MattR

Hmm, doesn't exactly grab me. I will teach you to fail? I knew someone was going to bring up sports is more than just winning, but competition, at it's very basic level, is about winning. I agree that good coaches at the secondary school level don't focus on winning. And yet, at higher levels it is all about winning and big money. I know what that means, you know what that means, but your average parent can't relate to it. A picture is worth a thousand words, so this fails my brevity test As David CO would say, try again. How about: We'll teach your kid to lead, starting with himself. Just change the tense: Preparing your son for life. That's a lot better than grow up, but it's still vague. What does it mean to be prepared for life? You're right. You're all right. Being the Scout law should be enough. As should Integrity, Being Prepared, Leadership, Character, and Independence. I wonder how many parents really respond to that. It reminds of a quote I found from Heraclitus. Character is destiny.

No, the title has nothing to do with the other threads (they honestly seem fairly good). But you have to admit it caught your attention and that's what I'm trying to get at. The challenge is to come up with a tight description of why someone should not only put their son in scouts but also volunteer. And by tight I mean just a few words. I'm a lousy salesman but one thing I've learned is that a short succinct message, even if it's not completely accurate, is worth a lot more than a rambling committee based mash up. Take sports as an example. The short message from coaches to parents is we'll teach your kid to win. The longer version can include something about hard work, teamwork, and good sportsmanship, but that's way too long. People understand winning. It connects. The BSA does not connect. What is it for scouts? Scouts is similar to sports but not quite the same. Teamwork and hard work are there, but there's more to it than that. Selfless? There's a huge overlap between theological free will and scouting but it will never fit in a couple of words without sounding stupid. I'm looking for a short, one or two word phrase of what Boy Scouts will teach a boy. We'll teach your son ... to grow up, to be a man, honor. I like growing up. The average frazzled parent of a teenager will get that. I also like we'll teach your son honor, but the idea of honor in today's world sounds like a wish more than a necessity. But I wouldn't mind being corrected on that one. The reason I'm doing this is because my committee asked me to write down my vision/philosophy/whatever it is that drives a lot of decisions I make and I told them about the aims and methods of scouting. Unfortunately they said that's all, to put it kindly, poorly written. So I'm going to just rewrite the aims and methods. I also think it would help talking to parents outside of cub scouts, something that we need to start doing.

How about a lion themed patch? I'm sure there are lion patrol patches you can order online. Sock puppet lions? It's something they can play with, which is all they probably want anyway. Or maybe a lion themed helium balloon. Just call it a really big patch and it will be just like the big kids.

That's a great idea. Cheaper. Includes a tightener. Much easier to sell to the scouts. Easier to walk on. We can use it as a regular slackline at another event.

Any opinions on rope size for the main rope of a monkey bridge. We have 1/2". Was wondering if 3/4 or 1" would be better. It's probably harder to tie but I was going to put an eye splice in the end and use a come-a-long to tighten it. We're thinking 20-30' for the span between the frames. A website I found https://scoutpioneering.com/2012/12/27/double-a-frame-monkey-bridge/said 1/2 or 3/4.

How about using squirt guns? I know, the BSA says yada yada and I had a patrol get their skit pulled in the middle of the skit because they used a pillow but then the summer camp staff used a wig for a damsel in distress. How prudish are the people at National if they won't let a kid stuff a pillow under his shirt and act like a woman in labor? I can guarantee you that any woman that has been in labor would not consider it sexual. (This skit is writing itself. How about a skit where the scouts poke fun at National for not allowing them to portray pregnant women!) I'm not making fun of you Mashmaster, I realize you're trying to follow the rules. It's just that there are lots of rules that just get going too far and start taking all the fun and purpose out of scouts. There are no simple rules for what is humor and what is crude. Funny things are about pain that didn't go too far. How many scouts laugh about things that went wrong on a campout? Those are the great stories. Things need to go wrong. Adventure is about going out towards the line and hoping you don't go over. Scouts is about letting kids make mistakes and then learning from them. Why not do that in the context of skits? If a skit is offensive then there's an opportunity for someone to learn how to apologize and for someone else to learn how to accept an apology.

