Scouting Pet Peeve?

[Tron]

1 hour ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

We disagree on this issue, but arguably us both being involved and running units makes Scouting America stronger and more able to serve all interested youth. Families that like your unit on this issue won't like ours and vice versa - but the result is that all families can find a unit they feel welcome in.

When there is a single NSO in a country (as opposed to the WOSM NSO being an umbrella organization for several scouting organizations with separate leadership, uniforms, etc), that NSO needs to contain a lot of different kinds of units or be content to serve only a small part of the youth. So, having units with different approaches (sometimes in quite sharp disagreement) is the only way forward unless one is ready to accept niche status, which I imagine no one here is. 

This isn't quite accurate though. While there is 1 NSO (and that NSO is Scouting America here in the states), if GSUSA, Campfire, Rainbow Scouts or Trail Life wanted to become a WOSM member they can apply to WOSM and force a federation; however, those other large(ish) national level organizations don't want to federate for their own various reasons are thus locked out of WOSM. 

[AwakeEnergyScouter]

1 hour ago, Tron said:

This isn't quite accurate though. While there is 1 NSO (and that NSO is Scouting America here in the states), if GSUSA, Campfire, Rainbow Scouts or Trail Life wanted to become a WOSM member they can apply to WOSM and force a federation; however, those other large(ish) national level organizations don't want to federate for their own various reasons are thus locked out of WOSM. 

It is 100% accurate that right now, Scouting America is the WOSM member from the US. 

None of the organizations you mentioned are going through the motions to try to force a federation and at least two do not abide by the WOSM constitution or are otherwise ineligible (size), so there is nothing suggesting it's about to become inaccurate, either.

It would seem that you agree with me, despite your first sentence, or am I missing something?

[Tron]

17 hours ago, AwakeEnergyScouter said:

It is 100% accurate that right now, Scouting America is the WOSM member from the US. 

None of the organizations you mentioned are going through the motions to try to force a federation and at least two do not abide by the WOSM constitution or are otherwise ineligible (size), so there is nothing suggesting it's about to become inaccurate, either.

It would seem that you agree with me, despite your first sentence, or am I missing something?

I think we're on a similar page from two different books. 

What I am getting at is that WOSM isn't set up to just have 1 NSO; it is the preferred method but not the only method. If the other national level organizations wanted to become the NSO then WOSM has a method of petitioning which forces a federated status as the NSO. So it's not like WOSM locks out other orgs/forces a first to the table situation; there is a way for younger better organizations to take the reigns (to some degree). 

As you point out two of the other organizations I listed (as examples, there are like 12 nationwide scouting organizations, maybe more here in the states) do not follow WOSM policies and their petitions would be declined. The others could file though. I think the reason why Scouting America is the NSO is that no other group wants to play exactly by the WOSM rules. 

[clemlaw]

On 10/6/2025 at 3:20 PM, MikeS72 said:

Scouts (or anyone else for that matter) who asks, "please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance", and then begins with "I pledge of allegiance" instead of "I pledge allegiance".  Those are usually the same Scouts (or others) who insert a comma into the line "one nation under God".

 

Several years ago, it was our troop's SPL who kind of stopped things during the opening ceremony and reminded the Scouts that it is "I pledge allegiance," and not "I pledge of allegiance."  He did a good job handling it with humor.  And he didn't single anyone out, although that would have been difficult, since over half of them were saying it that way.  🙂

As for the comma, my poor sainted first grade teacher taught it to me as "one nation, under God," and she wouldn't be wrong about something like that.

Finally, when I was a Scout a long time ago, we _always_ repeated "a Scout is" for all twelve points of the Law.  I was kind of surprised when I came back as an adult and nobody did it that way any more.

[FireStone]

Adults wearing Eagle rank patches. Not the square knot, the oval. 

And I'd personally let it slide for an 18 or 19-year-old, but I'm seeing too many 50-something men wearing an oval Eagle rank patch. 

[qwazse]

On 11/10/2025 at 12:08 PM, FireStone said:

Adults wearing Eagle rank patches. Not the square knot, the oval. 

And I'd personally let it slide for an 18 or 19-year-old, but I'm seeing too many 50-something men wearing an oval Eagle rank patch. 

I haven’t seen enough adults with ovals on their pockets to be bothered.

I find the rule to be a quirky one the sole purpose of which is to sell one more piece of insignia.

[Eagle94-A1]

On 11/10/2025 at 12:08 PM, FireStone said:

Adults wearing Eagle rank patches. Not the square knot, the oval. 

And I'd personally let it slide for an 18 or 19-year-old, but I'm seeing too many 50-something men wearing an oval Eagle rank patch. 

Once upon a time, Explorers, and Venturers, before the Venturing ranks came about,  age 18-20 could still wear their Eagle on their green shirts. One of my national scout shop employees, age 19, wore the knot on tan uniform, but his Eagle patch on the green uniform, which was allowed at camp. This was 2001.

 

[Tron]

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Once upon a time, Explorers, and Venturers, before the Venturing ranks came about,  age 18-20 could still wear their Eagle on their green shirts. One of my national scout shop employees, age 19, wore the knot on tan uniform, but his Eagle patch on the green uniform, which was allowed at camp. This was 2001.

 

I think the rule might be or might have been that 18-20 is youth in the exploring/venturing/seascout programs so they qualify as youth and youth can wear rank badges. 

[scoutldr]

I was an Explorer for 4 years and wore the square knot with dark green background.  The pocket had the patch shown in my profile pic to the left. I earned Eagle as an Explorer, so never wore the oval rank patch...which was OK with me.

 

[FireStone]

15 hours ago, qwazse said:

I haven’t seen enough adults with ovals on their pockets to be bothered.

I find the rule to be a quirky one the sole purpose of which is to sell one more piece of insignia.

I've seen it a handful of times but what reminded me of this was seeing 2 in one camp, but in different units. 

I actually find it helpful, if everyone abides by the square knot rule it's easy to tell who is a late-teens scout vs. a late-teens adult. 

[skeptic]

As I have aged to old coot or goat status, I find few things surprise or tryly annoy me.  Not worth the bile.  As long as the YP is in place and the Scouter means well and is focused on the youth growing, what is the big deal?