packsaddle

My favorite way to accomplish that is to play Wagner operas. And the best part of it is that I actually enjoy those.

Or you could answer the question. I am not advocating anything. YOU are advocating doing nothing and I'm merely trying to find out what the benefit is for a good scout not to provide help in a situation like this. Or I'll accept identification of the 'harm' of providing the help. That works too. Answer please.

I have to admit, playing those sounds on long drives is pretty 'hard core', lol. I'll consider doing that in the future as well.

Then the answer is 'no' and in both of your views a good scout encountering this kind of situation would do nothing. Actually given the condemnation I'm reading here, 'nothing' is mild in comparison, lol. So who benefits from the decision to do nothing? Would 'help' in this situation provide benefit to anyone? Who 'loses' or is 'harmed' by providing the help?

So...a good scout would do nothing to help? Is that your answer?

So: many years ago one of our faculty literally dropped dead one morning as he was brushing his teeth...massive stroke. Not married, no children, distant (in terms of distance) relatives. So the dept scrambled to get others to 'stand in' and finish his courses, etc., and in the process pretty much neglected everything else. Then, years later, another faculty member recognized a guy who is working at a fast food place. The guy had been a graduate student of the dead faculty member. He had assumed that since his advisor was deceased his degree was over and that was that. What is the path to fairness in this situation? Do we just accept that the former student had made his decision and was reconciled with the outcome ... and do nothing to help him? Or do we take into account that he did a huge amount of work and merely needed to submit the thesis, inform him that it is still possible to get his degree, and help him with the process so he can graduate? This is also a real-life story. What path would a good scout take if he discovered this former student and had the ability to help him?

Neither Eagle nor service in BSA is evidence of professional qualifications. It is evidence of public service...which is just fine if such is a component of job performance for the purposes of performance review. My guess, though, is that it rarely figures in a performance review either. I don't mention anything about my Eagle or my BSA involvement. If something like that is the 'straw' then you're cutting it way too close in the first place. Edit: I would add that I think Eagle might be a good thing if applying to college. It is evidence off extracurricular achievement.

A.K.A. Stepford children.

I see nothing wrong with traditional outdoor activities (scouting for most of us) as a niche offering. Why does there have to be a huge national organization? Why can't it be viewed as some form of 'elite' status as long as it's available to everyone? To me it just needs to be scouting and we shouldn't worry about how bloated salaries are justified and paid.

Hint: In 37 states recently, the highest paid public servant was/is a coach. In the 1960s there was still a shred of 'amateur' in college sports and 'student' in student-athlete. This institution (like many others) had a stadium that could hold the student body and some guests from the opponent school. Today it (like others) can hold the entire population of a small country with room left over for the student body. We've become a 'herd' society focused on sports, also often delivered on a flat screen with beverages and food. Edit: Incomprehensibly that last comment even applies to GOLF!!! of all things. Good grief!

Well, 'auction' was a stretch, more of a 'sale', bit by bit, lol. We didn't do anywhere near as well as you but we did make a profit and had fun and food to eat as well.

Indeed!

My bad.

Back when I still went to RT, the cub breakout was best when it was short and sweet, as already mentioned. The person conducting that part had the theme and some suggested activities and we had a short discussion and maybe a few questions and ideas and then done. But the OP asked for new ideas and this, to me, was a critical limiting factor...we do seem to run out of ideas fairly quickly. But really, there are lots of things to do and as long as the boys have fun, those 'to do' things are all fine. They can be imaginative and simple and cheap. We made and flew kites, paper airplanes, went fishing, dug for worms, collected insects, had snake displays, visited the fire station (and just about every other kind of public service office), explored lakeshores, had scavenger hunts, listened for bird calls, identified animal tracks, tried to figure out what kinds of insects had splattered on windshields, or what kinds of birds had splattered cars and boat docks, the list goes on and on. As for getting more participation, I stopped going to RT as a cub leader because of the way cub scouts were basically ignored in our district. It was a real 'downer' to go to RT and basically have backs turned to you. I can take a hint so I stopped going. You might want to check to see if anyone out your way feels the same.

Stosh, yes. I have auctioned a goat. It was perfectly bar-b-cued, tender, and nicely seasoned. Sauce of your choice. The auction went quite well. Horizon, I agree and when the 'Mrs' finishes that multivariate model, let me know what the confidence limits do each year out on the prediction. Most of these kinds of things really don't mean a lot when you get just few years out. But it's all going to be OK in September at any rate, lol. Any guess on what the 'confidence' limits are on THAT prediction?

