packsaddle

"In my area Packs do not publicly advertize what their Pack/den programing is." This caught my eye. It's probably a common way to operate if for no other reason than it's easy. However, when I was reviving the pack years ago, I published our program as prominently as possible - public announcements in newspapers, radio, fliers posted in store windows. It was one of the major operational changes that boosted recruiting into the pack, not only of boys but of motivated parents as well. They can't want to join you if they don't know about you. If I was CM again I'd make our program as visible as possible...we even had a publicity chair on the committee. Those were good days.

Not sure what they do today but when I was CM, there was a breakout meeting at roundtable in which the cub leaders met to talk about these things. Now, I think the new suggestions are circulated on various web sites and email lists. I just haven't kept up with it. But I will when grandson is old enough for me to return to the cubs. I love the cubs.

Heh, heh, I can relate to what Eagle92 wrote. I particularly agree about that part about pencil instead of ink. The only thing I would add is that India ink is permanent. That's why it is used for herbarium labels, etc. The other inks, however, are subject to loss. Also agree with that format change. I still have an old working AT just for that purpose, plus most of the odd format drives between that time and now (and an array of intermediate MAC machines - my kids are going to have to haul a LOAD of junk to the dumpster when I croak). I used to have a box of data on paper tape...alas, my access to a reader is long gone so I recycled that stuff. Pretty sure I already had that data on a 5.25 floppy, lol.

I'm confused. Why is this ticket thing so incredibly important? I keep reading about 'tickets' but mostly in that mysterious woodbadge/management theory forum. I thought this thread was about doing the best thing for the cubs.

No problem, those are all good points. I'm with you on the print thing but it's really time consuming, as you observe. Nothing is fool proof. Even for Egyptian kings, I guess.

I did bring a pack back from the brink. But my son was in it and I was already a den leader. But other circumstances were different as well. My solution was in recruiting. The program was not a problem, just a big recruiting discrepancy. As an 'outsider' I would advise you to offer advice and ideas, but nothing else. In the case you describe, the pack may be too dysfunctional to save. It actually has MORE boys than mine did when I took it over but from what you describe, I'm not sure it can be saved. Sometimes it's best to just let something die.

Similar to Tampa Turtle but it really depends on the season and the weather for that trip. If we got drenched all weekend, we'll still cook all the meals and return Sunday afternoon. But because we know the tents are going to be wet, we send them home with the boys who know what to do dry and repack them properly. Then, next meeting when the tents are returned, each is inspected for dryness and completeness. Plus, the rest of the trip equipment is inventoried for cleanliness. If we have a dry weekend all this is done Sunday afternoon unless, like SMT224 noted, we can stay out an extra night. In that case we do it on Monday afternoon, perhaps a little earlier. Really, we have such an abundance of outdoor opportunities here we are ready to go at the drop of a hat and the tough part is choosing which place to go. This long weekend we'll be in the mountains to take advantage of a little more available driving time and that extra night.

I'm in the process of scanning everything - goes back quite a few generations, letters and other documents as well. Then give copies to all the descendents on DVD's or thumb drives. Then keep all the originals in that same box. Descendents can make the fateful cut someday in the future. Or else the rats can do their thing. That's what will eventually happen anyway. No illusions...we're not Egyptian kings.

"Congress should not be allowed to leave chambers starting October 1 until a budget is passed (a CR is not a budget)." I strongly agree with this. After doing a career with the feds and living the last decade or so with the CR approach intruding at unpredictable times, I can tell you with great confidence that it greatly diminished the ability to get anything done. Forget morale or initiative...it didn't even allow us to let contracts to private companies in a lot of cases. To me it was fundamentally dishonest.

"The DE I worked with back then just sent me an email that starts "OMG"." If this happened yesterday it sounds like it was an epiphany for her. My advice is to shrug it off. Any volunteer who thinks they had responsibility or control over a large organization which is subject to large strategies and large market forces and the cumulative decisions made by the public...is mistaken. Volunteers should remember that what's important in scouting is family first. Family. Scouting is not life. It is fun and all kinds of good things. But it isn't life. Family is life. And in family, you can find all the things you think you lost just now when an artificial organizational unit was removed. You've lost nothing if you still have family.

