FScouter

"What is more important: the rules or the boy?" Given that every BSA rule and policy is there to ensure the boy gets a full measure of Scouting, or to keep him safe, the answer is clear.

I got a nasty e-mail once from a forum participant. He figured out my personal e-mail address, full name, home address, and telephone. It was a little scary in that my house, personal property and livelihood were being threatened. I go to lengths to keep that stuff confidential, and still. Theres a lot of wackos out there.

If they asked you to go to the office on their behalf, I'd say they handled it using you as a resource. That's no different than the yeoman asking his dad to check on the availability of the Elk's building.

It could be argued that by booking dates without consulting the group, you are a controlling adult on a power trip. What youve taught them is that everything always works out fine and that if they dont do the work, you will. Or it could be viewed as just taking advantage of an opportunity that presented itself at the permit counter. Either way, the youth leadership must now deal with the consequences of the sin youve committed. That would be to decide which of your dates will work for the crew, if any, and to start planning the event. Theyre also obligated to cancel with the city any date they dont want. And they owe you 3 bucks too.

I agree with Hunt; its a poor example. It shouldnt take a lot of soul-searching to help boys complete requirements. The concern is it sounds like a foot-in-the-door justification to make other far-reaching adaptations to change the program; changes that fall from ones self-anointed infinite wisdom to create a better program. The BSA program has evolved over many years and is the product of hundreds of Scouters with a ton of wisdom. That collective wisdom far, far surpasses any one adults 2 cents worth. Its a good program, just follow it!

On a number of occasions I've heard the comment scoutldr has made that training does not meet the needs of the trainee. I still wonder why a new leader would not need to know the material covered in training?

Why do you keep calling yourself a bad Scouter?

There will always be that part of society that will revel in repeating demeaning jokes. As well as those that object to being targeted. I suppose anyone has a right to be insensitive, but whats the point in defending against the objections that result? Are the demeaning joke tellers getting their feelings hurt when someone objects? Get over it and move on!

An official BSA investigation is under way to find who leaked the secret memo about the trademark crackdown. Within 6 months teams of infiltrators will be in place within local councils and districts. Look for innocent faces appearing from nowhere at roundtable meetings, camporees, etc. Their mission is to track down errant members that use BSA owned logos. The target is illegal posters, flyers, patches, tee shirts, equipment, illegal uniforms and anything related to Scouting that was not obtained from official Scout shops and council offices. Better hold on to your official BSA receipts. The other goal not mentioned in the trademark memo (there is rumored to be another secret memo not yet leaked) is to root out the misfits and purge them from our great organization. The first suspects are those that protest the loudest. Watch it!

Sheesh! I can see the headlines now - "City Raids Cub Scout Pancake Breakfast, Syrup Bottles Fail Sticky Test".

It wouldn't make sense to send out a 39 cent letter to get a 2 cent donation, but I wouldn't blow off $10. If only 1 person out of 25 sent in $10 to correct their error, you'd be money ahead. If 25 people forgot their pledge, or sent less than they intended, I'd guess nearly all of them would respond to a letter. Regarding a finance director making multiple phone calls after two letters failed to correct a $5 error, I'd say there's got to be more to that story.

Pledges are keyed into an Excel spreadsheet. When the checks come in the amount is credited to the pledge. Then someone pushes the print button and gets a batch of mailing labels for all the pledges that are short-pay or no-pay. A letter gets mailed. The result is more pledges get paid up. It surely isnt cost effective to pay a staff person to analyze each short-pay and decide whether a 39 cent stamp would be wasted effort to collect whatever the balance is. So they send a letter to everyone. That keeps administrative costs down.

It sounds like he's continuing to advocate his thought from the last several days over several threads that units have a right to toss out whatever BSA program parts and do their own "thing". In this instance, to redefine the meaning of the Scout Oath and Law, if it's convenient to do so.

That is not what I said. BSA designed the BSA program and owns the program. COs agree to conduct the BSA-owned Scouting program according to the policies and guidelines of BSA. Program materials provided by BSA tell COs what the program is, how it works, and how to implement it. BSA program materials are necessary for COs to run the BSA program. There is no such thing as a CO designed program that happens to use some BSA materials (no purchase required) that can be called Scouting. The BSA program is incredibly flexible, with lots of room for COs to customize. But that does not mean BSA permits units to pick and choose BSA program parts they like, or discard the parts they dont like.

If you want to hammer on the DE, please go ahead, but not because he is doing a poor job planning a program activity. Quite likely, the district chairman doesn't have a program chairman, and/or an activities and civic service chairman. Running or planning activities is NOT the job of the DE. Hammer on him instead to fill the district committee with competent volunteers to plan and run the district program activities.

