Oak Tree

I'm curious if the DE makes the same threat against anyone who isn't wearing standard uniform pants. It seems like capris would be better than blue jeans. Shorts are ok, long pants are ok, and a fashionable style in-between is not? There's a woman in our district who is so petite that she wears a blue Cub Scout shirt. Should our DE be threatening her, too? Or even tactfully suggesting she do something different? It seems like 95% of the adults have some obvious error on their shirt - I'm happy with anyone who makes an effort to appear professional. Oak Tree

Nike, The question of whether you can double-count tenure was asked in a thread from December: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=147833 Brent's position is correct - it doesn't appear to be allowed. Eventually you'll have plenty of years of service and it won't matter. It's not a race. I do understand how it feels to serve multiple units, and it pretty much feels like totally separate tenure. I might be inclined to be a 'uniform licensee' in this regard - I wouldn't be concerned if you wore them all. Your friendly snarling commentator had a possible compromise position - the total number of years represented by the knots should not exceed your service star. Oak Tree

I don't believe there's any rule on this, unless you were to interpret the generic buddy system statements to cover tenting. We allow Scouts to tent alone at times. Some bring hammocks. Some are just the odd Scout. We only have two-man tents, so we can't really put three boys in a tent without inducing claustrophobia. We've told the boys they need to be willing to share tents, even if they bring their own. Hasn't been a problem. We had exactly the problem with the 6-person tent that SR540Beaver describes - they are now disallowed in our troop as well. Oak Tree

I would love to see those studies. But I suspect you may be right about the lack of support. God forbid that someone's sacred ox gets gored. Much better to let people make anecdotal arguments in favor of their favorite program element. There are all kinds of interesting questions that could be asked. It would be very insightful to give a detailed questionaire to a few hundred units and see what kind of response you get. One problem would be that units that do things wrong tend to fail, so it might be hard to get representative results. But I'd love to see if there's any correlation with where/when den meet, how long pack meetings are, when advancement ceremonies are held, whether the unit wears a full uniform, how the committee/den leaders meet, how often the unit goes camping (both packs and troops), etc. It's always hard to separate correlation and causation, too. I've seen several BSA studies that show that Scouts do well in society. But I've generally thought that it could be that good families tend to put their kids in Scouts. Hard to tell. I'd predict that you'd see strong correlation with some of the district demographics. The actions of the DE may also have a big effect. If he puts little effort in, or is generally not very good at his job, there would be a noticeable effect. At the unit level, I think that enthusiasm of the leadership, and a reasonable willingness to compromise (and not do so many of the wacky things we read about on this forum) would be key indicators. I think good units tend to get their leaders trained, but I'm not as convinced that training creates good leaders. Good strong units tend to make their quality numbers, but fudging to make the numbers doesn't make you a quality organization. I too applaud any unit that resists efforts to misrepresent their actual state. I don't mind a few hangers-on, if they want to be there, but there's no reason to push to include anyone who doesn't want to be there, or to tweak the advancement dates. I understand Eamonn's temptation, and he is absolved from guilt as far as I'm concerned, but it cannot be a healthy thing for an organization to encourage this type of behavior. And the whole system is set up that way right now. Oak Tree

If I may be so bold, I don't think your problem is trying to come up with evidence that the shirt is to be worn buttoned up. The problem is that no one is comfortable telling the woman this. For evidence, you can use every official picture in any Scouting documentation. The shirts are always buttoned. I wouldn't even get into an argument on this point. How about this? "Hey, Mary, we're trying to encourage the boys to wear the uniforms properly. Can I ask you to button up your shirt to help set a good example? Thanks." Oak Tree

Ours are done by the district. We have a volunteer who coordinates the reviews and assembles the reviewers. Oak Tree

That's a sensible policy, and nice to hear. But even if double-registering doesn't boost the number of Scouts, it still can artificially boost the number of units. What you really want to know is how many boys are active in the Scouting program. But that can be a tough thing to measure. Oak Tree

I'm not in OA, but I feel quite confident in saying that this is not an acceptable position. Pretty good way to extinguish your chapter over time, actually. Highly discriminatory against small troops, new troops, any troop with low numbers of arrowmen. I looked up some OA election procedures on the web. They don't specifically say that the OA has to let a unit have an election, but it sure seemed to strongly imply that. They want units to hold elections! While I understand the desire to get OA members to participate, this is just the wrong way to go about it. Good grief! Oak Tree

