FScouter

I don't understand that smiley face thingy? Does that mean youre kidding or telling a joke or what. Unless patrol leaders are "permanent" they must be "temporary"? Or maybe that is just a reference to the (misguided?) Scoutmaster Handbook which advises that patrol leader elections be held more frequently than twice a year in a new Scout patrol, so as to allow more boys a chance to take a shot at it and get familiar with the concept.

The Insignia Guide doesn't spend a lot of verbiage with stuff that should be clear with no discussion. Is the "BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA" emblem optional? The council shoulder patch? If you searched through BSA resources and did not find an "optional" statement, that is the answer. The flag patch question is not addressed. That doesn't mean it is optional, it just means that the Insignia Guide does not specify that it is mandatory. The wikipedia and Mike Walton have their own opinions, and lack of a source citation shows it's only opinion. BSA does not say "optional", so it is not optional. Now if you have a boy or adult that removed the flag from his uniform, you might get some discussion from this forum about that issue if you ask.

In the other thread BrentAllen spoke of adult patrols: "We do this in WB and in SM training, so why not in a unit?" I took the old Scoutmaster Fundamentals course a long time ago. We formed "patrols", did exercises, games, camp set-up and cooking as a "patrol". The purpose (as I understood it) was to demonstrate to us adults how the patrol method works for boys in the troop. There was no expectation that we all go back and assemble the troop adults into a "patrol". There is no discussion in adult leader trainings about how to work an adult patrol. No publications offer guidance on running an adult patrol. If it was part of the BSA program at all there would be a chapter or two somewhere that talks about it. The issue I have with these "patrols" is that the adults seem rather more inclined to play "boy scout" than to serve the troop as an adult leader.

I don't usually pay much nevermind to these kinds of exposes about how the other side has been fooling us, because the "right" side is just trying to fool us the other way. But it was interesting to note that the story makes a big point to tell us that in the final year of "peace-loving" Jimmy Carter's term, he caused 2,392 deaths, but after that (when the republicans took over) there have only been 1,531 deaths (per year average). Those peace-lovers sure do manage to get a lot of military people killed, huh? Way more than the war-mongers.

"How do volunteers and Professionals in the field give feedback which results in change up the line?" Boy, PL, SPL, PLC, SM, troop committee, CO, district committee, DE, council committee, national committee. Each level passes on feedback to those than can effect change.

"For everybody else, if I've made things too complicated ..." I find that a post with more than 2 or 3 bullet points, or longer than 1 screenful is difficult to respond to.

I'm pretty much of the opinion that most folks have made their own conclusion, data notwithstanding. The data either supports their conclusion, or gets disputed if it does not.

"Report to" sounds so military. As in "step forward and give me your report, grunt", or "go report to your senior officer and get your assignment".

C'mon folks. If we all had to have verifiable "data" to support our comments, the forums here would be empty. Opinions, gut feelings, "I heard", and personal points of view are all completely valid. One's position if hardly bolstered if the best argument against another person's statement is "show me the data".

"Better to tell 'em they're on their own, and free to go make orphans of some kids when they run head-on into a parent's car on their way home?" Now you're talking crazy. You teach them BEFOREHAND that booze is dangerous and they run a big risk of killing someone by doing so. Time, energy, and resources spent with a ride program for drunk teenagers is a typical example of addressing the results of a problem instead of fixing the problem - teenage drunkenness. Yeah maybe it helps a little, but mainly it just gives people a warm fuzzy feeling. Let's get real and FIX the real problem.

Lets take a test, how many new scout leaders can tell you how learning a knot at any age will advance Character, Fitness and Citizenship? None, and therein lies a dilemma. BSA has figured out that learning knots is a way to self-sufficiency which leads to confidence and character and eventually fulfills the mission. The Scoutmaster Handbook and specific training talk about this, but Im afraid many new leaders dont get past the list of requirements in the Boy Scout Handbook and the checklist in the Troopmaster program. And like someone said earlier they have summarized the entire First Class Emphasis into one bullet point: git er done. Eventually they see a bigger picture, but until they do, Scouts will get a lot of lecture time and check-off sessions at troop meetings. To the new SM: Ensure that your troop program contains plenty fun and exciting hands-on and outdoor activities so that within a year or so new Scouts will learn all the skills found in the Tenderfoot, 2nd Class and 1st Class rank requirements.

One of the consequences of replacing a volunteer with various quirks is the replacement volunteer will bring with him all his personal quirks.

What is the point in holding an election if the results are not going to be allowed?

What is the proper rank for a senior patrol leader?

The troop program should be wrapped around achieving the aims of Scouting and fulfilling the mission. Advancement is one of several methods to do that. First Class Emphasis (which is the original topic of this thread) focuses on the advancement method. I dont see anyone advocating either advancement, or fun, as a goal. I do see a red flag if boys are not advancing, or if they are not having fun. It shows that one or more of the tools is not being effectively used . If boys are wrapped up in a good Scouting program utilizing a variety of methods, advancement cant help but happen.

No mixed signals here. If you give kids condoms, what do you think is going through their heads??? What do you think he's going to do with it? If you offer to give a kid a ride home when he's loaded, the only message is "cool, go ahead and get wasted, you're expected to do so." If we faciltate bad behaviors, expect to get same. If you want to stop bad behaviors, then do your job as a parent. Teaching your kids is harder to do, but way more effective than picking up the pieces after you failed.

"Council would advertise the training as "Cub Leader Specific",... " Yeah, it's a problem when you take 5 different trainings and try to roll it up into 1 package. Sadly, volunteer district training chairs resort to that sort of thing because it's easier than selecting and recruiting a training staff to do the job properly.

Yall may have your own opinions on Scouting and these forums are here for you to exchange your ideas with others. Lets not be too quick to condemn posts that have not even been made. Before you post, run it through the Scout Law editor before hitting the submit button and well do just fine. As OGE mentioned, it will be great if we all play nice. We should expect nothing less.

In this case it doesn't much matter which version of the book you look at. None of them have any requirement that a counselor must be registered with a troop. All of them say the counselor must submit an application and be approved by the council advancement committee.

For any training the material that needs to be covered is in the syllabus. A training can be shortened by skipping some of the required materials. There is no other way to do it. Skipping parts has no "sanction". The fact that a council committee has failed to send in the rescue squad to stop it does not equate to approval. If a MB counselor skips over some of the requirements and the badge gets recorded anyway, that does not mean the practice is sanctioned. It just means the people doing the work are not doing a quality job.

The council leadership training committee already has the obligation to provide quality training. If a mandate helps spur the committee to improve the quality, then a mandate is a good thing. Poor quality does not follow from a mandate to get leaders trained. Support from the top is a good thing.

I did the same thing with my green hooded sweatshirt.

The link MarkS posted has several additional links at the bottom of the page that should answer every conceivable question. Of course there is no specific statement to refute every point of misinformation one may hear. For that, you must ask the contender to support what he says with some BSA resource. http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/resources/mbc/faq.html

A Scout earns his own way.

It's a common complaint. "I already know how to camp, I don't need this training." The purpose of Introduction to Outdoor Leaders Skill is not the teach adults how to camp. The primary purpose is to teach the SM and assistant SM how to teach Tenderfoot, 2nd Class, and 1st Class outdoor skills rank requirments to boys.