MattR

Give me a new name and a rough range of dates and I'll split the thread.

I think you guys are being a bit naive on this one. If there's one thing I've learned about the scouting program it's that motivating scouts about character only works on those that essentially already get it. If a scout doesn't want to be bothered about character then it's a really hard slog. So either the parents believe that character is important or, on occasion, a scout's parents are bad enough that the scout sees a need for good character. But that's not to say that there aren't lots of scouts or their parents that want to get Eagle. And there lies a big problem. Absolutely vanity is preventing improvement. But greed is oh so much worse. If you really want to improve program quality then remove the biggest source of greed, rank advancement. Be a scout because you believe in the ideals, not that you're going to get a better job. I got so tired of listening to scouts that, when asked why they were in scouts, said first that they were going to get a better job or into a better university or it would make their resume look better. It used to be very rare when they said that. It always used to be about fun, friends and the outdoors. But it has changed. I was shocked the first time I heard something about payback. The last time I asked a group of scouts why they were in scouts it was close to half that said they were going to get something from earning a badge. Maybe it's my town that has changed but I doubt it. TikTok, likes, influencers, search algorithms ... our lexicon has changed to that of greed and dopamine hits. This program used to work because most of the volunteers really believed in the fundamentals. They believed in it so much that they wanted to make it work. Quality would have been an easy sell then. But that has eroded over time. There are still people that believe in the the ideals but there needs to be a critical mass of those people in order for a unit to deliver a good program, where the idea of improving quality is even viable. My guess is that most units feel they're delivering a quality program if some kids are getting Eagle patches. And it makes sense because that's how the program is sold. Character is what you do when nobody is looking. It's not rank. It's not NESA. It's not OA. It's not a MB sash. It's not data in a database. It's what you do with your patrol when no adults are around. So, the first thing to do to make a quality program is to focus on a program with character and remove all the other distractions. Eagle is the biggest distraction. This reminds me of the Woodbadge game Win All You Can. Eagle is just goading people to do bad things. But they never come out and say it. It used to be that it was a method and could be used to develop character but that script has flipped. But that will never happen.

One quote from that struck me. This from a lawyer representing 75 survivors: In other words, if this plan is rejected then it's everyone for themself. Get in line and hopefully you're at the front. That's a couple of winners and a whole lot of losers.

I think it really started well before that. There's a peak around 1973, just about when I joined, and then there's another, smaller peak, around 1990. The first peak probably corresponds to the baby boom kids being old enough to be in scouts. That second peak is likely from the children of those in the first peak.

Did you notice that the author of the article was 14 to 18 years old? Maybe a scout.

I don't see nearly as many girls selling cookies as I used to. Sounds like GS is suffering like the BSA. Not sure their cookie overhead is any different than that for popcorn. Honestly, the drop in membership for both organizations is a sad statement about our drop in community more than any problems with leadership.

Makes sense, protection in numbers.

I'd push that just a bit further. Make webelos start a year earlier and last a year longer, so 4 years instead of 2. A lot more new scouts are afraid of the outdoors because fewer parents camp, so they're even less mature than before. So make the program about getting them ready to camp with a troop. And as you said, make it part of a troop. If a webelo is mature enough to move to a patrol when they're 11 then go for it, but most aren't. Anyway, as part of a troop they'd still have their own program but they'd see the scouts, get to know them and the transition would be easier. If this were done than cubs could be skipped all together. Yeah, I know, that will go over like a titanium balloon (lead's not so healthy ). So, end of my 1 1/2 cents of wisdom.

Well, the girls membership has dropped by roughly 20% in 18 months. My guess is the boys are similar, given that the girls percentage is nearly the same over that period. The point is a 20% drop in 18 months is ... more than a bunch.

I read this and what caught my attention was that the OA has, essentially, taken on the role of keeper of the flame for SA (Twitter, no!, X, no!, BSA, got it!). Joking aside, I wish them luck. If national is okay with this then ... maybe that's a way to participate? The OA asked for feedback. That's a change. The comment that troops are now much smaller is the first honest description of some of the problems troops are facing. More support for at least troops via something other than district beaurocracy sounds good to me, even though it sounds hard. Maybe the OA can come up with better training? I really wish them luck.

$600k per shower house? I'm sure they need new ones but what is this, $500/sq ft? Seems really pricey to me. And they need 8? Something doesn't sound right. Just an idea but how about build one while teaching some scouts some trade crafts? Forget merit badges at camp, teach them some useful skills. High schools have votech classes, use those.

Welcome to the forum, @KayLH23.

Our difference of opinion is off in the weeds compared to the differences I have with the description above. Whoever talked about coding and bullying as a way to convince anyone to join scouts really doesn't understand the program. If they're talking to kids it should be something along the lines of fun with friends and learning how to enjoy a good challenge. If they're talking to parents it should be something along the lines of "teaching your children to be trustworthy when it hurts, friendly and cheerful when you're having a bad day, courteous to people you're not sure about and brave when you're afraid. Scouting is learning how to enjoy life when it gets tough. Scouting is in the outdoors because that's a great place to learn all these skills. It's not a classroom." It's not great but it's closer than coding and bullying.

That's odd. Whenever I asked older scouts what they enjoyed the most it involved friends and high adventure trips. There were other things they said they got out of it but they lead with friends and HA. Some mentioned outdoor skills like shooting, kayaking, climbing. Eventually they got around to working with younger scouts and teamwork. Nobody ever, once, mentioned coding, rocketry or cyberbullying. And yet, scouting could solve these problems they mention.

Right, but Simpson isn't of Japanese descent. Presumably he didn't live in the camp. So once a week he walked past the barbwire and guard towers to join a troop meeting? There's a good story there.