You get what you measure. That's one of my favorite management maxims. I do evaluations of professionals regularly, and I would be extremely wary of judging them on anything as simplistic as what the BSA seems to use. If you measure (and reward) the number of units, you'll get more units. They may be paper units, or ghost units, or overlapping units, but you'll get more units. If you focus solely on youth membership, you'll get more members. They may be boys who don't even know they're in a unit and who didn't pay their own fee, but you'll get more members. In a growing district, you'd see all of those things going up. There would be more unique boys, in more units. There would be more advancement, more FOS, more attendance at summer camp and at camporees. There would be more uniform sales. There are reasons why any one of those might not be a good indicator by itself, but overall you should be able to recognize a good healthy district when you see one. I think the pass/fail nature of the award gives a huge incentive to fudge if you're close to the line. I know that a nice simple result is easy to talk about, but more realistically a district could be rated on a one through five scale, or some such. And it would certainly have to take into account the TAY. There's no reason why a district in a growing region should automatically have an advantage in the rating process. Oak Tree

Our commissioner interpreted the 70% requirement this way - in each month we will have 70% of our boys have an outdoor activity. That's still a fairly high bar, but nothing like the idea that 70% of our boys must go on 12 outings a year. You don't have to hit 70%, though. You could just improve over last year. Oak Tree

Hunt, I find this thread to be an inspired piece of work. Congratulations on a most interesting experiment. There is apparently a vast alpaca industry that places ads through google. Following the links gives a glimpse into a world that I've never given much consideration to; the llama husbandry industry. You can buy alpacas or get them for free. You can get sweaters, blankets, all kinds of clothing. You can visit alpaca farms. It seems like every time I reload the page I get slightly different alpaca ads. It's fascinating, in addition to being a tribute to too much free time on my part. Here are the ads I see this time: How To Get Free Alpacas Through Income Tax Deductions! Section 179 extended through 2007 AlpacaDigest.com Suri Llamas for Sale Over 100 suri llamas, over 30 years experience at WoodsEdge Wools Farm! www.alpacasllamaswoodsedge.com Raffa Exclusive Sweaters The most beautiful 100% Alpaca Sweaters made in Peru. www.raffa.com.pe Alpaca Free Alpaca info & links from the online authority www.doo.us.com One notable feature of these ads is that they are mostly for 'alpacas', not 'llamas'. Interesting how that works. Perhaps we should have started out with 'alpaca', but it's not nearly as funny sounding a word as 'llama'. Oak Tree

Yes, pack and troop are different. However, there are a lot of similarities. Our area never seemed to offer pack committe training, but after I took the troop committee training I felt like I'd learned a lot about the pack committee operation as well. I agree with Lisa'bob that the troop is more complex. The troop does boards of review, and it also deals with a more dispersed decision-making organization. I see that recently our council has been offering pack committee training at Cub Scout leader training events. I may have to take that sometime and see how it is. In general I like that training forces you to talk with other leaders - there are definitely benefits to getting people together. But on the whole, I think it's good to offer TCC on-line. I don't know that I'd want all training to be available that way - but we can probably adapt. Oak Tree

I'm with Beavah and Eamonn. Use of good judgement is a great thing. I don't like it when people use the G2SS as a club. I'd find it ludicrous it if a trip were cancelled in the middle because the BALOO-trained person had to leave. We do sometimes drive at night. Sometimes one car will follow another. It seems like this rules discussion happens over and over. We've got the canonical list of why people don't follow the rules. I don't know that we need to have it again (but still, here I am). This thread didn't start off as a rule-breaking thread. It instead is intended to discuss the legal consequences of our actions as volunteers. I very much like Beavah's description - it's something I've asked for in training but have never received. I can see why the BSA doesn't really want to push this information, but I'd love to hear if anyone knows of any reason why Beavah is incorrect (from a legal, not philosophical /moral/ethical perspective). It sounds pretty much like what I'd expect - I know I expect my insurance companies to cover me even if I make a mistake. I'm always interested to hear about any actual lawsuits and their outcomes. So anyway - thanks for the information, Beavah. Oak Tree

Once upon a time my corporation mandated that I take a diversity class. It wasn't as bad as I'd anticipated. One of the interesting insights I got was that white males do not in general perceive themselves to have advantages. They may accept that other groups have some disadvantages (either real or perceived), but that's a different mental implication. It can be hard to put yourself into a position of someone else who comes from a group that really does perceive themselves as disadvantaged and who believes that the white men have all the advantages. So Hunt, I agree that white men are more likely to make the argument. There is a tendency among them to think that everyone is equal and we should all be able to poke fun at one another on a level playing field. They don't understand how strongly the other groups feel that the playing field is not level. But just to throw out a counter-example, here's a black guy telling white people to "get over it". http://blogs.chron.com/laugh101/archives/2006/03/white_people_st.html Oak Tree

