The runaway Train

[GKlose 24]

Maybe it's just the Membership part of me, but I see a perfect opportunity here :-), right in line with BSA policy and no hurt feelings...

 

MIB, T/S and Dad -- why not start a venturing crew? MIB and T/S can provide crew leadership (and outdoor coordination) while Dad can sit back as Crew Adviser and watch the fun happen. Same CO/COR if you really want to keep working with them. In due time, if the troop needs assistance, you're always able to step back into those roles. Once the wedding happens, you're in-line to be a co-ed crew advisor team...works well for a couple that I know in our district, who wanted to bring more young women into the scouting program.

 

But if the bridge is already burned, you can always start up the crew elsewhere.

 

The byproduct is that your DE will love you for starting up a new unit.

 

Food for thought...

Guy

[moosetracker 132]

Sorry GKlose.. We are not a Venturing Family, especially not with this COR.. The COR burnt the feeling of warm fuzzies, when she was not COR and did alot of damage to the troop by starting up a Venture Crew under the CO, that was suppose to be self sustaining, and all females.. When she didn't get enough members, she then recruited at the Troop during troop meetings, telling the boys of age to drop the troop and finish up their Eagle in the Crew, where there was no uniforms, girls, no younger boys that they needed to mentor and meetings only twice a month..

 

Became a big civil war, the troop in the end won out and the Crew ended up folding..

 

But, my son (who was not of age) and was hurt by the older boys he worshipped at the time wanting to take off. Just doesn't have the best memories of this.

 

When his fiance joined the troop, there was mention of her becomeing Crew advisor for restarting the Crew.. The two of them cringed..

 

I have nothing against the Venturing Crew due to this one incident. I realize this is not how they are suppose to recruite, and it is a great place for women, and boys who will not join a troop, or who have already decided to drop out of a troop.. And on occasion some do successfully become duel enrolled.

 

I do not blame the whole Venturing movement for the actions of one person.. But, it did come as a shock, when the Council/District Leaders would tell you the Ventures were not a threat to the Boy Scout troop.. But, when you ask them to help sort out the mess between our troop & Crew, and were told the actions of this person, their response was.. Well create a better program so the crew can not steal them.. Nothing about speaking to her and informing her this was not the right way the Venturing Crew goes about recruiting..

 

Also my son & (I believe fiance is the same), enjoy working in the adult world. Being members of a crew, is pulling them out of the Adult world and back into the role of a child.

 

Then comes the complication of my son only has a few months before he is no longer a crew member, then Fiance would have another year as crew member, at which time they would not be able to date.. Kindof hard to plan a wedding and not date at the same time..

[Beavah 205]

Then comes the complication of my son only has a few months before he is no longer a crew member, then Fiance would have another year as crew member, at which time they would not be able to date.. Kindof hard to plan a wedding and not date at the same time..

 

Yah, that's why this bit in da YP training is so absurd, eh? When yeh actually talk to folks at National, they're far more rational about it. Obviously the concern is a big power difference, of a 40 year old Advisor dating an 18 year old young woman. That sort of thing, however, is best left to the people closest to da situation to decide. Yeh just can't write a workable nationwide guideline that isn't ridiculous if taken literally.

 

Yet another example of how we old people are rigid and inflexible, while da young folks are thoughtful and rational and able to see da shades of grey.

 

Beavah

[Beavah 205]

Yah....hmmmm....

 

So re-readin' this whole thread has given me a new insight, which is why I hang out and participate in all these things.

 

I find myself convinced by young teacher/scout's argument. I think Lisabob and I are wrong. Older folks, not younger folks, see things in more artificial black-and-white ways. And da evidence is right here in this thread.

 

It seems da young people just expected the folks they were working' with and for to be Trustworthy, eh? To live up to their word. That strikes me as a reasonable, black-and-white expectation. Also maybe a notion of equal pay (or equal voice) for equal work. That, too, strikes me as a reasonable black-and-white expectation, as hard as it is to live up to sometimes. I think they both have somethin' to do with "Timeless Values."

