Oak Tree

Our Committee Chair normally processes it. He was out of town for the turn-in, so I turned it in. The way we deal with training is we send out an email to everyone indicating what training they need. If they haven't completed it by recharter, we just don't register them.

It was diagnosed in exactly the manner that JMHawkins describes. It was definitely not dehydration. Hyponatremia is not that rare. Here's a study that showed that 13% of runners in the Boston marathon had hyponatremia: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa043901 In this case, though, the question is really, should you force/encourage a kid to drink a glass of water - I'd estimate it at 16 ounces - when he already feels he has had more than enough? It was not given as a suggestion, or a "join me in a toast." It was, "Ok, everybody listen up. I want every one of you to take a glass. Go ahead, take it... Fill it up with water. Do it now. Everyone. Whether you've had plenty of water or not. Take a glass and fill it with water. Now, we'll all drink it together. Everyone. Ready? Ok, let's drink." If you weren't drinking, you definitely felt like you were disobeying a direct order.

aren't yeh just supposed to say "J20" or somethin' from da canonical list? Yeah, yeah, I know. I'm just curious about how the rules advocates would handle an actual situation like this. We actually had one Scout diagnosed by the Health Lodge as suffering from hyponatremia (drinking too much water and having his salt concentration get too low).

In the parent thread, Eagle 732 asks who gets to decide which rules are immoral, impractical, or just ridiculous, a 12 year old boy? Here's an example of the kind of "rule" I'm thinking about. At summer camp it was very hot. People were sweating profusely. Adults were constantly reminding the Scouts to drink water. At one meal, at the close of the meal, the program director got up and told everyone, whether they had already had plenty of water or not, to fill up their cup with water, and that we'd all drink another cup together. As an adult, I can make a reasoned judgment about whether this may lead to hyponatremia, or whether I believe that our evolutionarily defined sense of thirst is somehow fundamentally defective. The youth, on the other hand, can pretty much tell if they are already overly full of water. I'm sure at some table the adults had already been encouraging the youth to drink up plenty. So some youth decided not to follow this rule. Even 12-year-old boys could decide whether it really made sense for them to drink another cup full of water. Should we tell them that they need to follow the rule for now, but that they should advocate for a change within the system? Should we proceed with open "civil disobedience", jump up on a table, and shout out, "I don't believe that's a good rule and I'm not going to follow it."? Or do we just silently ignore the rule for those cases where it doesn't really apply? If you think it's ok to use your judgment on whether to follow this rule, what is the distinction about which rules you get to use your judgment on and which rules you don't? (And ok, maybe this is an "order", not a "rule", but the rule would be that you have to follow directions from the program director.)

cynicism meter just peaked. Nowhere in the story did I see service hours mentioned. Instead, it says "they wanted to help out because they wanted to make sure that the community makes it safe and sound". And are you somehow implying that the news hasn't done any other stories on any other groups that are helping out? Jeesh. It's a feel good story about some Scouts helping fill sandbags. Good for them.

Pack 79 is engaged in civil disobedience as I would define it. (You might ask for one more step, which would be to go ahead and actually register such a leader. And yes, you might say that civil disobedience can only apply to the government, but I think the concept applies broadly.) Pack 121, I don't know - they might just be using the rules as written, if not as intended. But I don't really care and they aren't the focus of the discussion anyway. The BSA is going to have to decide whether to deal with these various acts of civil disobedience. Will they force all these groups to renounce their policies, even to the point of pulling the charter if a unit or council doesn't back down? Or will they just do nothing? Another option would be to change the policy, but right now they have to decide between doing something and doing nothing. My guess is that they will do nothing for the moment. Just guesswork, though. They really don't have to decide anything until/unless they get an actual complaint about a registered gay leader. And even then they could decide to do nothing, without changing their official policy. But if nothing happens to these units/councils, you can be sure that there will be more.

what more could anyone want in a leader? Well, just a wee bit more. I want them to be able to make good decisions on what to do in the first place, and I'd like them to make good decisions when they are down in the trenches doing stuff with me. But in general, yes, I think the traits you list are key ones for a good leader. And like Beavah, I agree with everyone too. I love reading Lisabob's and Eagledad's experiences - not because those particular ones have happened to me, but because the descriptions are honest, and true, and highlight exactly how the system is set up to work. It's clearly absolutely essential to recruit and delegate. And you really really benefit from matching people to jobs. Beyond that, the problem is with the system in the first place. I am quite frankly amazed that we get volunteers at the district level at all. Who wants to be a membership chair? And part of the reason that it's hard to find people to help at that level is because it doesn't align with anything that's important to them. I think it's hard to get enthusiastic about keeping the district membership numbers up. And setting up training sessions? Teaching a class can be fun, but doing all the logistical coordination behind the scenes on a volunteer basis over a long period of time?