But you can be registered in two different positions if you're registered in two units. I've thought about this question, too, as it seems a little bit of a gray area. I'll personally probably stick with the idea that it's not a race. Theoretically the district is supposed to approve these awards, so it would be their call. The Cub Scout awards say "Dates of service used to earn this award cannot be used to earn another key or award." Clearly this means that other Cub Scout leader training awards cannot be earned during the same tenure. But the Boy Scout awards? How about the God and Service award? I'd say it does intentionally include Boy Scout awards, because it uses the term "key", which is only a Boy Scout award. Oak Tree

I'm with Eamonn and jblake47. I find it rude to constantly point out errors in others' terminology - especially new posters who are asking questions about some other aspect of the program. If BSA didn't want people to confuse Venture and Venturing, they should have given them different names. The idea that they would use almost identical terms and expect people not to interchange them is completely impractical. I used to see this behavior a lot more on the forum, where anyone who posted a question had a fairly good chance of being corrected on something they were doing. It seemed like a 'blame the victim' or at least a 'blame the one posting the question' game. It seems like this isn't as prevalent now, and that's a good thing, but I do think the Venture/Venturing corrections are an example of it and I think it would be kinder and more courteous to have less. This happens less in smaller, more informal groups, but such are the hazards of an internet forum. Oak Tree

Here are the 1977/78 requirements. 1. Do the following: (a) Give a short history of computers. Describe the major parts of a computer system. Give four different uses of computers. (b) Describe the difference between analog and digital computers. Tell the use of each. © Explain some differences between special- and general-purpose machines. 2. Do the following: (a) Tell what a program is and how it is developed. (b) Explain the difference between an assembler and a compiler. Tell where each might be used. Describe a source and an object program. © Use a flowchart diagram to show the steps needed to set up a camp. 3. Do ONE of the following: (a) Prepare flowcharts to find out the average attendance and dues paid at the last five troop meetings. (b) Prepare flowcharts to work out a simple arithmetic problem. Explain to your counselor how this program could be stored in a computer. Tell how it could be used again. 4. Do the following: (a) Name four input-output devices for computers. Explain the use of two of them in a system. (b) Explain the Hollerith code. Show how your name and address would be punched on a card. 5. Tell the meaning of SIX of the following: (a) memory (b) bits © on-line (d) bytes (e) microsecond (f) address (g) channel (h) interrupt (i) register (j) console (k) central processing unit 6. Tell the meaning and use of TWELVE of the following: (a) business data processing (b) information retrieval © simulation (d) scientific processing (e) floating point (f) truncation (g) fixed point (h) accuracy (i) input (j) record (k) output (l) file (m) software (n) instruction (o) hardware (p) indexing (q) loop ® subroutine (s) real time (t) time sharing (u) cybernetics 7. Visit a computer installation. Study how it works. (a) Explain what each of the following does: design engineer customer engineer programmer analyst operator salesman (b) Read two pieces of information about computers. Describe what you read. © Describe jobs in the computer field. Oak Tree

Yeah, that extra (IF Amount > $10) calculation in the spreadsheet would take a lot of work. And if the council finance director has time to call about $5, he has time to use common sense. To answer Lisabob's original question, I'd expect that council is very interested in asking for the amount of money that maximizes their return. And a smaller number of $120 contributions could very well beat a lot of $20 contributions. I wonder if they run experiments in some districts to see how much it varies. We've had a couple presentations from district over the years, but we've recently been telling them that we'll do our own, just to tone down the stridency of the message. We had a lot of parents say that they felt the district presentation was too much. And I still have trouble figuring out where that money actually goes. Oak Tree

OGE, I'm not sure if you're posting your protestant work ethic question with your tongue in cheek, or not, but this is just a random example of a potential difference in attitude by COs. If I google "protestant work ethic" I get 155,000 hits. If I google "catholic work ethic" I get 142 hits. Protestant work ethic even has its own wikipedia entry. It was one of the theological underpinnings of the Puritans, and has entered the American mythology and lexicon. Using that term is just part of the standard cultural literacy. I know of no evidence to show that protestants are actually harder workers than anyone else today, but I agree with the idea that different COs will have different philosophies about the importance of different parts of the Scout Oath and Law. And nowhere did I see Beavah state that units could redefine the Scout Oath and Law. But it seems 100% obvious to me that everyone has to interpret what those words really mean, and that they'll mean somewhat different things to different people. Oak Tree

The computer merit badge appears to have been introduced in 1967, according to wikipedia. I have the 1978 requirements, and I don't know how much, if any, they differ from the 1967 requirements. The 1978 version does include this requirement that would probably stump most of today's computer scientists (without any access to reference material): Explain the Hollerith code. Show how your name and address would be punched on a card. Oak Tree