 

But many if not most of us adults in this thread instead of applying timeless values applied our own experience as though it was a value. Our experience that a SM is supposed to be 21 (so we ignored that the lad would be 21 when he became SM), our experience with BSA paperwork, etc. We saw da minor things like BSA paperwork as even more black-and-white than Timeless Values. So much so that quite a few people made up rules that just don't exist in order to justify treatin' it as black-and-white. Insurance won't cover. The age of majority is 21 not 18. Unregistered MC's can't vote. And on and on... We're so determined to see black and white that we make stuff up.

 

And all da young people expect from us is that we be Trustworthy.

 

Now it is true that those with more experience have more experience. I reckon that's correlated with age within a given field. A lawyer who is 50 is likely to have more experience than one who is 27 (unless he's a second-career fellow ). So yah, a 40-year-old who has worked on lots of committees and teams is goin' to know more than a 20 year old about how to work on committees and teams, and be better at getting things done. There are things da young folks can learn from us because we have more experience with adults.

 

But correlation is not causation, eh? A 40 year old who has never really worked on committees or effective teams is goin' to know less than a 20 year old who has. And a 20-year-old who has spent the last 10 years in Scouting is goin' to know more than a parent committee member who signed up two years ago.

 

What happens as we get older and confident in one field, though, is that we tend to get confident in general. So much that we like as not overestimate our abilities in other fields. My psychology friends say that's pretty well established. We adults do that a lot, eh? We're confident in our own fields, so we think that with a few pages out of a Scoutin' book we know all there is to know. I'm not immune, for sure, and I see attorneys bluster and bully like buffoons when they get outside their area of expertise. Look at Congress. Our overconfidence leads us to be too black-and-white. Includin' in our attitude toward young people.

 

So teacher/scout, I apologize to you and your fiancee, and I stand corrected. You are quite correct, it's us old farts who find (or even make up) silly things to be black-and-white about, eh? When all we should really be is Trustworthy.

 

Beavah

 

 

[JMHawkins 15]

If a Venturing Crew isn't palatable, there's always the option of a new Troop if the old one is (or starts) losing boys. It's some work, but sounds like you have enough energy to get it done. I wouldn't do it simply to spite the old troop or to continue your Scouting experience, I'd only do it if boys really are dropping out of scouting because of the dysfunction. And of course, there are other existing units in your district that might welcome some energy.

 

Regarding the notion of young vs old and seeing black and white, I will say there is one very imporant area that a 40 year old is usually far more open minded than a 20 year old, and that's in understanding how many difficult people there are in the world. MIB and ST seem much more perceptive than the average 20 year old, but the average 20 year old would run into this COR and wonder why they got so unlucky as to have to deal with her. The average 40 year old on the ohter hand is pleasantly surprised when a day goes by without running into someone like that.

 

And there's also the notion of someone with 20 years experience vs someone with 1 year of experience, 20 times. It all matters how much you pay attention and whether you learn from your mistakes (so you can make new ones next time!).

 

My summary of this whole affair I think would be titled The Two Forms of The Golden Rule. There is of course the traditional - nice - version, "do unto others..." and the corrupted version "He who has the gold makes the rules." This shows both. The CO, represented by the COR, has the gold - literally owns the troop - and so makes the rules. And can unmake, remake, them almost at will, and can be arbitrary and thoughtless in doing so. Which is where the "do unto others..." part comes in, because if you don't treat other people well when you make the rules, they will vote with their feet and leave. I'm very baffled that the CC and COR were taken by surprise by this - it was as predictable as rain in Seattle. Well, more evidence that age only brings the opportuntiy for wisdom, not the guarantee.

 

Good luck whatever you do. There are other opportunities, and frankly, the COR could learn something from this. If she does and trys to rebuild bridges, try to be open to it. Not blindly open to it, no, you've learned some things too. But another thing that 40 year olds can learn is that people screw up, and sometimes they honestly want to fix it. And sometimes they just want someone else to bail them out.

[qwazse 4344]

O yeah, I remember your crew debacle ...

 

But, it did come as a shock, when the Council/District Leaders would tell you the Ventures were not a threat to the Boy Scout troop.. But, when you ask them to help sort out the mess between our troop & Crew, and were told the actions of this person, their response was.. Well create a better program so the crew can not steal them.. Nothing about speaking to her and informing her this was not the right way the Venturing Crew goes about recruiting..

