packsaddle

I sympathize. No one is forced to contribute to FOS. No one is forced to sell popcorn. If your pack doesn't want to participate in these things, you don't have to. Take care of your unit and your boys first and then, if you're comfortable with these fundraisers, participate. Frankly, this is one reason I support the idea of making the whole thing fee-based. You pay for the product and as the real customer, you then take control of the quality and supply of the product through market forces, just like the system is supposed to work in this country...instead of participating in a system involving entitlements and hand outs. When we pay for the product, we not only can choose the product, through the direct investment we appreciate the product more, instead of viewing it has a 'freebie' or subsidized entitlement. And if we don't like it, market forces will remove it...as should happen to inferior products.

It is still possible to take young people into a world that doesn't rely on any of those techno gadgets. I just returned from 3 weeks with students on a trip to Dominica. No AC. No TV. No cell phones (except for mine which was only for emergencies). No radio, really, and no internet. They did have one iPod. Also, no window screens - mosquito nets only. Water from a spring, no hot showers, bathing in streams or under a shower from that cool spring water. No clocks, just a punctual sunrise and sunset. I took them to paradise and they loved it. Days never involved anything but what we could do by hiking to our destinations (or swimming to them). Nights had no sounds other than frogs, birds, insects, a very rare automobile, rain on a tin roof, and friends having a card game before we went to sleep at around 9pm only to wake early to the early morning sounds of birds, rain, the nearby stream, and perhaps another auto driving up the mountain. After the first few days, they sort of settled in and forgot about all that irrelevant crap and started living real lives for just a little while, thinking about life, companionship, and - of course - the assignments. And when we got back home, I went for a solid week before I remembered the TV. They started calling on their cell phones as soon as we had service again but they knew how good it can be without all that stuff. Great trip. It is possible to do that with young people today and have them to like it. As we were flying out on the way back, a couple of them were in tears. That's the way to leave, wishing you could stay and hoping to return. I doubt that summer camp with all that crap will be as good.

"potatoe salad" Has anyone ever heard of Dan Quayle? Sorry, couldn't resist. (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I'm not completely clear on the problem. It could be the CM just needs some encouragement and support. But if the CM is merely unenthusiastic then the dens are free to take up the slack and make the program exciting. I was both den leader and CM in the pack that I served and the dens are where the enthusiasm is really needed, at least more than at the unit level. If you are meeting the deadlines for pack meetings, successfully completing the pack events like pinewood derby and the Blue and Gold Banquets, then good dens will carry the day even with a weak CM. But if the CM has become an active obstacle to doing things, then the committee chair is just a chair and the committee members can take the lead in getting the things done that need to be done. This is one reason a good committee is really important for all units. So my advice is: take care of the dens first and then help the committee chair and the committee get things moving. From what little you describe, it sounds like your pack has plenty going for it with enthusiastic dens, den leaders, and committee members.

Just heard that she has been found alive and well. From what I saw on the news, she is a very capable and prepared young woman and I hope she can complete her trip safely. Or if her boat is disabled I hope she is extracted and returned home safely. I can't speak for her parents but there are two things for sure in my family: 1) I would be extremely cautious before I considered allowing my daughter to try something even a small fraction of this and, 2) I also know she'd never make me have to consider it in the first place...whew!

From JoeBob's post: Guide to Safe Scouting - Unauthorized Activities: "Scout units may plan or participate in paintball, laser tag or similar events where participants shoot at targets that are neither living nor human representations." I read this a couple of times and as usual, it is ambiguous...unless you think about the logic of the statement. The ambiguity comes from the "neither living nor human representations" part. If the word 'living' was meant to modify the noun, 'representations', then the target could not be a representation of anything living, even a plant! (BTW, insects are animals) However, if this was the case, why throw in the 'human' modifier - it is redundant and not necessary. Humans are living, therefore this further admonition is not necessary. To make this logical, however, one merely needs to add the word 'target' after living. It removes the ambiguity and allows the use of a cut-out of any animal to be used as long as it's not a human representation. In this form it makes sense. You don't shoot at the actual potted plant, just a photo of it. And not even a photo of Bin Laden.