We really like the stuff at scoutdirect.com. They have great prices all the time and even better if you wait for the occasional sale. The tents have been the best ones we've purchased.

So since you're such a big believer in civil disobedience who gets to decide which rules are immoral, impractical, or just ridiculous, a 12 year old boy? It depends on how one defines civil disobedience. I think it's pretty rare where that actually applies in the way I think of it. I think of that as people who openly state that they aren't going to follow the law, because the law is immoral, and then expect and accept the punishment that comes from not following the law. That is usually not what we're talking about when most people decide whether to follow some rule or another. 12 year old boys are constantly evaluating whether parental rules, school rules, Scout rules, etc are rules that they really need to follow. Generally speaking any disobedience comes behind the scenes. Most of the time you don't see people just openly saying that the law shouldn't apply to them and therefore they aren't going to follow it. That's because they don't want to directly confront the authorities (and because they would generally lose if they did so.) But my answer for the question "who gets to decide" is, whoever the rule applies to.

So, at a recent campout, the SM and ASM decide to hold BoR's for various things, including a couple of Life's. To presume that this is in line with BSA guidelines, I'll interpret it as saying "the SM decided to get some MCs and/or parents who were on the trip to do some impromptu BoRs." It's irrelevant to the point, though, as to whether the BoRs were properly constituted. Either way, the AC needs to find out somehow. a couple of boys and sets of parents are ticked that boys didn't get the award. Someone seems to be a little bit entitled here. The thing that would tick me off is that the parents aren't giving the leaders any slack. As SM, I have learned, just as NJCubScouter says, to try to deflect these things by warning everyone up front that we might miss something and if so we'll work it out. I've also learned to say "It's my fault." Everything, anything, home, office, Scouts - give me the blame. Then move on. We also struggled with exactly how to make sure the awards get recorded. We've used two different policies in recent times: 1. At the completion of the BoR, return the book to the Scout. Tell him that it's his responsibility to go see the AC to get his accomplishment recorded. That way no leader is at fault if it doesn't get recorded. 2. Because of some issues with #1 (Scout neglects to take book, AC isn't at this meeting, ...) we now have the board keep the book. The head of the BoR then gets the book(s) to the AC. So in this case, what were the Scouts told at the end of the BoR? What might the troop do to set expectations for Scouts and parents about how this is handled?

Did he already think that he'd met the requirement of being active by October 2009? He doesn't have to be active for the time immediately preceding the Eagle award. I do think the troop can set reasonable expectations, but they can't be retroactive and take away something that the boy had already done. If the requirements were set before the boy began his tenure as a Life Scout, then I would side with the troop. But in this case it sounds like the requirement had been completed earlier. If there are "reasonable expectations", I think that they should be stated for everyone. In this case, I would sign it and move on, and make sure I've clarified the rules going forward.

I don't think the example I want to set for my scouts is of one who chooses what rules to follow and which ones to ignore. No place for civil disobedience? No place for teaching the Scouts that it's important to use their own judgment on whether some rules are immoral, impractical, or just ridiculous? Once a policy becomes so unpopular that people just start openly brazenly ignoring it, knowing that they have the backing of others and the fact that the authorities can't or won't or don't crack down, then the policy is on the way out. As more units and councils start to profess their opposition, the avalanche will become unstoppable. Why would one want to belong to a voluntary, private organization whose national policies one openly rejects? Perhaps because one believes in the mission of the organization, generally supports most of the policies, and enjoys participation. Also perhaps because one does not see this particular policy as relevant to the day-to-day activities of the organization, which one likes. Virtually every organization I belong to has some policy or direction that I don't think is the perfect way to do things. I'm not giving up belonging. And it somehow feels anti-American to suggest that I give up the right to speak my mind. I know the organization can kick me out if I'm too much of an annoyance, but most organizations tolerate some amount of dissent.

Definitely like the idea of giving rewards for getting things correct. Depends on how much time you have and how much you want to encourage. Communicate what you're looking for. The right rank badge? The right quality unit patch? No patches in completely wrong places? Then reward that with something small. We've done ice cream sandwiches for the patrol that gets the best score on a uniform inspection. Just the fact that you are paying attention to it will get people to do better.

"If they are not doing this, what ARE they doing????" I'm not sure what, if anything, they do. In fact, I couldn't even tell you if we have a district advancement committee. Perhaps they are the ones who put on the Eagle boards of review? Beyond those boards, I have no evidence we have such a committee. Fits right in with Eamonn's thread of ideal vs reality.

In our troop the committee will allocate a budget for new equipment for the year. The equipment coordinator and the SM discuss general priorities, and the Equipment Coordinator works with the troop quartermaster and the patrol quartermasters to come up with a list of what is needed. Usually the EC or the SM does the actual ordering of equipment, based on a fairly long history of experience with various equipment and knowing the failure modes, and from having searched out various good values. We did once have a committee member order a bunch of stuff and he got very cheap stuff that failed pretty quickly. My experience is that the Scouts are pretty good at deciding what equipment is actually valuable to them on camping trips, and they know what works and doesn't work.