"Ditto" Beavah. (and with that I think I have set the record for the greatest number of ruffled feathers with the fewest words - ever) OGE, sure that's not 'Shawshank', instead of 'Sheepshank'? sorry, couldn't resist. BTW, Dreyfuss was better in "What About Bob" or that thing about close encounters.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Vol_scouter, Edit: I'll answer that last question first. Because the 'man on the street' is who will determine the ultimate fate of the country and his understanding of science, or lack thereof will be part of that determination. AND, the way you and I ask and answer questions in public has the potential to affect the understanding of that 'man on the street'. I didn't use the term 'phlogiston' with intent to confuse things for jblake47 - or you. I didn't mean to imply a relationship between gravity and combustion. My apologies, I just used the term because I like the word (and the story from the days of alchemy). So I applied it in the way I applied it. If it helps I'll call it 'nophliston'. That work any better? Nophliston, the mysterious force that is exerted by the rest of the universe which pushes the pencil toward the earth when the pencil is released. So, If I was a person who had no prior exposure to science or religion, and I was presented with both the 'nophliston' theory for gravity and the 'force mediated by gravitons' theory, by what logical process could I arrive at the truth? After all, if those gravitons have never been found, as you say, some logical process is all that is left for the guy to use to exclude one or the other of the two theories, right? Otherwise, as far as he's concerned, one theory is as good as the other. I asked that question about your opinion of your fellow citizens because I was curious about your opinion regarding your fellow citizens. That's all. I'm not sure how to make it clearer than that. I'll repeat the question. In your estimation of your fellow citizens, in real life which alternative theory do you think the average person would most likely choose to believe: the one in which they can directly observe the effect or the one which uses invisible and perhaps imaginary things? Keep in mind that while you're correct about consensus not being the way science works, I'm not asking about that. I'm asking about what people would choose to 'believe' is true, given those two alternatives. One more thing, I'm not going to get upset if you have no idea which choice people would choose, I don't know either. I'm just hoping you do, or maybe someone else does.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Bart, I'm still playing you-know-who's advocate.... All you've shown is that your system seems to work better than the alternative. But did you really give the alternative a fair chance? Shouldn't the alternative be taught alongside 'conventional' gravitational theory in physics classes, in order for the students to make up their own minds? One correction. I have a colleague who studies atmospheric processes and properties. He studies the atmosphere surrounding the International Space Station. That thing IS a satellite, isn't it? You telling me there are no atmospheric forces operating on the ISS? You note, "...we see no evidence that this is happening, so it's most likely not happening." You're using the lack of evidence to conclude something. Show me the evidence that it's NOT happening. And, by all means, GET that alternative theory of gravity into the classrooms!

vol_scouter, I'm curious. How do (would) you exclude the phlogiston idea? What is so 'wrong' about phlogiston? Let me play devil's advocate. If I was a person who had no prior exposure to science or religion, and I was presented with both the 'phlogiston' explanation for gravity and the 'force mediated by gravitons' explanation, by what logical process could I arrive at the truth? In your estimation of your fellow citizens, which alternative do you think the average person would most likely choose: the one in which they can directly observe the effect or the one which uses invisible and perhaps imaginary things? Heh, heh, and which one is which? Edit: Bart, that ellipse thing is a little troubling. I always have a few students who enter college still thinking that the seasons are caused by the elliptical orbit and the distance of the earth from the sun. I will tell them that we were, yesterday, precisely at perihelion. They will still cling to the idea. A few also 'know' that the universe is only 10,000 years old.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I was working on a project in the Three Sisters area of Oregon years ago. Those were the best days ever, I just love that area. One day mid week I stopped by a local grocery for a sandwich and I arrived just in time for 'check day'. Evidently all the 'blue plastic' people came down to collect their welfare checks or something like that. Then they'd cash the checks, buy some food and go back into the mountains to live under a blue plastic tarp. I stood in line behind one of them. He was about my height, taller than average, and had long black hair and a beard. He looked like a really grimy, dirty version of Jesus. He must have had 10 rings in each ear, pierced eyebrows, multiple nose rings, lips, tongue, I hate to even think about what else must have been pierced. He had a few tattoos but nothing exceptional. We talked for a few minutes (that's how I learned about the check thing) and then I gave him a lift up into the hills where he disappeared into the bush on a poorly marked trail. I guess he spent most of his time stoned or something. He did tell me with a glint of pride that he never touched alcohol. He planned to spend the summer under plastic and then drop over to Sisters or Bend or Eugene or maybe on down to Florence when it got cold. He told me he and one of his friends had done each other's piercings. I mostly listened...horrified fascination.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Heh, heh, that might make it clear to you but I'm still on square one. I'm afraid I'll have to accept your explanation as a gesture of 'good faith' and hope I never have to make a wager on it. P.S. think there's a chance that 'they' will ever change their minds about that explanation? Edit: I just remembered the answer to your 'why' question. I had memorized that answer way back in Catechism...to glorify God! That seems to work for a lot of people for those questions of purpose.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