Yes, I agree with the others. I'd count it for both.

I actually like it when they challenge me. It shows they're interested enough to make the challenge and it is an opportunity to engage in a constructive way, no matter how the challenge is made. But this is also one of those situations where it helps to have the kind of objective detachment that comes with not having a boy in the unit. I guess it also helps to remember what it was like to drive a school bus way back when. Anyone who can do that without being rattled is going to have it a lot easier with a bunch of boy scouts.

As I understand it from the perspective of an educator, it depends on the context. I tend to side with you on this...to post a page (I'm assuming it's been scanned into pdf or something) without your permission crosses the line in my mind and I wouldn't do it unless a really old document qualified under the publication date restrictions. However, if I needed to post that page from your book in order to demonstrate (teach) a class on the proper layout of a publication or in order to give them an example of poor grammar or perhaps to criticize your content as incorrect, I would defend my publication of that page. However, if I was on the jury and someone posted a page from your book in order to show how to tie a knot and if you could convince me that this cost you profit from lost sales of the book, I might be persuaded to hand you the verdict. But if the defendant could show that by posting that page, it stimulated increased sales for the book because people wanted to learn the other knots, that would be a different story. As a practical matter, a letter from you or your attorney to the offending web site owner would probably, under the weight of its intimidation value, cause them to take it down. Keep in mind that the idea is still available for them to reproduce. They can take the 'method' you describe, redraw the diagrams, and write a new description for the knot and then THEY will have the rights to it. But keep in mind that I am saying these things NOT from the standpoint of a person trained in legal issues but rather from the standpoint of a person who does use the web in teaching and who takes measures to avoid intimidating letters from offended authors. So I am in sympathy with your feelings and I wish you luck. But if they're not charging a fee to get the info off their site, the best you can hope for is probably to have the page removed. I add: I have had entire documents that I have written...published by others under their name and with no credit given to me, so I think I understand how you feel. In my case there was no commercial value (only intellectual value) to the documents so that's tough luck for me.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

"This is a cad thing to say, but these are 'rights of passage' for adolescent boys." I think what you meant to refer to was 'rites of passage' which traditionally are rites that mark passage from one status to another - often sexual maturity, but usually acknowledgment of increased responsibility and readiness to join adult life. I don't see it for this behavior and I do remember such nonsense from when I was growing up. "Trading licks" often escalated into more than a friendly contest and getting kneed was clearly seen as an extreme thing by those who engaged in it. Moreover, getting kneed usually meant that the culprit must be beaten to a pulp or else he or someone else would knee you again sometime...I only got kneed once and some 50 years after that time I still feel the anger rising when I think back on that event and my response. None of that was or is acceptable behavior and just because adults might have turned a blind eye on it back then didn't make it less of an assault, sometimes brutal and injurious. So I disagree with your dismissal of this behavior. The concept of 'rite of passage' doesn't apply because there is nothing about the behavior that implies change in status of maturity...and under any view the behavior is unnecessary, hurtful, violent, and unacceptable.

Holy Moley! I've never even heard of anything like this. The boys in this unit must be cream puffs by comparison, the worst we've had during a scouting event is maybe some profanity or an illicit magazine. Not even an old-fashioned fist fight. So I think the advice is good and I sincerely hope we'll never need it. Wow! So now I will give thanks for living in Shangrila and enjoying the scouting equivalent of Stepford children in this unit.

