when do you start a new Troop?

[johndaigler 10]

Kudu,

 

The Scouter.Com Moderator Team should take a good long hard look at their inability to act decisively.

 

"Decisively" is not a synonym for "Loudly", "publicly" or "rudely".

 

And, yes, you should "let it (others' comments) go" - the website's dueling pistols are at the cleaners.

 

"If you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,

. . ."

 

 

jd

[johndaigler 10]

dan,

I whole-heartedly endorse a thread where you and Kudu exchange ideas!!!

 

If I were feeling snarky, I'd suggest that's what I've been talking about for days, but it's been such fun having you and Kudu turn your blunt instruments on me rather than each other, that I'm sure I'll miss this thread's continuance.

 

I look forward to learning from both of you.

 

jd

 

 

 

[dan 10]

Gee and I thought you where using your blunt instrument on me.

And all this time I thought the issue was is it a BSA program or not. Silly me.

Glad you are not feeling snarky.

 

edit

What we have here is failure to communicate.(This message has been edited by dan)

[vmpost 10]

Getting back to what dan said early on...he has many good points. So was the point about when your son got attacked.

 

When the time comes that the Troop you are involved in is not following BSA policy or it does not "fit" anymore, it is time to look for alternatives. What are they? What is the problem? Can it be "fixed"? Is it a threat to the well-being of others? Is there a Troop nearby you can drive to? Do you have a moral obligation to the other youth in the program?

 

Short story: we were involved in a troop which was primarily adult-run (and had some other issues), but was the only one in town. I was new to the program and registered as SA. The SM invited me to participate in a SM conference so I could learn how to conduct one. He had a bee in his bonnet about the youth being conferenced. During the conf, he started badgering the Scout to define ethical. Nothing the youth answered was good enough. He replied in the vein of, "I'm sorry, sir, but I'm not familiar with that term." When I suggested "morally straight" from the Scout Oath, he gave a good discussion. Then the SM said, "Fine, but now define ethical." This went back & forth until the Scout was in tears. I finally asked to speak to the SM privately and asked him where in the book it said the boy needed to know that definition. He said, "Right here in my SM Handbook, that's where." Then went back to badgering the boy. What he pointed to was the part about the booklet "Youth's Frontier, Making Ethical Decisions" that the SM was to have provided for the Scout to take home & discuss with his parents. He didn't. When I questioned him further, he said, "This is MY troop and I will run it MY way. If you don't like it you can just shut up and butt out!"

 

Now, I don't know what your take on this is, but it is my belief that the troop SHOULD be the BOY's... (There were many more issues...this was just the last one we dealt with.) We immediately considered options. The CC was his wife. The COR & CO had a "hands off" policy... refused to do anything. IT WAS TIME to go to another troop. We looked at the alternatives...start a troop or join an existing one...

 

Your situation is similar...you have a choice to make. Can you fix the problem? Is there another existing troop you can join? Is the best solution to start another troop?

 

(And contrary to what many of you have experienced, the Unit Commiss & DE don't/won't always step in and monitor this for you.)

[OldGreyEagle 5]

from the BSA Publication "Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures" you will find the following concerning Scoutmaster Conferences:

 

One of the most enjoyable experiences of being a Scoutmaster is the opportunity for a Scout and his leader to sit down and visit together.

 

In large troops, Scoutmasters occasionally assign this responsibility to assistant Scoutmasters or members of the troop committee; but this is unfortunate, because most Scoutmasters feel that this is truly the opportunity to get to know the Scout and help him chart his course in life.

 

A good conference should be unhurried. It helps the Scout evaluate his accomplishments and to set new goals with his Scoutmaster. This can be accomplished at a troop meeting, camping trip, or in the Scout's home.

 

Goal setting by the Scout makes it possible for the Scoutmaster to help the Scout with his weaknesses and encourage him to use his strengths.

 

The Scout (joining) conference is probably one of the most important associations a Scout will have in his Scouting career. It is at this conference that the Scoutmaster illustrates to him the adult-youth relationship that is unique to Scouting.

 

All through the ranks, it is rewarding for the Scoutmaster to observe the Scout grow in responsibility and maturity. It is through this association and example that a young man grows and matures, and the Scoutmaster conference accomplishes that aim. (See Scoutmaster Handbook, chapter 8.)

 

Its not the Scoutmaster's Troop its not the scouts Troop, its the CO's Troop. The boys enjoy the program and the adults are stewards of the program. Its knuckleheads like this drunk on power that will kill the BSA faster than council mis management. Well, maybe they are equally deadly

[Eamonn 61]

vmpost

When I hear or read about people like the SM you had the misfortune to have to deal with, it makes my blood boil.

While it does seem that many people are willing to accept that adding or subtracting to the program is fine and dandy. I really believe that this is the sort of thing that will happen.I have said many times that this game isn't rocket science, we have a program all we adults have to do is deliver it.

If we really feel that it's so out of whack that we are unable to deliver it find an organization with a program that suits you.

Baden Powell seen that Scouting wasn't going to work as he wanted when the Boys Brigade tried, so he went elsewhere.

As for the District or Council trying to put things right.

You are correct when you say that they aren't going to step in.

I however feel that any SM who has a Lad crying needs to be reported to the SE. Letters need to be sent to the COR, the CC and the CO.

My very good friend Bob White informed me that we no longer use the term "Safe Haven" a term I thought was something we should all aim for? I have been informed that it has been replaced with "Controlled Risk".

To my way of thinking this SM you describe is out of control and is to big of a risk. If the CO is so "Hands Off " that they fail to see this, they don't deserve to have a Scouting unit.

Eamonn.