Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, KublaiKen said:

in our Chapter all candidates are on the ballot and the SM only uses a strike if the candidate is actually elected.

So, as I read this, all scouts who have met the OA qualifications are put on the ballot, and stand for election.

The SM does not exercise the SM's discretion to exclude from the ballot a scout that the SM believes should not be elected.

The doomed scout's name appears on the ballot and the doomed scout knows he was on the ballot. The doomed scout does not know he is doomed.

The scout electorate believes the doomed scout to be a viable candidate because he is on the ballot, and perhaps deems him worthy and elects him to the OA, not knowing that their vote won't count.

And what is the color of the Truth in presenting a ballot to an electorate when the "fix is in?"

After the doomed scout is elected, he is told that he was not elected.  (But he was.)

And what is the color of the Truth in telling a scout he was not elected when he really was elected?

Or maybe the SM has the backbone to tell the doomed scout that he was elected, but that the SM is denying him membership in the OA.  And how is that message delivered?  Such that the Scout has a path forward to qualify next year?. 

And how does the scout reconcile that his fellow scouts thought he was worthy, but the SM is the roadblock?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SiouxRanger said:

So, as I read this, all scouts who have met the OA qualifications are put on the ballot, and stand for election.

The SM does not exercise the SM's discretion to exclude from the ballot a scout that the SM believes should not be elected.

The doomed scout's name appears on the ballot and the doomed scout knows he was on the ballot. The doomed scout does not know he is doomed.

The scout electorate believes the doomed scout to be a viable candidate because he is on the ballot, and perhaps deems him worthy and elects him to the OA, not knowing that their vote won't count.

And what is the color of the Truth in presenting a ballot to an electorate when the "fix is in?"

After the doomed scout is elected, he is told that he was not elected.  (But he was.)

And what is the color of the Truth in telling a scout he was not elected when he really was elected?

Or maybe the SM has the backbone to tell the doomed scout that he was elected, but that the SM is denying him membership in the OA.  And how is that message delivered?  Such that the Scout has a path forward to qualify next year?. 

And how does the scout reconcile that his fellow scouts thought he was worthy, but the SM is the roadblock?

I agree. I can't imagine why I would have submitted a name on the ballot if I didn't intend to allow that candidate to be elected. I was pretty stunned when I was asked, especially because in my distant youth I was a Lodge Unit Elections Committee Chair at one point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I might also add: check with the scout. Every now and then you come across one who doesn’t want to be on the ballot. I personally think SM approval includes identifying candidates and letting them know that they may be up for election.

  • Upvote 1
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...