coarse language: sure, but the occasional dab nabbit can be used for character development. disparage a certain demographic: what about idiots? I understand not making fun of minorities, but the best slapstick usually makes fun of idiots. Or country bumpkins. There's a great skit where two cops end up moving a dead guy from one spot to another because they didn't know how to spell the first. cross dressing: there are hilarious skits involving damsels in distress or pregnant women. A pair of socks or a pillow adds to it. The guy in the doctor's office that collects everyone else's ailments. Starts with a cough, a cold, itching, ... and finally a pregnant woman walks in and the guy runs off screaming. death and violence: lots of skits with someone dying with over exaggerated motions. Or evil people just being evil. Death is usually used to setup the punch line. toilet humor. ever see the one with the SM riding a roller coaster while the audience is told he's on the toilet? I know. this one can get out of hand really easy but let's face it, the bean scene in blazing saddles was funny. inside jokes: yeah, those just aren't funny. alcohol: I haven't seen it either way, so I'd be fine with this restriction. But you know, a country bumpkin sipping out of a paper bag could be funny. I hate to say this, but most humor involves pain and ridicule. There's always a line that shouldn't be crossed. Rather than rule out anything that could be anywhere close to that line maybe a better approach is to start showing scouts how to find that line. And if they go too far it's an opportunity for them to learn how to apologize. Skits are fun. Be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water (that's both death and toilet humor )

One of the struggles with cub scouts is most den leaders are figuring it out about a week in front of their scouts whereas in boy scouts the adults tend to have years of experience. So while the DLs are trying to keep their heads above water the SMs already know how something is going to play out because they've seen it a dozen times before. Better training for DLs might help but training is not a strength in the BSA. The only thing that works is seeing it done right. For all the comments about too much cub scouts. I agree. My son and I took 2 years off in the middle. I was waiting for boy scouts.

Hmm, or is this an example of one really extreme situation being blown way out of proportion and broadcast everywhere to the point where all sorts of people think this is normal. How many girls sell cookies? How many get robbed at gun point? Is it worse than the odds of being struck by lightening? Is it getting worse? If not, then maybe this is just sensational news used to get more clicks. You know, the same thing that's keeping kids from enjoying the outdoors.

I keep seeing this quote and I need to clarify. I never said move the second webelo year into boy scouts or change any of the rules about parents going with their son. I just said have the webelos meet with the troop. I agree that having parents with more ideas and doing a better job would be great, but most webelo parents are burned out and don't understand what boy scouts is about. So moving the webelo den near a troop helps train the parents, it shows the webelos what their future might hold, and it gives the webelos a way to ease into boy scouts, not just one day we're at cub scouts and the next we're into boy scouts. There's a big range of maturity coming in from webelos. Some kids are ready when they're ten and some don't seem to get it until they're 12. As much as I'd like to see a simple rule about what new scouts can do, the cub scout to boy scout transition can be a shock and I've seen it drive kids away. The point is, lessen that shock.

I don't know, @@blw2. I understand the time constraint. I also see a lot of parents pushing their kids to get scholorships of all sorts when learning how to run your own business, even if it's just spreading mulch or raking leaves, can make a bigger dent on college expenses. I agree it doesn't have to be a troop event and it certainly shouldn't be the parents doing all the work. But something that encourages and teaches the scouts how to make some money would be better than the Personal Management MB.

