evmori

Just an earthbound misfit I~

Understand that Bolingbroke did not use scouting as his bio in this case. He used it as a title on his signature. Big difference. By using it as a signature rather than as bio element he is in essence saying that Scouting, through him, endorses the content of the petition. That is an improper use of his office. Hogwash! Another interpretation that is incorrect! There is a good possibility this guy is retired & being a commissioner in the BSA is his "work". Nothing wrong here! Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

There is nothing that prohibits a person from stating in a bio that they are a volunteer in the Scouting program. That settles that!

Is there a "picking order"?

This is no different than wearing your uniform to a polical rally in support of an issue. You as a volunteer do not have the leagal authority to lend or suggest the supporty or endorsement of the BSA to anything.

20 lashes with a lanyard for you Beavah!

Nothing in BSA advancement literature says anything about doing a good job, all the Scout has to do is hold the position. Actually the wording is "serve actively" which is different than just holding the position. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

Just Google "The Game of Life" or "Win All You Can" and you will find it! I question why there needs to be games like this in the 1st place?

It is improper for a volunteer to use the name of scouting to support politial issues or a specific party or candidate. Does anyone know if this is fact or just another interpretation? Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

highcountry, Based on your last post, I am wondering why Scout A is still in your unit?

Again, Bob is interpreting & passing it off as fact, which it isn't. Someone posted what is in many BSA publications about this & it is clearly stated that one of the committee's responsibility's is recruiting leaders. The CC is the one who signs the application as a representative of the unit. Them there is the facts! Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

Bob White posted: I hope the moderators join me in hoping you will confine your posts to the topic of the thread, rather than your personal opinions of other posters or in trying to expose personal information about them. Seems we all stray from the topic from time to time. Even Bob. What cracks me up is Bob feels it necessary to chide everyone about it but when someone chides him he claims he is being attacked! Does everyone feel staying on topic is important or should a new topic be spun off? I feel there are time when the topic, for lack of a better word, "grows" as the discussion continues and don't see the need to spin off a new topic or chide those who stray. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

The up-side is Wachovia is not part of the bail out since they were bought by Wells Fargo.

There is only one requiremement that the program says should be approved by the Scoutmaster and that is the Scoutmaser Conference. For all other requirements they (excluding merit badges) they can be tested and approved by whomever the Scoutmaster approves. In the case of Scout Spirit, the BSA says that it is unique from all other requirements and is best determined by the Scout himself. I might be wrong, but the Scoutmaster is responsible for advancement in the unit. Now the Scoutmaster has the option to, but isn't required to, approve someone else to test & approve rank requirements. So to state There is only one requiremement that the program says should be approved by the Scoutmaster and that is the Scoutmaser Conference is not accurate. And it is the Scout who best determines Scout Spirit for himself. But that does not mean the Scout is permitted to sign this requirement. Nowhere does it state the Scout may do that. The requirement starts with "Demonstrate" which, to me, means the Scout has to show and/or tell someone. I don't think the posters in these forums have a problem following the program elements. I'd go as far to say the posters on this board probably follow the program elements better than most! Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

Congrats to you & your son! A job well done!

He's a volunteer. And where is the picture of him in uniform? I don't see a problem with this. Is this the same guy who was the president of Clorox?(This message has been edited by evmori)

OK so the problem gets fixed. What are they doing to ensure it doesn't happen again?

Why would a UC call Scouts? That's not their job. Neither is contacting new leaders individually. Sounds like a watchdog position, not a UC.

I'd go through each one and ask him how he feels he has achieved each.

A SM conference should take place only after all other items have been signed off. I would agree, but it doesn't have to. Let's assume, instead, that the SM evaluates "scout spirit" at the conference, which I believe is a fairly common practice. If there are disciplinary problems or other less quantitative issues, they would generally fall under the "scout spirit" category. If not met, the SM should not sign off the "scout spirit," quantify the areas where improvement is needed, offer a timeline to see improvement, and have another SM conference after that time. I would agree the Scout Spirit requirement should not be signed, but if a Scoutmaster Conference was held, it should be signed. I appreciate it, OGE, when you agree that we agree then disagree. That says it in a nutshell click23! Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

Lisa, Read the requirement. It states Participate in a Scoutmaster conference or Take Pare in a Scoutmaster conference There is nothing about passing or failing, just participating. It's your time to get to know and develop a working relationship with that Scout and to gage how good or bad a time he's having being a Scout and a Scout in YOUR TROOP. I don't believe in rubber stamping any requirement. But ya can't pass/fail a Scout for something he has to do nothing more than participate in. If a Scout doesn't show up much & all that other stuff it says in the other thread, how did the Scout complete all his other requirements? Remember, they don't have to be done in any order except the BOR which is last. The Scoutmaster Conference can take place 1st. I would think if a Scout is this lackadaisical about Scouting, the BOR would be able to glean that & let the Scout know what he needed to accomplish so he would be able to pass his next BOR. After all, that is the job of the BOR. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

I know Bob won't see these so would someone please repost these so he does. Would you follow these laws? It is against the law to make faces at dogs. The English language is not to be spoken. You may be arrested for vagrancy if you do not have at least one dollar bill on your person. You must contact the police before entering the city in an automobile. You may be convicted of a Class 4 felony offense, punishable by up to three years in state prison, for the crime of "eavesdropping" on your own conversation. -720 ILCS 5/14-2.

The lesson of the the Game of Life is much different than what MacScouter believed it was. Then what is the lesson?

Sounds like it's time to develop a plan at the next PLC to deal with this. Bob's question about the future of these patrols should be addressed as well as the SM & Advancement Chair taking a look at all the advancement records for these patrols. That way, a viable plan could be developed by the PLC. Hope this helps. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10

highcountry, I think you are missing the point. I agree with you about those type of Scouts you are talking about. You have the option of not having a Scoutmaster Conference with a Scout but if you do, the requirement must be signed. The BOR is where this should be handled. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10