Punch line first: do it. You'll have a blast! Now the long version: This cub scout pack was having a membership problem. I was a den leader and when the old CM 'graduated' with his son, I was drafted, sort of, into the CM position. Now keep in mind that our DE was completely worthless and about as intelligent as a really smart bucket of nails. So I took it on with only the bit of training they could offer and some help from other CM's at the roundtables. I dove in with everything I could bring to it. And I loved it. I still like the cubs more than the scouts and I'd do it again if I was asked. Long story short, the pack turned around and I managed to eventually find a replacement who was also good at the position. Today the pack is doing well...and I still have fond memories of those little guys learning so much for the first time. Don't even hesitate. It could be some of the best experiences you'll ever have. P.S. try not to think about the time you put into it. Oh, and yes, delegate the popcorn stuff to someone else...I have learned to absolutely hate popcorn.

DeanRx, I'm sensing some tension on this. I'm with you on the sloppy record-keeping by the councils. And I'm with you on the effect it might have on leader recruitment. And I'm with the spun communication thread on the ham-handed way this organization seems to implement things. But the tension thing...this is not the end of time. It is, as noted, a bumbling way to add red tape. And I note that the Army has an actual critical job to do for the entire country, BSA's job seems mostly to make sure BSA leadership keeps their paychecks. Yes, the life of the volunteer is going to be harder. But as volunteers we need to realize that we are the ones actually in control. There is NOTHING that we are being forced to do...we're volunteers. Simply decline. If necessary, allow BSA to remove us from the role. They'll get the message very quickly...ok, that may be giving them too much credit. They'll get the message eventually. But don't sweat this. Sweat the economy. Sweat your children's education, or their future in general. But this is not an essential ingredient for life. Don't sweat it.

Here are a couple of sites for exploring the legal aspects of 'fair use': http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/comics/ I really enjoy this one and, http://library.duke.edu/about/depts/scholcomm/copyright-and-fair-use.pdf This one has a nice set of guidelines. If you google 'Fair Use' and 'copyright'you'll find many other explanations and helpful discussions.

Scoutfish, I think he was joshing you. It's tough to get sarcasm when it's typed on a page.

Because, Scoutfish, they think THEY are the ones who have the absolute right way of thinking...in both cases. When they are confronted with contradictory policy to their way of thinking they demand chapter and verse. But no such thing is needed to support prejudice.

The House just voted to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military. Sad that BSA is going to bring up the tail end of things on this. But it will happen in spite of the prejudice. To me the irony is that so many who profess on some religious basis to open their hearts to others and see them as they see themselves, choose to view gays through the view of some kind of prurient evil, thus allowing condemnation or condescension but definitely a desire to root gays out and reject them as members...on that same religious basis. It seems impossible for these individuals to understand that gay persons are much the same as everyone else, sincerely caring for and loving others with the difference of being drawn toward the same gender. To me it says more about those who are doing the judging that they condemn gays through some kind of view of personal perverted revulsion, a view that must be deeply rooted in their own minds and NOT necessarily in the minds of most of those who they condemn on that basis....because of religion. BSA will indeed change eventually, as Trevorum noted a while back in 'The times they are changing', as the minds of those who condemn begin to open and homophobia recedes into that cesspool with its likeness in racial hatred and other evils.

