Stosh

I can see equal amounts for all boys, and in our troop it applies whether they worked on the activity or not. But we don't need ISA's for that. On the other hand you have boys that did work pay $XX and those that didn't pay $YY. Still no need for ISA's. What I'm trying to figure out the scenario of what actions necessitate the need for ISA's. Little Johnny needs $XXX for Philmont. Troops says he has to raise $YYY to qualify for the troop to pay his way for the trek. He can come up with that amount by participating in selling so much popcorn or writing a check. No account necessary. The part that bothers me is that the "account" is viewed as a bank account whereas the money somehow belongs to the scout. It doesn't it belongs to the CO and distributed through the unit. I can see where that might be interpreted as private benefit. I also get a little leery of IRS interpretations because they come right out and tell you that what they say up front doesn't mean anything to an IRS auditor.

There are some people who should not be around other people's kids. It is unfortunate that 1) it happens to be a SM and 2) the CO, DE and SE allow it to continue. Congratulations to your son, and yet I'm hoping this kind of ignorant persecution helps him to be a stronger person rather than defeats him. I have seen it work both ways.

Okay, I'm game to learn more about this but I'm having a difficult time trying to figure out to avoid private benefits and some other things and still have an individual account based on their efforts. I.e. a salesman gets paid by what he sells, and others get paid for the time they work. Isn't this nothing more than compensation for participation in the fundraiser? Sorry for being thick on this, but isn't this the rationale for the problems the booster clubs were getting into?

If you are driving the speed limit, what difference does it make what lane you drive in? The only people that would be passing you would be those who are driving illegally.

Depends on the game and what's at stake. I may be a registered scout living the Oath and Laws, but if I'm mugged with a weapon, all bets are off, all rules ignored, and no bluffing or warnings will be used. I am conceal carry and I will defend myself and cheat if I have to in order to win. If I have to pull my weapon from the holster someone's going to have a bad day. Might be me, might not. But that's the game of life. I'm surely not going to try and cooperate with such threats. In light of servant leadership and watching out for the others around you, might it not be a good idea to review BSA's weapons policy? Like the OP suggests, when one doesn't understand the rules of the game, people get hurt. What about the real world where certain situations don't have rules..... or at least none that make any sense. Check today's news and tell me how this works so people have a chance to win.

I love the analogy of safety in numbers. That works as long as you are buried deep in the herd, but if the wolves are at the edges, where you are, it could be a bad day coming down the road. I have noticed how this works every day. The vast number of drivers out there drive over the speed limit and for some reason a lot of people are caught and fined, their pocketbooks take a hit. The added risk to oneself and the people's safety entrusted to you in your vehicle is also increased as the speed increases. So if someone bends the speeding laws, why not other laws? Everyone threshold of lawbreaking varies, do you wish to entrust your son to someone when you don't know their threshold for legal compliance? I drive my wife nuts with my driving at or less than the speed limit depending on weather, road conditions and traffic. Haven't had a speeding ticket since the early 1970's. The last time I was pulled over by a police officer was for having fuzzy dice hanging from the mirror of my '74 Nova. I guess I do a lot of risk taking in the woods in search of adventure, but when it comes to everyday safety and the safety of others (CO's non-profit status) I get very serious about sticking with the rules. Just remember, Al Capone was taken down for tax fraud, you could be next. Sport booster clubs have already felt the sting.

I have been following this dynamic in our youth since I took psychology in college and started working with kids. I have been involved with youth development programs (not just BSA) for 45+ years. The writer of this article is spot on and any response from BSA with their G2SS is nothing more than legalese CYA policy from BSA. Their #1 priority is not youth leadership development, it is legal litigation avoidance. From purely a mathematical Boolean perspective, Boys sign on for the fun and adventure being marketed by BSA. BSA has in place policies which prioritize safety and avoidance of legal entanglements. Adventure involves a certain amount of risk to be an adventure. The greater the risk the greater the adventure. Just use wall climbing vs. mountain climbing as an example. Do the math on the adventure to risk factors involved and then tell me if BSA is providing the youth with what they are signed on for and paying for; . Youth today are at a greater risk of never leaving the parent's basement than they are on any youth activity BSA or not. Gee, how many boys get hurt on a regular basis in sports? Why would anyone want their kid to play sports? The way it's set up now, kids are safer on a BSA activity than any Chess Club activity. I wonder how much longer BSA will keep the Chess MB before it becomes obvious the risk factors involved and they drop it.

Why are you planning and making the decisions for either of the groups? Shouldn't this be their decisions? Anyway, as I see it, if any of this "goes south" the only one holding the bag is you.... you planned it, you take the flack. Seriously, this is one of the big reasons I am an advocate for boy/youth led organizations. If something goes wrong, I step in a help clean up, but I never take the blame for other people's decisions.

Do the boys boys in the Troop's various patrols camp with their patrols or do they camp with the Crew? One or the other is going to get short changed. As long as the Crew and Troop NEVER have an activity together, no one will ever have to make that choice. In the long run the youth will be "penalized" for their choices. What happens if 3 of the 4 PL's are registered with the Crew? If I'm with the Crew, how much involvement will I have with the patrol's planning for the event? Okay know the adults make the rule that the dual registered youth must stay with their patrols. That's gong to mean all the non-Troop members of the Crew will not have the help of anyone from the troop on the outing. I see a lot of potential hard feelings here. We faced that situation and the Crew I was with eventually never went to any camporees or scout activities. We had too many Crew members that would have to choose between the Crew and their respective Troops and so that was the end of that. Even the boys who were in OA had to choose between OA events and Crew events. This is but one hassle we faced and eventually we decided as a Crew that that the members who joined would need to prioritize the Crew first over their Troop activities. Everyone who joined after that never again had a conflict with their Troops. The SM's were really angry and petitioned the DE's and SE's (we were multiple council with our members) and on one occasion where the SM was adamant the boy dropped his registration with the Troop and went full time with the Crew. Ultimatums don't work. One simply cannot serve two masters at the same time. Communicate it all one wishes, even on up to the SE level and it's not going to make a bit of difference, somewhere along the way someone's going to call "foul". Oh, by the way, if the Troop insists on the Troop registered scouts stay with their patrols, it's only a matter of time before the Crew begins to suffer because the Crew only members will have to do all the heavy lifting without the Troop members and will eventually realize that they don't need them and will make plans on their own. They're doing all the planning anyway, who needs them tagging along when they just happen not to have a Troop activity conflict.