No, boy scouts doesn't start until normal and the webelos still do their program. It's just that the webelos do their last 9 months much closer to a scout troop so they can see what the future holds. They still go camping with a parent and maybe it's just 4 campouts instead of 10, but they see the boy scouts getting ready for 10. Webelos was always supposed to be a transition from cub scouts to boy scouts but it's just another cub scout den. All I'm proposing is put that den at a troop. If the troop is doing patrol method then it should fit just fine. For a discussion about scout burnout, there's another thread: http://scouter.com/index.php/topic/28836-wheres-the-adventure-that-was-promised/Oh wait, you started that

Eagledad, I was thinking of something related to this. Here are some problems: 1) Webelos are bored to tears 2) Webelo parents are bored to tears 3) NSP for a year is too long 4) New scout parents don't understand the scout program So how about taking the 2nd webelo year, keeping nearly the exact program, and just moving the webelo den into a troop as a NSP? They keep working on the cub scout program but it can be less about pins and more about getting ready for boy scouts. It is a den, so they don't need a PL. Troop guides or Den Chiefs can be used to teach the scouts how to do really simple things. The parents will get a chance to back off and learn while the boy scouts will get a chance for more leadership. The webelos can slowly transition to regular patrols, rather than all at once. And the webelos don't have to go from few if any campouts to every month. Start them off with warm weather and easy, under the guidance of scouters and boy scouts that know what they're doing. For those boys that have never gone camping with their parents they can learn slowly, at their pace. Better than that, the parents can learn as well.

What is meant by "adapt to the world?" Here's another way of asking that question, what is it that keeps a scout around until he ages out? And is the BSA moving towards that? For what keeps a scout around I'd say they need deep friendships, they need to make decisions that matter, and they need room for improvement. An adventure will create friendships. Just know different people have different definitions of an adventure. Knowing that you're truly responsible for others, and being able to handle it, will create purpose. Growth will always come from a deep enough problem. At the same time the subject has to be simple enough that a 16 year old can master it enough to show others how to do it. I don't think the BSA is moving towards that. They're moving away because they're under the impression that short attention spans mean everything should be one and done. What I find is scouts that want to stick around are the ones that find something that keeps their interest for years. We run a haunted house for the council. As much as I'd like to ditch that program the scouts love it and we keep making it bigger and better. And it's a ton of fun. The outdoors has proven that it works. It's fun, deep enough to get better at and yet the scouts can teach others. All of the other ideas I can think of fail. They're either too difficult for a scout to master and make decisions about, or only a few scouts will be interested. I think a better approach is to keep the outdoor emphasis in scouts and push some of the ideas about venturing down into scouts and encourage troops to find their adventure. Survival, STEM, 4H, helping to raise service dogs, getting a job to pay for scouts, regularly helping with habitat for humanity, taking ownership of a path at a state park. I think there are lots of possibilities. An adventure doesn't have to be a week in the woods. An adventure is accepting a challenge with your friends. An adventure that lasts years is just accepting a series of challenges with your friends. Reworking the MB program to include more adventure and less classroom might really help. Make it so a patrol or troop can do an extended version of the MB. Do it for a summer or for 5 years. The scouts choose. A MB counselor would not just work with a single scout for a couple of weeks, he'd help a patrol develop a program for whatever time frame they'd like. Talk about getting patrols out of a rut. That would be way cool. The goal is not eagle (but you're welcome to it), the goal is a long adventure.

I respecrtfully disagree. And by respectfully I mean I respect your opinion, but I don't think it's the right time or place to fight that battle. There are two sides to this issue and both are claiming the moral high ground. Just as much as I don't want anyone else telling me what my religious beliefs are, I shouldn't tell anyone else what theirs should be. We have differences. I'm okay with that. Maybe I'm right or maybe they're right. I think it's time the BSA let someone else decide. The thing is, nearly all the decisions I make regarding scouts has nothing to do with this issue. It's not worth the fight. I know, I'm suggesting a pragmatic response whereas a lot of people want a moral one. When people fight every injustice they see they can stretch themselves too thin. Sometimes battles should be left for someone else to fight. If a transgender or gay kid wants to join scouts then let's help him find a place he'll be happy. Maybe, just maybe, if both sides try to help each other out they might stop yelling at each other.