QUESTION: how many wireless computers can access a Hotspot, and does the more you computers you use use slower the download and upload times? This depends on several things, including your hotspot and the quality of the upstream internet connection. For example, we did the geocaching merit badge at a camporee one year. One of the requirements is to log on to geocaching.com. I brought my phone and four of the adults brought their laptops. Those laptops didn't have any trouble operating through a weak 3G signal. There wasn't a lot of data moving back and forth. Your hotspot can be a phone, a router, a laptop, or pretty much anything that can have an internet connection. Some of these have limits on how many computers can connect. The number of computers will probably not overwhelm the hotspot. The limiting factor will most likely be the upstream internet connection. If you have a good ethernet connection, it probably won't be an issue. Don't download videos, though. In short, my guess is that you should be fine with any reasonable hotspot and a wired upstream connection.

I wouldn't worry about those two particular cases, but in general I'd do as Eagle732 suggests: "The Scoutmaster deals with them by not recommending the "power hungry" MBCs to Scouts. The scouts deal with it amongst themselves by letting each other know which MBCs to avoid. " In our case, there really aren't any district or council lists, so it's up to each troop to maintain its own. We haven't had much issue with "power-hungry" counselors, but I would describe some counselors as "long-winded". Some boys avoid certain counselors for that reason - they don't want to have to meet 20 times and hear the counselor pontificate about the importance of every requirement in the badge.

My guesses: No focus on girls because 1. GSUSA is perceived as an equal option. 2. Public is generally ok with other gender-segregated programs. 3. People can understand a reluctance to send boys and girls camping together. 4. It's stated right up front as part of the BSA's mission that it will focus on boys. No focus on atheists because 1. The BSA is up front that it requires a belief in God to be a member. 2. Atheist-rights are not a prominent part of the public discourse. I can't think of any other current discussion of atheist rights at all. I think this is generally perceived as a battle that's over, with only private religious organizations continuing to discriminate. And gay-rights are very much in the public eye, and people generally see no apparent reason why the mission of the BSA requires a ban on gay leaders. It comes across as very unfair, and people are much more likely to get upset about things that seem unfair.

Tell them. It's not unethical to let your friends know what you are doing. You don't have to recruit or try to get them to do anything, but you can certainly let them know. They can make their own decisions. You aren't trying to organize a resistance. The troop is about to collapse anyway.

Here's a link without a comma in it: http://tinyurl.com/ctx535j This is pretty open rebellion...they are signing the anti-discrimination statement. National would not let the Cradle of Liberty Council take that stance just a few years ago. Either something is going to give, or else we're going to have a de facto local option, at least by council.

I have one son who just went to college. At the moment he says snacks would make a great gift. In a month or two he may have some additional ideas, but I definitely like the idea of jerky and trail mix from the troop.

I wouldn't be in favor of Eagle for adults, but I could certainly see some adult awards along the lines of those suggested (we do have some awards already - knots, BSA Lifeguard, Mile Swim, 50-miler, BSA Physical Fitness, Emergency Prep, ...) I could see some set of more structured awards that represent real mastery of a topic, that would be more than just surviving a class. Tie these twenty knots in under two minutes. Get left in the woods naked and survive for a week. I think that the mile swim is like this, but there aren't many others I could point to. I do think it's really important for the adults to have fun, and it's good to have little things that help give some positive feedback. It's easy enough to say "it's all about the boys", but it can be hard to keep that long-term vision in mind every single minute.

If you build it, they will come. This is a great example of how the vision of the adults leads to a successful program. It takes time to shift away from the program of the old guard, but it can be done. Sounds like you approached it well. Congratulations.

Ah, don't listen to those stick-in-the-muds, advancement lady. I think it's a great idea. People wear unique neckerchief slides regularly. I think there are various cool events that could have interesting recognitions. I like the idea of doing them for accomplishments that don't otherwise have recognitions - things like camping out when it's below zero, or sustaining an injury, or going out of the way to be helpful to someone. Just little meaningful things. Now, while I like the idea, we don't actually do many, if any, in our troop. But I'd be happy to hear about what other troops do.

I have no issue with Webelos dens that want to look around at multiple troops. But we find that having a strong relationship within the CO between our pack and troop works well. I think that having that relationship can make many things work better. We don't have the committees meet on the same night. I'm not sure that would help much. What we need is as much cross-pollination as possible, and having the committees meet on the same night at the same place might get you a little bit of that, but there are lots of other ways too. I stay on the pack leaders' email list just to be aware of what's going on in the pack. It's good to have a few families with kids in both groups. The Cubmaster and Scoutmaster should talk every so often, or at least email. Some competition can be good, but we're not businesses here, we don't get paid, and no one wants to be continuously pitted against other BSA units.