BDPT00

Youth can always nominate adults, and those nominations carry a lot of weight during the selection process. I recall my wife's Silver Beaver. The selection and presentation was done entirely by a youth. Those concerned about Vigil selections should remember that those selections are made by youth. No adults are allowed a vote.

This is why we have a key-3. At the district level, the chair can be a community-connected guy with little Scouting experience. That person runs the district with the executive there to keep things running according to Hoyle. We have Robert Gates as that person at the national level (even though he has a Scouting background). Mike is there to carry out the decisions of the executive board. That's pretty basic, and doesn't address the power of the exec position, but bringing in an outsider wouldn't make much sense to me. We need a pro with a proven track record. I think it's a good choice.

I'm with Bad Wolf. This sounds like a very broad brush statement, and I don't agree with it at all.

Lowering the pockets? That's hysterical. Is he tiny? I understand that if he's wearing a small or medium shirt. That's a good one.

I know a few Scouters I don't care for, but it has nothing to do with knots or beads. Many comments here seem to be prejudicial (assessing someone based upon knots on a shirt), and I don't find the logic in that. I find it amusing that some find it worthy of mention that they only wear X of their Y knots, as if it's some sort of noble gesture. Of all the comments, I find the ones regarding beads (and how many) to be very odd. Are we actually criticizing someone for wearing beads?! That makes no sense to me. The beads are intentionally discrete (BP's idea). Wearing the WB nametag, patrol emblem, World Crest with beads, and especially a spoof knot ... Those things (to me) are a bit over the top (louder than they need to be). I wear beads when I think they're appropriate. Some feel that they're always appropriate. So what? I think the 'in your face' comments are mostly in the eye of the beholder, but I get the point, and I know some of the people you're referring to. They're just not on my list of friends. That way I don't need to worry about them.

Ahoydave, I'm very confused by your statement regarding religion, cognitive challenges, and parenting. Can you clarify that?

However people feel about knots, some are earned by way of a checklist, and others are by nomination. Training and position knots can be done by the individual. It's nice to surprise people with them, but the ultimate 'responsibility' for them is up to the individual who earned them. Some units will have a person designated to take care of the paperwork, because new folks often don't know about how this all works. Some like to wear all of their knots, and some prefer to wear none. It's up to the individual to wear whichever knots they choose, and for whatever reason. If it doesn't appear that someone else is going to fill out the paperwork for something you've earn, feel free to do it yourself.

And yet again . . . Thank you. I'll check it out. Never seen this site before.

Well! Thanks again. With the obvious exception of the narrators, the video was totally unscripted. These folks are real Scouters, sharing real opinions. Some might appear harsh, while others are very compassionate. All are sincere. I'm sure that the objective with the beginning was to attract the everyday-Scouter who can relate to the issues raised. These are very difficult circumstance for a lot of people, particularly those who've never encountered them before. It's heartbreaking when a unit hits a brick wall, and has decided that the only solution is to 'remove the tumor' (there, I did it again) and move on. If the family goes to another unit, it's now their problem. I've seen it happen, and I'm assuming you have, too.

Thanks, Bad Wolf. I speak a lot on this subject. My normal role is to play the part of the Scoutmaster who'd rather see the 'disruptive Scout' go to another unit. I think I say out loud what people are thinking. I do this as an introduction to a person like yourself who has dealt with this 24/7 for 20+ years. Our talks are often met with many tears from parents who felt that they were alone, and that nobody cared. Families join Scouting because they believe it to be a 'special place.' It sure can be, but it's too often not. We try to change that when DEs come begging for help. By then, a lot of feelings have been hurt, and bridges have been burned. We hope the video can help.

Tough crowd! These 11 families had a perceived problem. It happened to be in the form of a particular Scout. The solution ('fix') was that, "Either he goes, or we go." Like it or not, that was the situation. The point is that this isn't the only unit that deals with this issue, and something needs to be done. We either leave it up to each unit to deal with it as they are able when the time comes, or we try to do something about it. These kids have lots of opportunities to experience failure and rejection. They deal with their own battles every day. Scouting should offer an opportunity to succeed and to find acceptance.