Yep. My first response was Oh, facebook should manage content, not create it. Anyway, Google "facebook auto tagging" or try this mess: https://www.google.com/url?q=https://vtldesign.com/digital-marketing/social-media/nh-facebook-marketing/how-to-disable-facebook-facial-recognition-photo-tagging-nhmarketing/&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwi6iuKL-JfSAhVmwlQKHdLGCtEQFggcMAI&usg=AFQjCNE5LUNasKw2ypmPKGMkiUa0NA9New

This is an unusual situation but I've seen where a parent doesn't want their children's photos online. In this case it was because the dad was stalking and threatening violence. Mom was scared enough that a restraining order was not enough. I'm not saying it happens often, but just that there are reasons. On another topic, I've noticed FB will automatically ask if you want certain people tagged. It's doing face recognition, knows who a person is in a photo, and asks you if you want that person tagged. What I don't know is who gets those messages. I see them for pictures that I don't post. My guess is that they are only friends of mine so it shouldn't be an issue, but with facebook I never know. We don't use facebook. We use our own website and just load tons of photos on it. The photos are public (we asked the parents).

I'm not a fan of lots of programs. I'd much rather see one program that's flexible enough for the leaders to modify. A 10 sizes fits all strategy is just another way of micromanaging what the adults can do. In software this is called feature creep and it never works. A clean simple model is always better. I'll tell you one thing scouts has that none of these other programs have, and it's the ability of the parents to have fun and participate with their kids. Everything else is just the parents standing on the sidelines and watching. STEM would be boring for me and I'm in that business. The reason it's boring is because I have 10 more years of college than any of the kids and it would be like me going for a hike with a two year old. The outdoors is the great equalizer. I had an amazing amount of fun with my son. As he got older he passed my abilities and I loved it. But then again, I bake my own bread and have a cast iron skillet. So what do I know? As for coed, I think the best approach would be to support what the parents want. Coed, single sex, whatever the parents want. I have enough faith in the program that it will balance out. One of the issues I see is that scouting in the US is so politicized that it has an image problem. For whatever reason the BSA has a red image and the GSUSA has a blue image. The problem is that most parents don't want red or blue for their kids, they want a good program. I have problems going into schools and talking about scouts. I can't meet parents. This isn't just hurting the BSA, it's hurting all of scouting. So if the GSUSA isn't the least bit interested in boys, or their dads, then I'm fine with creating a program that poaches their turf. The parents would be happy with a single scouting program. At the same time, I want all the people on this forum that want to keep an all boys program to have that option because I know there are just as many parents that want an all girls program. My daughter wanted the all girls version of the BSA program. She didn't want to be a boy scout, she just wanted to do what the boys did. I'd say ditch venture scouts, run the scouting program to 21, and let the CO decide what the age limit is and the sex(es). It would encourage scouts to stick around until they're 21 and be a younger face that the teenagers can look up to. That's the cool factor that UK scouts has that we don't. That gives a younger and older scouting program. Fold all the non outdoor programs into one and do the same thing with ages and sex. That leaves two programs and the CO can make what they want. Gays and girls are up to the CO, as is the program.