"Is it really funny?" Let me get out the humor-meter and feed the joke in. It's pretty hard, obviously, to get an objective measure of whether something is funny. It's clear that some percentage of the population finds it funny, or it wouldn't get forwarded around and have its own entry on snopes. Would it have been just as funny with a different retort? Still no objective measurements around, but I think it's safe to say 'no'. While the rapist retort is equally effective as a logical argument, it is not effective as a snappy retort. In order to be effective, the retort has to take a comment that's offensive to the first person, and compare it with one that's offensive to the other person. Would the joke work if the journalist were a male? No, I don't think so. "Well, sir, you're equipped to be a gigolo, but you're not one." Just doesn't have the same punch. Interesting to analyze why not. One reason might be that guys aren't really offended by the idea that they're equipped to be gigolos. A lot of humor depends on who you identify with. I think that most people who find this funny would identify with the general or the Boy Scouts. They see people who just don't get it who are trying to stop them from doing entirely reasonable things. They would most likely be offended by the reporter's question and her equating Boy Scouts to violent killers. If you identify with the reporter, though, you're likely to be offended in the other direction. I personally am offended by people who are offended all the time (no, wait, that means I'm offended by the fact that I take offense...aw, heck, I give up). Sometimes I think there are other ways to indicate what's not funny and what's proper behavior, other than taking offense and claiming victimization. Oak Tree

The phrasing of this email screams 'urban legend'. So it's hard to take it too seriously. The fact that humor has the potential to offend is a reason why politicians have to stay away from vast areas of material in order to avoid offending any section of their constituency, while comedians can take on all of them because they are only trying to build up a smaller group of people that find them really funny. I've often wondered what would happen if a comedian tried to run for office...would the expectation that they make lots of jokes give them some immunity from the 'I'm offended by that' charge? As I read the item, I thought the general was essentially saying "Just as the overwhelmingly vast majority of women are not prostitutes, the overwhelmingly vast majority of gun users are not killers." One of the reasons why this particular comparison is effective (judged by the fact that this email gets forwarded on) is that it takes one common stereotypical liberal view, "People shouldn't use guns because they're inherently dangerous", and contrasts that with another stereotypical liberal view, "women's bodies are not to be objectified." At least, that's my dissection of it. The language may be a bit earthy, but I don't personally see how the implication is offensive. But being offended is a very personal thing... Oak Tree

Here's a link to the Our Camping Log document that FScouter references: http://tac-bsa.org/national_camping_award.pdf As you can see, it says "Individual Scouts and Scouters may qualify for the cumulative patch by participating in campouts with their families, patrols, or other groups." The cumulative award starts January 1, 1991. The Scoutmaster Handbook contains very similar information about the award. p. 113 of the 2002 printing. The only things it says about what camping counts is that "a Scout must keep track of his campouts and have them approved by his Scoutmaster" and that the "total can include any combination of camping experiences with the Scout's family, patrol, or troop." Oak Tree(This message has been edited by Oak Tree)

Eamonn, It probably depends on what you mean by 'leaders'. Here's a quote from the Buckskin council's web site: "The target participant for BALOO training is a new Cub Scout leader with a desire to plan and carry out an entry level outdoor experience for the pack." I think you're right if you mean that it's hoped that it will be someone other than the Cubmaster or Den Leaders, but in practice I'm sure many Cubmasters take the class. And I think if you take the class and plan the campout, you are pretty much a leader by definition. I will agree, to be fair to BALOO, that it's probably correctly targeted at relatively novice campers who are trying to plan age-appropriate activities while camping with Cubs. 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. We already knew the great majority of it - heck, most of us had been teaching it to the boys for a few years. And they didn't focus on teaching us how to teach it better, they just wanted us to learn how to do it. We did pick up a tip or two, but the ratio of useful tips per hour was pretty low. I still like the training for the time I get to spend with other Scouters, so I'm not planning on bailing on the whole thing. Oak Tree

The NOLS courses (www.nols.edu) look like pretty serious 'camping expert' courses. I think that's about how I would design a course. For local purposes I'd probably do a bit more variety including the different types of outdoor experiences, and make it shorter. I must say I don't really feel that the BSA courses do much at all to improve my camping skills. I've taken both BALOO and IOLS, and came away from both of them feeling like they would only be valuable (skill-wise) to people who have hardly ever been camping. It seemed like our groups averaged several years of experience with Scouting, and on many topics we knew more than the instructors. I don't get the idea that would be the case with the NOLS classes. Oak Tree