packsaddle

Eamonn, continuing on the drug reference, isn't that supposed to be 'Suzie in disguise with glasses'?

boleta, I agree with the motivation idea. Nothing like a little friendly competition to get them moving.

Playing off a Gary Larson cartoon, here's a suggestion: "This here car belongs to Joe Jones so keep your hands off!" What do you think?

NJ, the legistlature sees a voluntary source of revenue. But you knew that. FOG, is that a 'yes' or is that a 'no'? Our state has all sorts of alternatives as do many others. I have no problem with someone advertising their allegiance to the KKK if they think it's a good thing. And if the state can make a buck off them, so much the better. What I would like (and I think some of you will agree) is for us to be able to design our own unique plates, subject to state approval of course, and for a substantial fee. Not just simple acronym games but allowing the full creative expression that, say, a KKK member could summon. How about that?

hops_scout, I'm grasping for the correct answer. How about this one, "Not everyone can be a member of Boy Scouts." Did I get it right?

We have the same problem. And we have thought (thunk?) of a solution (I think). At the end of the summer or at the early fall COH, we are going to "auction" the lost and found for the troop. This will be intended to be a humorous reminder for the boys to identify...and be responsible for...their belongings. We're still working on the form of 'payment' so if any of you have some ideas, let me hear them. So far we're thinking service time, or leading a cheer, (my favorite is food) but you get the idea. I guess it depends on who has the highest bid. They might actually give me stuff to prevent me from singing.

Welcome to the forums, fling1. I have to ask: fling1 what? Sorry, couldn't resist. Anyway there are two answers. First I read guidelines just as Barbosa did. Second, you must be careful that you don't go over the edge with us, for here there be monsters.

I also agree with Fuzzy Bear. I winced occasionally, but I tried to defend JasonOK and his incomprehensible raves and rants until his deception was identified. I still stand by the principle, if not the respondent. My field depends on free and open exchange of ideas and I think that is what makes it better. Perhaps better if also applied to all aspects of society, even when it feels painful?

Since this thread has morphed into one about young Eagles, I observe that we have not produced an Eagle younger than 17 (maybe one at 16) in the last 10 or so years. We have one boy who is poised to complete his requirements for Eagle this year at 14 but he's very unusual. Our unit is similar in this aspect to other units in the district and council. I can't explain the difference between these units and those consistently producing very young Eagles. But if a boy has completed the requirements then he should achieve the rank.

I have only seen a couple of instances where a 10YO boy joined. They worked out fine. I'd rather have that than have one come in at age 16 with the wrong expectations. I've seen a few of those.

We try to schedule a 'welcome back' COH early in the fall to get everyone back into the routine. It also gives the partials a little time to finish.

Fuzzy Bear, I agree. I do see FOG's original conundrum though. I think that if nominated, he should accept and go through the Ordeal. That way he'd be available at that later time when he might be needed. But this doesn't seem to be a problem, at least not in our neck of the woods. Just one more thought, I'm not certain that our SE is involved in any way in the selection process. Or am I just missing this detail?

Fuzzy, we're close. Brotherhood in 1964 (not sure about the year, could be '65) in Catawba Lodge. A few interruptions (college, kids) and back in business now. I was active on the dance team for years and still have my old Catawba Lodge Dance Team jacket. Unfortunately, various invertebrates have dined on most of the other costume items. H'mm come to think of it, maybe that IS fortunate. But I have photos. My children occasionally get enough courage to look at them with horrified fascination.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I don't mind admitting...I'm confused. Did Eamonn and Bob White leave all the forums or just the one on politics? Is Bob White still gone? Edited Part: Oops, welcome back Eamonn!(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

OK, I guess I was a little worried about the screen name and wanted to call the question. I intended no offence. Jason PM'd me and then published my PM response. Not a big deal until I learned the extent of the deception. And yes, I know that I (we) could have been deceived again with a simple 'no' as an answer. The trustworthy thing is really important to me (first on the list as a matter of fact) and I wanted to detect any attempt to evade. As for the thread, I've no problem with it and I basically agree with NJCubScouter's premise. However, he usually is equal to any counter-argument so I was content to read the discussion. Please continue......

9muckraker7, have you ever been involved with these forums under a different screen name? If so, how many and what were they?

mk9750, SCOUTER_Terry had to resort to his woodshed again. From my view it was primarily the result of a large number of provocative posts by several personalities that happened to occupy one human body. This individual was 'outed' as a liar (shapeshifter? chameleon?) and some of us are simply not responding further. I now have a suspicion that he will attempt to return as other personalities, indeed he explained his actions as a desire to demonstrate security problems with the website. But as a result, we now have two moderators who will 'facilitate' discussions in case they go over the line. The line is what is in question and I suspect that will be defined in practice and over time. Both of the moderators are capable persons, and serious about it, but I wonder how much time they will be able to devote to the task. Good to hear from you again, Mark. YIS

FYI, a blender does the bass-o-matic thing quite nicely. And, if you gut it first (filets are better), it's not too bad. Also you want to poach it a little to kill the parasites. Not a substitute for PB, though. BTW, that's 'nanner sammich'. Mighty good fare for any occasion.

Uuuuuuh, thanks for the points. I think. What do I do with them?

And to think I just PM'd him back because I received (by accident, I thought) his screen name and password. This revelation in this thread is interesting. Evidently he is a liar. To me he will remain without honor.

The person responsible for tour permits also does the permission thing, every outing, individually printed with all info except the signature...from a spreadsheet of the troop roster.

As W would say, I sum this up with one word, peanut butter and pickles. Best ever. BTW, I ruined a good blender once trying to make the stuff.

Beat you to it boleta! nya, nya, nya! (The preceeding announcement was in no way intended to offend but rather to offer a playful mood to an otherwise serious discussion) I just thought of something else. With FOS asking many of the same people and businesses for donations, why does Scouting need United Way at all? In a way it is double-dipping, which is OK by me except that units are cautioned against dipping from that well even once. Can anyone explain? It seems inconsistent.

Way back before I started giving DIRECTLY to the charity of my choice, I inquired about this. I was told by United Way that earmarked funds do go to the designated charity. However, that does not prevent United Way from reallocating other funds to achieve their funding goals for all the charities. Meaning...my interpretation now...designating a specific charity feels good. Therefore, I now donate directly to individual charities. That feels even better(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I've been told that people say things like this to avoid conflict. I believe that it actually compounds conflict... but perhaps postpones paying the piper (kind of like budget deficits). Still a deception, though. I guess if I was in your shoes, I would have asked directly, "Are you really trying to tell me I'm too old for this?" You wouldn't know if the answer was honest or not but if they said "yes" it wouldn't have left much doubt. Is there any possibility that knowing the organization too well WOULD in some way have detracted from your ability to do the task? I guess if they didn't elaborate, oh well.