Our supplier was the local J. C. Penney's. None of the boys had the collarless shirts so it probably was't anything that was going to be readily available. Must have had to special order it if you wanted it.

Maybe I was too far into the boondocks or we didn't get the memo. Never knew about collarless shirts and started Cubs in 1955

I see this topic headed for I&P rather quickly.....

I have been a strong advocate for troops NOT to start Venturing Crew for exactly this reason. There should be two entirely separate groups or there will be more concerns like @@Jeff in MI mentions here. Separate the groups or learn to put up with this kind of programming it's not going to get better. A person can't serve two masters at the same time With a common adult corps of people, they are always going to favor one group over the other and the only ones that suffer from this political jockying around are the youth. I'm thinking the GS leader should have just tried to do more camping programming than trying to work with the BSA on this issue. The temptation is to go with the experience boys and all their equipment, but one has to pay the piper and sell your soul to do so.

This way even mom and dad can get the bling and run with the big dogs.

I was a scout in the 50's and 60's and there were no collarless shirts, I thought they came out in the mid to late 60's. We always were taught to tuck our collars in.

Oh, okay, it has nothing to do with any games the scouts might be playing then. Makes sense to me..... right. Sorry I came in late on this discussion, but I"m leaving early to make up for it.

I have no idea the rationale behind this "game" other than it basically ticks everyone off in the end. By the time WB staff gets around to doing all the neatsy stuff about ethics and competition, it all goes out the window the first camporee the SM goes on. The boys are out to win the competition and get ribbons for the flag and trophies for the shelf, but in the past 35+ years of scouting I have never heard anyone getting a trophy at camporee for ethics. Our summer camp has campwide games of competition and I don't see anyone worried about the ethics of the situation and I have never heard anyone in any of these scout competitions award negative points. I minored in Psychology in college so I have an inkling of what this "game" may be about, but it's practical application to scouting seems to be a bit of a stretch. Maybe someone can enlighten me and all the others who haven't had the new and improved WB course.

Woks are bigger than DO's so we do a lot of stir-fry. Do up big batch of minute rice and all the prep for the stir fry can be done up before going on the activity. Just dump into hot wok and stir around until hot and it takes about as long as minute rice to cook.

Gee, @@TAHAWK, we could suggest to the parents they only wear the latest pin, otherwise they'll start looking like a Banana Republic general....

Woe to the troop that inherits this problem.

It is my opinion that the vast majority of CO's out there are doing this to provide a service to the community and have no idea that they are ultimately responsible for the non-profit status legalities of this "organization that uses it's facilities." I know of other units out there that have for-profit businesses as their CO. I can only imagine the door they leave open for themelves every time a Cub Sells a package of popcorn to the neighborhood. They need to count every penny of that as income and somehow work it out so the boys receive it, but they can't they aren't a non-profit group, they're part of the business. 5 families get together to form a troop. Did they fill out all the legal forms necessary to be a non-profit? If not they are personally liable for any income that unit creates. I really don't think BSA does a very good job of keeping everyone, including CO's in the loop of the financial risk they could be entering into with a scout unit.

Better yet, let the boys decide. Spend some time visiting with the boys to see what style of camping they would feel the most comfortable about starting. If they like the idea of plop camping, good, go for it but leave the door open down the road a year or two when the older boys might want to expand into a more lightweight option. Nothing's locked in stone and for camporees and newbies the plop camping equipment will work just fine. I have always used the patrol method and this will apply here as well. Instead of individual scout accounts, I have individual patrol accounts and the boys that get out and hustle the most on the fundraisers get the equipment they want when the funds become available. If they want to forego a new Coleman 2-burner stove so they can knock some money off the cost of summer camp, they should be deciding what they want to do. They want to go minimalist with their efforts (maybe the older boys) then they can decide the equipment necessary for that .All they need to know is how much money is in the patrol account and they can figure it out. Newbies? Well it's like starting all over from scratch each year, unless down the road the older boys have aged out and that patrol's (really good) equipment becomes available. The new guys on the block get first crack at it. The other boys should be satisfied with the equipment they have, they've been working for it and saving for it. When all is said and done, if one of the patrols doesn't want a dining fly, why should they buy one? My new troop has one patrol, they have been operational for 18 months now and have yet to buy a rain fly. When it rains, they get wet. Their choice. So far out of all the camping they've done (summer camp had dining flies provided) they haven't experienced a really bad situation they can't handle. It might be a bit eclectic and mix and match if the boys do it their way, but then that's the nature of a boy-led, patrol-method troop.

I think a name tag with the father/mother pin on it would be nice. Especially if their son is Eagle. I bet someone could make a fortune making name tags that would allow the in to be attached.

Yeah, it's a non-official ribbon that you put your non-official pins to wear your official uniform It's kinda like 2 negatives make a positive thingy.

Everyone who has raised kids knows how this works. I can fight with my brothers and sisters, but if some outsider even so much as looks cross-eyed at them, they'll have to answer to me.