Eight years until it's one quarter of what it was in 2002. There's a prediction that has a clear metric and we will see how well it holds. Just last night I was reading a prediction made in 2004 that oil supplies would be well in decline by now and that as a result widespread famine would be racking many countries outside the USA and IN the USA, food would be scarce and prices would be skyrocketing. Of course there's also the doomsday prediction that an asteroid is going to provide us with an 'end of times' hit this coming September, somewhere around the time of the equinox. Maybe the prediction about BSA isn't going to be relevant after September...

Others are taking charge. Enjoy.

Just move on. Focus on your family.

I've been following both the original thread and this one and I'm still scratching my head wondering why anyone would go to the trouble to take the actions that these ASMs have taken. If it was me, I'd try to work with you using some of the suggestions I've read in these responses. These ASMs just don't make any sense. So while I know this is going to be your version of the problem, Imachristian13, can you explain why they are so set on this path? What do you think has caused them to harden and behave like this? Do you know the reasons? I'm curious and if you could explain what you think their side is, that might be helpful. Edit: This line struck me in the OP: "When our son is in scenarios under their direct leadership, he has a bad experience." Can you elaborate on this? What is the nature of the 'direct leadership'? What are the bad experiences?

Well, the form I grew up with is already gone and has been for quite a while...probably was replaced in the 1970s before I came back. It was great for me and I have no doubt that it would still be great for boys today. But I'm not 'in charge' and the program is different. I admit that I look at all this from a very local perspective. As long as there are boys who want to do outdoor stuff, even a fraction of what things used to be, I'll be there to assist and try to provide those opportunities. That is completely not dependent on National policy as far as I'm concerned. If BSA became a tiny niche organization with barely any national organization to it, as long as there continued to be community interest at this local level, assuming I'm healthy enough by that time, I'll continue to work with the local unit if they want me. What I don't understand is the seeming concern that unpaid volunteers who practically aren't even given the time of day by National...have for the long term well-being of National. I'll just add that to the long list of other things I don't 'get'.

DuctTape, I have made the same observation. Before we start talking about the so-called 'death' of BSA, we need to define what would constitute that 'death'. For some of us, it's already happened. For others, I suspect there is a fairly long outlook but scouting will have evolved into something different, perhaps with many fewer members. But if those bean counters are eventually forced to start asking people if they would like to supersize their order, I won't feel that bad. Scouting, I suspect, will live on even without Irving and while it might be slimmer in numbers, it could be just as good as we volunteers want to make it for our boys. Do we REALLY have to have Irving to have scouting?

Yes, I've had similar interactions over the years. Here's the thing though, there seems to be a contradiction in all this. Those great guys, my father, uncles, other family members...all fought that war, and others have fought other wars since then, for a variety of reasons but one thing they all have said when I've talked with them...they want theirs to be the last. They don't want their children or anyone else in the future to have to fight. They want 'better' lives for their successors. And that's what we had after WW2. We did achieve pretty much what our parents identified as 'success' for us and for them as well. The contradiction, maybe 'contradiction' is the wrong term, is that this level of separation from the 'knowledge' and 'reality' of what those soldiers and that generation did IS a predictible outcome of what they wanted for us. My children have never had to practice 'duck and cover'. They never had the spectre of hospital wards full of iron lungs in their future. True, they have new things to worry about but is it really bad that they are almost completely ignorant of what it's like to grow up with the nearly immediate fear and threat of being vaporized? I'm not disagreeing that history is a good thing to know. I guess what I'm saying is that if we're successful, it seems that everyone eventually will only have the historical records to go by, and not direct personal interaction.

Me too, this medium leaves a lot to be desired for communicating humor.

I didn't see a personal attack, only concern. But aside from that, what do you mean by "...if given a chance"? How do you propose that scouting should be given this chance, what form would the "chance" take (aside from allowing Twain and Shaw as members, posthumously, lol). Could you be more specific? Edit: NJ, I have a theory...it's a sort of 'Saturday Night Live' kind of theory...or maybe 'Saturday Night Fever' theory...or maybe 'Samurai Night Fever' kind of theory.....

Are there any WW2 veterans among the members of these forums? Does anyone in these forums have anything more than a 'movie' imagination of WW2, really? I suggest that if anyone wasn't IN that war, a 'movie' or some 'book-learned' idea of it is about all we can have.