 

Not reading their minds, but I suspect experience told them that explaining things to "runaway advisors" is generally a waste of time. The best thing to do is let nature run its course.

 

Now she's a "runaway COR". Hmmmm, wonder what the best thing to do is here?

 

And, I agree that things not working out for the best in a troop is the wrong reason to start a Venturing Crew. The right reason to start a crew is you see youth (male or female, in or out of a troop)with a need, and folks think you're the right people to meet that need.

[Monkey Tamer 19]

All HAIL BEAVAH. For he is wise.

 

It takes a big man to admit to himself when he is wrong and an even bigger one to admit it to all who care to hear.

 

I read the entire post and found my viewpoint shifted several times as well.

 

Having never been overly orthodox in my presentation of the program, I can see the benefit of drive and enthusiasm over dogmatic adhearance to the pantheon of BSA Rules/Regulations/Reccomendations/Suggested delivery meathods...ad infinitem.

 

Where the rubber meets the road is the relationship between the leaders and the scouts. Do the boys care about all this stuff being flung by the monkeys on the committee? Hell no. All they want is someone that they can look up to, who will give them the straight deal and make scouting enjoyable. This Troop had that and is stupid if they let their personal peckadillos blind them to it. The age thing is a canard. They need something to base their intent on and that IS official policy, so Bob's-your-uncle, that's what they will hang their hat on. If the folks involved were old enough to meet the requirement, they would find something else to cling to.

 

officiousness and petulance should never be more important than the core values and unit health.

 

I have had DL's that hated each other. Their kids loved them, so guess what? I don't care.

 

I have had a COR I saw once a year for signatures. Our CC is happy to let me do everything but re-charter. In the minds of our COR, CC and committee, I am the boss. Is this the prescribed way to run a pack? I don't care.

 

I chose every committee member but the treasurer who has been there longer than me. Is that the "right" way to do things? I don't care.

 

All my DL's are full voting members of the committee. They are the rubber meeting the road and I think they should have equal say. Any parent that ventures into our committee meetings may take the floor and voice any opinion or ask any question they like. The Pack is, after all, theirs. OK the CO "owns" it, but the families have more at stake and can leave if they don't like things. The special project coordinators are brought on the committee for the time leading up to their events. They have equal voting rights during their temporary tenure. Again, rubber meets the road. Any of that sound like it's right or official? guess what? I don't care.

 

We get all kinds of different parents move into the Pack every year. Some really young former Eagle dads, some grisled veterans of other Packs and Troops seeing their youngest through the system one more time. I welcome their input, and listen to their ideas. Sometimes I like them and sometimes, not so much. but if they have a good idea I generally listen to it. Sometimes I make up whole new ad-hoc positions on the committee just to make space for somebody who has good ideas and is enthusiastic about making our program better. I could care less about their demographics (young, old, man, woman, purple people eater). That's not what is important. What IS important is do they bring something that will make our Pack better and more enjoyable for the kids. Do I run this correctly? I don't care.

 

Basically, there are four rules I run my pack by. 1) YP and YPT (something that I do care about and make sure is written in stone). 2) GSS for operations (Meetings, camp outs, outings). 3) Do we keep our word to the boys and follow the CS promise? And 4)Is this going to be good for the Pack and the boys. All Rubber-Road items.

 

Everything else is just Bravo Sierra.

 

Is this a good way to run a program? you guessed it. I don't care.

 

I supposed "good" depends on your interpretation. This is mine: We have close to 100% graduation and retention rates. We have had 100% AOL for the last three years. And we're feeding a vibrant healthy troop as 80-90% of our boys are going on to Boy Scouting.

 

I guess the BSA could harp about our Pack not following their bysantine structure. I suppose the COR could fire me for usurping her authority, but Jimmy-Crack-Corn and I DON"T CARE.

 

As long as I'm CM, all Our Pack will focus on is the rubber and the road. I think a lot of other units would be well served to do likewise.

 

Here's to another lost lunch break.

 

Cheers All!