I think Beavah has given a very thoughtful response and I agree with him. Just because the boy has not revealed his sexuality to anyone doesn't mean there's a lie. It isn't really anyone else's business. If he came out after earning Eagle, no big deal. It is his prerogative as to whether or when to ever reveal something personal like that. If anyone else doesn't like it, tough luck. As long as this idiotic policy with regard to adult leaders exists, two things are for certain. First, there will continue to be gay leaders and gay boys and for the most part, we just won't know about it. Second, as long as the policy exists, BSA will be a welcome place for homophobes and in this region I can easily (and sadly) say that homophobia is alive and well...but not in this unit.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I mostly saw this while I was a CM. Single moms mostly would express an interest in having male role models for their sons (about 50% of the pack had single moms). Some of them would even pick a pack based on their perception of which den leaders suited them best (at least that's what they told me, coming into my den...made me a bit nervous, LOL). Anyway, the concept of 'male role model' is something that each of them had in their minds and when I talked with them about it during the rare quiet times at campouts, etc., their views of good role models ranged from 'not the jerk who I divorced' to 'males who demonstrate through their lives that men can be solid, thoughtful persons who can be depended on to take on responsibilities and follow through on them'. I think of this one as James Stewart. That sort of thing. The point is, in the end the concept is up to the individual to define in one's own mind and like the moms in my pack, they are quite varied. I suspect that a hypothetical pack with a strutting, puffed up, testosterone-poisoned leadership (John Wayne in this case) would attract others, perhaps for similar stated reasons. I see no way to sort this out or make sense of it other than to chalk it up to individual perceptions. (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Nice! Good for him. The $60, sadly, was wasted. Back when I was working for the federal government, I received a performance bonus. The amount was a bit surprising: $985,985.00. It was obviously a mistake but it showed up automatically in my bank account. Actually it was kind of scary. I called my secretary immediately to tell her about it and she connected me to accounting. They told me I was mistaken and that I had received the correct bonus. So I faxed them a copy of my bank statement. I can only surmise the scramble that happened when they received it. But they couldn't figure out how it happened or where it came from. My division chief confided to me that there was a good chance that if I hadn't said anything, it never would have been noticed. nice. So then the problem was how to pay it back. I ended up writing a check for the amount to the US government. Made me a bit nervous too. It had sat for nearly two months in an interest-bearing account. I was allowed to keep the interest, not that much really, about equal to one mother-in-law present. But the real upshot is....I have an incredible credit rating! My credit card limits suddenly went to the sky and I got really nice offers from banks. Commodore Vanderbilt said that money is power. He was right. I felt relieved after unloading that back to its rightful owner. The boy can feel good having done the right thing even if it doesn't count as a good deed. It really was a good deed in his heart.

Homophobia is such a waste. I agree with Lisa, Calico, NJ, and Dan. This shouldn't be an issue at all. It is an issue contrived by judgmental people who think they understand a unclear and (I think) dishonest policy. The gay scouts who I know in troops around here are fortunately accepted as they are and have adult leaders who are supportive in the sense that Beavah mentioned.

Brent, it is of course impossible to know what is in the mind of any person with absolute certainty. In that respect I accept your point. However, actions and reactions to situations give powerful clues to motives. When a leader, in order to persuade, refers to himself and his impressive array of knots...when his words tend to be about him and his actions call attention to him, these things are not evidence of his selfless devotion to the boys. I have seen this in some leaders...I admit, fewer today than in years past. I am not comfortable with the application of the GOBN, as a term, to scout leaders or groups of scout leaders. The GOBN with which I am familiar (and I admit this is a personal view) in this region, is one that applied to a primarily male socio/political group that was designed to maintain a status quo and exclude 'outsiders' or persons with different or opposing views. And while I think there are leaders whose service is more about them than the boys, I believe the GOBN concept is not applicable to scouting, at least not at the volunteer level.

"Awards are a different beasty. I confess I really dislike adult advancement and awards. I think it sends da wrong message and attracts the wrong sort of people to the uniform. Folks who are a bit more in it for their own ego needs than in it to serve the kids." I agree completely too. Beavah said it perfectly.

As with Roadkill Patrol, mine did too. It is a fine line and so I was ASM and another dad was SM. We agreed up front to swap places with regard to our sons at troop functions. The other son was not the bully but he got into his share of bad choices, I really liked him but he had a streak of mischief (mostly from being unencumbered by the thought process). But this allowed both of us dads to lead and our sons to participate as if their 'father' was back at home. Or close to it. It worked out well for us.

Yeah, maybe that's what explains us adults as works in progress... As for me, I have never missed one of those dates...and without the help of a secretary too - it's my loving spouse who forgets anniversaries, etc. Abandon all hope!