The fact that a pencil moves toward the earth is not a theory. It is an observation. I'm a bit sympathetic to your thoughts regarding 'gravity'. As far as I can detect, no one, not anyone, understands yet just what gravity IS. So maybe that is the direction you should be headed. but gravitational theory has to do with the way 'gravity' affects objects that have mass. The theory is what is used to predict, for example, the motions of objects with mass, relative to each other (as NJ mentioned) as well as to explain that the pencil released on the ISS is, in fact, also subject to gravity but is falling at a rate balanced against another force thus causing it to be 'weightless' (but not without mass). That pencil is in orbit in synchrony with the ISS, but not outside the influence of gravity. It is held in orbit by gravity. Now, I can't prove that there ISN'T another force, call it 'phlogiston', by which the rest of the universe is 'pushing' against that pencil to force it to the earth and pushing against the orbiting pencil and the ISS in precisely the right way, thus producing an identical outcome to what we observe. That would be a matter for 'faith' if someone believed it. I don't know of those persons, though. Regarding human ancestry, is there ANY evidence that you could recognize in support of the idea of a common ancestor? But that has almost no relevance to the process of evolution. We do observe evolution, all the time, in many ways. It is easy to observe and quite repeatable. What I can't do is 'prove' that each of those observations is NOT a special miracle. That would be a matter for 'faith' to address and I have met persons who DO maintain such beliefs. Regarding medicine, have you ever heard of thalidomide? Or...for that matter the medical proof that cigarette smoke causes no harm to the smoker? Or the medical proof that coal dust causes no harm to the lungs of miners? Those things are easy to find, probably plenty of more recent examples too. I've heard those claims of proof, even as dead people all around provided evidence against. I guess that in the case of lung cancer and black lung, those claiming proof had other motives. But for a while, a lot of people 'believed' the 'truth' of those 'proofs' (and made a tidy profit too!). Merlyn, I'm thinking you know better, and maybe I'm reading you the wrong way, but just a reminder that populations evolve, not species. The confusion is what occurs when persons use terms imprecisely or when the terms are imprecise to begin with.

Actually I did notice your absence. And missed it. I might have even tried to provoke you a couple of times by writing 'ditto'. But then gave up. Happy New Year and welcome back.

Jblake, two questions: 1) If those theories are just speculative guesses, in your mind what would they be called if there was good evidence to support them, short of proof? 2) What would constitute 'proof' in your mind, of either of those things you just called speculative guesses? NJ, for a while I beginning to think YOU were extinct (possibly even a myth).

Callooh! Callay!, In case anyone was interested, I thought I'd show everyone your wrasse: Have a nice day

Scoutfish, I hate to tell you fella, but the earth revolves around the sun now. And in a million years, given the differences in mass, etc, I doubt that will change. At least it hasn't in the thousands of millions of years in the past, before there were humans. Or maybe you wrote that in a confusing way. If humans die off suddenly, it's almost certain that they're gone for good and best of luck to whatever fills that niche after us. We have almost no predictive power about what would happen after something like that. The book "The World Without Us" gives a fanciful account of some possibilities. At risk of invoking TWO four-letter words starting with 'M', who knows, we may just have 353 days to go.

So I guess it comes down to what different people think IS 'faith', itself. There's obviously a difference of opinion on this. That difference could be relevant to BSA policy. As for that four-letter word starting with 'M', I guess I'll look forward to listening to Edith Hamilton complaining to herself while we're burning in hell, "What was I thinking? What was I thinking?"

A tattoo or piercing automatically disqualifies that person during a one-year deferral from donating blood stem cells or other tissues. In some states it causes deferral of the person from donating blood. That fact alone ought to be enough to give pause.

Without revealing too much about identity...he WAS! The whole story is something I can't comfortably write in these forums.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I once knew a faculty member who lived his entire life, tattooed over his entire body where it could be covered by a suit of clothing. No one suspected anything until he retired. That was when we found out. What a great secret!(This message has been edited by packsaddle)