing). For whatever reason -- maybe to make up for what they walked away from, maybe to pay homage to a mentor, maybe they never had the opportunity to be Scouts, etc., -- these men (and women) are some of the best Scouters I know.

Not Eagles. Not AOL recipients. No Wood Badge. No OA. Just good, solid leaders who take their role seriously, train hard and work for the boys.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, an_old_DC said:

I get a down vote for reprinting part of a CBS article? LOL

It was downvoting the sentiment of the article and her statement, not you.  I removed it. ;) 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The great irony here is that because of who she is as a figure in this whole sea of change, that will carry far more weight than Eagle Scout on any application or resume .  She will either be heralded as a hero and rubber stamped her application, or castigated as a villain and buried at the bottom of the pile.  Having "Eagle Scout" on her paperwork at this point has little relevance in her college aspirations, even littler than what current Eagle Scouts experience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said:

I double down on this statement by saying that the BEST Scouters I have ever met are NOT Eagle Scouts. Many were guys who quit at various points in their Scouting career and came back to Scouting for their sons or daughters (Venturing). For whatever reason -- maybe to make up for what they walked away from, maybe to pay homage to a mentor, maybe they never had the opportunity to be Scouts, etc., -- these men (and women) are some of the best Scouters I know.

Not Eagles. Not AOL recipients. No Wood Badge. No OA. Just good, solid leaders who take their role seriously, train hard and work for the boys.

You're definitely not alone in that sentiment. 

My Troop is about to have it's 4th Scoutmaster since I joined in 2005. None were Eagles. 3/4 Took Wood Badge at some point during their tenure, but only one (the most recent) had Wood Badge before he became SM. All are exceptional, dedicated men. 

We've had a good handful of ASMs or Committee members (myself included) that earned Eagle, and it's been pretty good for the most part but I think each of them who were/are great in their roles would have been regardless of whether or not they were Eagles

I think you and I share the same opinion. Could Wood Badge or Eagle be helpful to being a good Scouter? Yea, it could be. Is it a guarantee somebody will be a good Scouter? No, it's not. Do you have to be an Eagle or go to Wood Badge to be a good Scouter? No. Definitely not. 

Edited by Sentinel947
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gwaihir said:

It was downvoting the sentiment of the article and her statement, not you.  I removed it. ;) 

Thanks. :)

...and I understood

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Col. Flagg said:

And yet we have a "down arrow" feature and people use it. Some might say that the existence, and use, of the down arrow is equally as Un-scoutlike as anything said or discussed so far.

"Some might say" that, but I think they would be incorrect.  I am not a huge fan of the "down arrow" and I don't think I have ever used it on purpose (under the old software I gave accidental arrows in both directions, and you couldn't change it.)  But the use of the down arrow does NOT imply an "attack" on a person or group.  It implies a disagreement with the opinion expressed in the post.  (By the way, if I thought the down arrow did imply an attack, rather than a disagreement with an opinion, I would recommend to the forum owner that the down arrow be disabled, if that is possible.)

The distinction between an attack on a person or group, and a disagreement with an opinion, is (generally speaking) one of the dividing lines between "un-Scoutlike" and "Scoutlike", respectively.  (I say "generally speaking" because there are probably some exceptions going either way, but I think it is a good general principle.  To be clear, it is possible to express a disagreement with an opinion in an "un-Scoutlike" manner, and I am not inviting anyone to do so.

It is sometimes difficult to determine whether a post is Scoutlike or un-Scoutlike, and the line becomes somewhat more blurred in Issues and Politics.  That's why the moderators get the Big Money.  (That's a joke.)  But wherever the line might be, and however a particular post might be classified, un-Scoutlike posts are not acceptable in this forum.

Edited by NJCubScouter
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

That begs the question. Is calling someone un-scoutlike because you disagree with them, well.......un-scoutlike.

Follow the Scout Oath and Law and you should be fine.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

"Some might say" that, but I think they would be incorrect.  I am not a huge fan of the "down arrow" and I don't think I have ever used it on purpose (under the old software I gave accidental arrows in both directions, and you couldn't change it.)  But the use of the down arrow does NOT imply an "attack" on a person or group. 

Well since there's not definition of what the down arrow means, I suspect most people will take it as an affront (see what happened above as an example) if it is used. So, yes, one could argue that it is un-scout-like given there's no clear definition as to what it means. I didn't say it was an "attack" on anyone, those are your words. I merely said it could be construed as un-kind, ergo un-scout-like. 

I have only used it once or twice and in the manner you suggest...to disagree with someone. Though usually if I disagree I will simply quote the person (as I am doing now) and state my disagreement. I don't feel the need to "neg rep" them, which is what many might take that down arrow to mean. That's actually what it means in most other fora.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, following a train of thought here.

if Down Arrow = un-kind but un-kind is not verboten, then un-kind is not verboten, which means water guns are ok!

I move that we settle this and all future disputes a 20 paces with Super Soakers!

Can I get a second?
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah but the down arrow gives the user that little shot of endorphin-vengeance for a split second. Hard to give that up!

To follow up on the less satisfying metaphorical super soakers on the Forum does that mean I can go back to singing the 'little teapot song' again?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×