Since I'm bored with coed scouts... I think the early biblical writings would be the Torah Actually, I got curious. In the dead sea scrolls the name of God is not blank, but it does use a different alphabet, or maybe it's just a different font. Anyway, the YHWH, called the tetragrammaton, is from the hebrew יהוה or Yud Heh Vav Hey, which could be translated as "he" plus the root of the verb "to be" and likely comes from Exodus where Moses asks God for his name and God says something that can be translated a dozen different ways (He is who He is, I am what I am, I shall be what I am, He shall be who I am, I am who I am, .....). Somewhere along the line the Catholic church wanted a Latin version of the tetragrammaton and translated YHVH into JeHoVaH. Maybe Latin doesn't have a Y? But, back to not writing it or pronouncing God's name. Throughout the Bible God is referred to by either the tetragrammaton or one of many nicknames. The tetragrammaton is never pronounced and it's usually pronounced Adonai, which oddly enough translates to "my Lords". The idea behind not pronouncing God's name is not so far off. Kings get new names when they're anointed and using their original name is considered rude. Even using someone's first name, if you don't know them well, is, or was, also considered rude. There are native American tribes where people are given a secret name that only the person and the medicine man knows. Used in the right way this name was considered to have healing powers and used in the wrong way was bad. Anyway, God's name is never mentioned. Even if anyone wanted to pronounce it they wouldn't know how because there are no vowels in the original text and unless someone told you what the vowels are, you couldn't say it. At one point in time there was someone that knew how to pronounce God's name and that was the high priest. It was passed down from high priests to high priest. The high priest only mentioned it once a year at the end of the high holidays after 10 days of prayer. And he had a special room in the temple where he said it and nobody else was allowed in that room. What I've been told, and I have no idea of it's validity because I find this rather humorous, is that there was another high priest that acted as a backup just in case the first team high priest got sick, died or whatever. That brings up the scenario of what if the high priest dies in the room? Apparently they tied a rope around him and if he didn't walk out they pulled him out and sent in the backup. Well, after the destruction of the 2nd temple the priesthood ended and Rabbinic Judaism started, and one thing that was lost in the transition was the pronunciation of God's name. That's why Jews never pronounce God's name. Back to the regularly scheduled subject....

But venturing always was coed, so girls can't be the reason for the drop. I think the drop in venturing holds the key to the problems. Two things I can think of is scouting in the US is seen as a way to stuff your college app by too many people. Imagine boy scouts without Eagle. How many scouts would drop out. Another other issue is friendships. They develop early on, before age 14. That doesn't explain a drop in venturing though. I'd be all for lowering Venturing age to 11. Whatever it takes to solve the venturing problem will surely help the boy scout side. The outreach programs I've heard of (Mexican and Vietnamese) have come back and said these communities want not not so much coed, but the whole family. Siblings tend to stay together, so when the older brother goes to an event there needs to be something for the rest of the siblings. There's nothing wrong with having a separate program, just make sure they can meet the same time in the same place. That's another way to make it coed. High school sports are not coed but we do have title iX. Again, what's wrong with an all girl troop that shares a CO with an all boy troop? That would certainly make life easier for parents.

So bearess, are you saying boys need to be around boys to learn how not to be idiots when they grow up and are not around women? I never thought of that. Skip, the problems your wife has with credit cards would never happen where I live. The bill is always placed in the middle of the table. There are plenty of cases where the fact that I'm married means nothing. I can't even ask about my wife's medical info without her written permission.

The all mail program sounds really boring to me. Not even all email? What's wrong with local option here? You want a troop that's for boys only. I understand that. Someone else wants girls only or coed.

We had 25 one year. It was really hard. If you can come up with a way to even things out, and everyone is happy with it, I'd suggest that. The first important question you need to ask is why all these scouts picked your troop instead of the others. If the others are running a similar program and these scouts just randomly decided to pick your troop then a friendly round table with the other troops is a great idea. If the scouts picked your troop because the other troops were rude, ignored the visiting webelos, or have a horribly boring program, then you have a bigger challenge. In this case, Eagledad's comments are good. So, call some of the new parents and ask. At the same time, I never said no to a scout. If at the end of the day they want to be in your troop, don't tell them no. You might just cause the kid to drop scouts all together. But Be Prepared for the chaos. Good luck, you have what's called a high class problem.

I have no doubt the recently large drop is due to the membership change. But I have no idea how this will effect things in the long term. Yes, it's been bad for 3 years. But I'm not talking about what has happened in the past 3 years. I'm talking about what has happened over the past 50 years. The numbers have been going down for one reason or another since the 60s even though the population has gone up nearly 40% in that time frame. I don't know what the scout membership was in the 60's but it's a lot more than now and it should have been going up, not down.

Funny? This is based on experience. The girls were singing Christmas songs and the boys were wrestling.