I strongly disagree with your contention that BSA is there solely to provide units with materials and service so they can run amok and do their own thing and call it Scouting. BSA designed the "program" and OWNS the program. BSA provides materials and service to support CO's that USE the BSA program. The "program" is not made up by COs. The materials is not the program, materials help COs implement the program. The fact that BSA does not swoop down and knock units that pick, choose, and otherwise redesign the BSA program is not evidence BSA nods in agreement. That BSA may be silent about a troop that issues a Venturing shirt to boys at 1st Class rank does not signal approval either. While a misuse of the BSA uniform of that nature may or may not be evidence unit tweaking run amok, BSA certainly would not approve or condone that use, if they even knew about it.

Both Scouts and Scouters may earn the award. The application and details are on the Camping Log #33690A available at the Scout Shop. Do a search on this forum for "national camping award" going back to 2002 and you'll find more info.

One of the purposes of the uniform method is to show all members of a troop as equals, all part of the same team. Departing from that and putting one group of boys in a separate uniform sets that group apart from the rest of the troop, creating a class distinction or clique one group from the other. It seems counter productive to the method. There is no provision in BSA for two uniforms in a troop. Because BSA doesnt swoop down and stop it does not mean units have been granted authority to do so. As someone said earlier, I've got real issues to attend to ..., and Id have to wonder why a unit would spend any time at all coming up with and administering two uniforms in one troop, particularly since there is no support from BSA in doing so. Any tweak is going to be promoted and defended by the head tweaker, so Id really question any idea that two uniforms keeps boys in Scouting.

"My disappointment with the training is more reflective of my IOLS experience - which mostly involved various instructors just trying to teach us the First Class requirements." If a person signs up for a training expecting to learn a,b, and c, he's going to be disappointed if the purpose of the training is to teach d,e, and f. Maybe we need to do a better job communicating what a training course is and is not. Den Leaders have complained to me that New Leader Essentials didn't teach them any activities to do at a den meeting. But that's not the purpose of NLE. The purpose of Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills is to teach Scoutmasters and assistant Scoutmasters how to teach boys the skills they need for Tenderfoot, 2nd Class, and 1st Class outdoor related rank requirements. Some camping skills are involved in that, but the purpose of the course is not to teach adults how to camp. So the training may have been perfect in that it met all the training objectives, but still did not provide what a particular individual wanted to learn.

In no way seeking to offend anyone, but I sometimes wonder why we like to remember terrible events. I wonder if every year the Japanese remember the day Hiroshima was destroyed. I suppose they do, but why?

If were going to start quoting the charter agreement, lets quote a little more completely. The agreement also says The chartered organization agrees to conduct the Scouting program according to its own policies and guidelines AS WELL AS THOSE OF THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA. A reasonable person would conclude CO policies and BSA policies need to not conflict. If the CO policy is to tweak the BSA program out of shape and out of policy with BSA, thats a conflict. CO policies cannot trump BSA policies. I also wonder why were even discussing who has the authority, unless one is looking to justify the tweaks, additions, and deletions theyve made to the BSA program. Ultimately, I suppose the authority lies with whoever grabs it and says I, ME, MINE.

Ed, what distinction are you trying to make bewtween bold type, rule, and guideline? If its in bold type we do what? if it is not in bold type, we do what differently?

Consider that the primary job of the Scoutmaster is to train boy leaders; to coach, guide, and support them. Removing a boy leader really points to the failure of the SM to accomplish his task.

Think of it rather as paying for a function performed by an individual. Nobody pays to support a person. They pay to support a real functional purpose that is provided by some individual. If it is determined that the function is not being performed, then the individual should be replaced. If it is determined that the function has no value then the function should be eliminated. Rather than bellyaching about "council" blowing our money, challenge your council reps to better account for the dollars required to fulfill specific functions. Then decide whether those functions are necessary. Of course if you decide the clerk provides no useful service, dont be surprised if your phone call isnt answered within 4 rings, if at all.

A reasonable person would expect that it would be permissible to wear a uniform piece purchased at the Scout Shop. When designs are revised at some point it would seem logical that it would be stated in the Insignia Guide or other publication that the an old design was not permitted, if that were the case. In general, BSA publications say what must be done, and what may not be done. All the permissible stuff in between could not possibly be listed. Thus dont expect to find a passage anywhere that says its OK to wear discontinued uniform pieces. If at some point it becomes not permitted, it will show up in print. Personal web sites should be taken as personal opinions. As should personal posts (such as this one) found on internet web sites.