 

Oh. One more thing. I'm 44 and I'd take Mr. Long-in-the-name and his sweet little fiance on my committee any day of the week. And not to just sit around either. You guys kick a$$! Read the posts here and you'll see that there are a lot of over-worked good-hearted people out there trying to keep foundering units alive who would dearly relish someone of your desire and drive to come along and help them provide all that scouting has to offer. Go find one and "Do Your Best". There are a lot of boys out there who deserve what you bring to the table.

 

[teacher/scout 12]

Y'all heard how everything went last night and some may be curious about what I plan on doing as Cub committee chair.

 

Here is what I am thinking. At somepoint our COR needs to confront me because last night I told her that I do not understand how can refuse us a vote after asking me to be Cub Committee Chair with the full knowledge that I am 19 years old, because that's backa$$wards. Her response wasn't much, simply "I'll have to findagle something". So when she confronts me I plan on telling her that I made a PROMISE to her, to the past Cub CC and the cubmaster that I would be there, I do not go back on my word and I wish I COULD say the same thing about her. I cannot do this job without the final vote if a tie needs to be broken-it is simply not possible. I will only do this job for a year, so you have a year to find someone else. The reason being, I was only asked to be a pro-tem for this job and I plan on keeping it that. I will be senior in college having to do capstone, student teaching, classes oh and planning a wedding.

 

No garntees I would change my mind but I do want to know your input in whether this is the right decision or if you have any other suggestions.

 

Off to go babysit two year old twins who make seem right! Let me know what ya think

[sst3rd 129]

teacher/scout,

 

Sounds like a good plan. You can't control the actions of anyone but yourself. You've taken the high road, given notice with plenty of lead time, and have every intentions of keeping your promises. Leading by example.

 

You both have a lot on your plate. Take care.

 

sst3rd

[Oak Tree 15]

teacher/scout,

 

Sounds like a good plan to me, too.

 

Here's how I would "finagle" it in one of our units. Have the COR also be registered as the official CC. Then she can delegate all of her duties, including her vote, to you.

[Oak Tree 15]

I'd also like to give kudos to Beavah for being willing to change his position when provided with an argument to the contrary position.

 

I've found the black and white vs. gray thing to vary between young adults and older adults. There are certain things that young people are more likely to see in black and white, and there are other things that older people are more likely to see that way.

 

In general, in all societies, it is young people who tend to be flexible in seeing that old ways aren't working and new ways need to be adopted. I've never had Scouts rigorously push the black and white policy guidelines the way that some adults here do. Sometimes they can be too flexible in these regards, and that is one reason why we end up putting certain defined guidelines in place.

 

On the other hand, young people can also take positions that are a bit out of the mainstream. My biggest concern about putting a 21-year old in charge of a troop would be his ability to get along with the rest of the adults. At the same time, I've also seen a few 40-something adults get removed from their position roughly due to their inability to get along with the rest of the adults. Still, there's a certain maturity and judgment that comes from experience, that can lead an adult to have a quiet confidence in his ability - you can see it in some experienced professors and how they run their classrooms, or some experienced generals when they are interviewed in depth on some of the news shows, or some experienced Scoutmasters.

 

Those people don't feel the need to argue with you when they disagree. They listen to your position intently, they lay out principles, they remain calm, they know how to build consensus. I think Beavah's right that all of us older people can be more stuck in most of our ways, but the better leaders among our age group tend to have more maturity at this one particular type of gray-area thinking than do the younger people.

[qwazse 4344]

t/s: Off to go babysit two year old twins who make seem right! Let me know what ya think.

 

I think two-year-old twins are more than I could handle anymore!

 

Seriously, it is very important to put the COR on notice about when you think your term will end. You should also feel free to talk to the pack parents about who can step up to the plate.

 

It has nothing to do with the goings-on in the troop. (Well obviously it will, because the future pack CC will have a boy who hopefully crosses over someday. But the landscape may change once that bridge is crossed.)

 

It has nothing to do with the age thing or finagling, either. Sure it would be nice to know you have a vote -- if that's what decides things you deem important. But, even if you did, it would be about time in your life to concentrate on transitions.

 

All of us should be looking for our replacements! This is actually the normal order of operations.

[packsaddle 753]

I think that babysitting stint is an opportunity to get called, 'poopy face'.

Ooops, wrong thread, that's over in the youth protection thing.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, packsaddles, now yeh have to go report yourself to da SE!

 

Beavah