Bad Wolf, I found your sensitivity comments interesting. Aren't we both lucky I don't happen to have a child with a food allergy? My comments were made to catch people's attention, and I see I caught yours. I've visited at least a dozen units over the past couple years, and have travelled several hundred miles doing so. These units were in a crisis because the leadership had no clue what to do with these kids. Had one unit lose 11 families because the troop committee chair stood his ground, and would not get rid of the Scout with special needs (And yes, this kid was a pain in the butt to all of those families, one mother of which holds a PHD in clinical psychology). They didn't know how to 'fix' him. I also happen to have a lot of experience with this, and I know exactly what I'm talking about. I would invite you to view the video, and would appreciate your feed back. I agree that there are plenty of places out there to find information, but we volunteers don't happen to know of those resources, and the crisis is 'right now' because families are ready to walk. We can't address every unit in the council individually, and we don't want to wait for the crises. This is an attempt to put out the fires before they start.

BSA doesn't yet offer training for working with kids who have neurological issues. These kids can be a real pain in the butt, and can disrupt normal troop operations and dynamics. In an effort to address how to work with these kids, our council has produced this video. It was placed on council's website in April. Check it out. We all know kids who don't fit the Norman Rockwell mold. Here's an opportunity to learn about them, and try to find effective ways to help them fit in, and to achieve success. It's pretty easy to find ... www.northernstarbsa.org ... then click on 'training' and then 'unit training resources'

Units who do this think they do it the 'right way.'

I'm seeing a few people suggesting 6 areas. Would also desire separation of staff from participants, and would like staff to be as close together as practically possible. Would this add 4 more areas?

Just curious . . . when an NYLT course has separate sleeping quarters based upon staff/participant, gender, and age, how many sleeping areas are necessary? Bathrooms?

To me, it's simple. The words are duty to God; not duty to a higher power. I won't have any problems in a BOR. That's simple, too. I'll do my best. I won't spend my time worrying about what somebody else somewhere might do when they sit on a BOR.

The book says only that one doesn't wear both at the same time. Frankly, I can't envision an occasion when one would need to wear both. This 'local option' thing can easily get carried away, because whatever is invented soon becomes tradition, and then policy (even when incorrect). If on the belt, which side? Says who? Arrow pointing up or down? Says who? I believe I've seen it written that the OA sash is not to be worn on the belt anyway. There are plenty of 'local option' variables that become rules. I tend to stick with Jamboree and NYLT uniforming. It's pretty simple. BDPT00

How you see it is one thing. What's 'by the book' is another. Sashes are worn over the right shoulder (not elsewhere). BDPT00

As usual, if one youth is elected, your unit can nominate anB adult. If three more youth are elected, you can nominate another. BDPT00

Just an aside ... it would only take 4 youth elected (not 6). BDPT00

Thank you, BDPT00

Our states make laws to protect us from each other (and the police are there to enforce those laws). Our federal constitution allows us to arm ourselves against an overpowering federal government. BDPT00

Back in the Delivering the Promise days, statistics showed that a troop with fewer than 21 Scouts was typically adult led. For us adutls, yes, a troop of 6 or 7 (that's not a troop; it's a patrol) is pretty easy to manage. Pretty easy to keep them interested in advancement, and really easy to transport, feed, and mentor. Camping would be simple. Having each others' backs would be natural, because they all know each other so well. With a motivated leader and some good kids, it's no surprise they all became Eagles. BDPT00

It's funny how this kid has already been convicted by a bunch of people who don't know any of the players. Has he fulfilled all of his requirements for Eagle? Proceed. Do we make a list of drop-dead offenses that prevent Eagle? One of them (in some places) used to be being openly gay. I'm sure we've got some potheads out there who see nothing wrong with this. Is tobacco and alcohol in the same league? Sexual activity? Cheating? Shoplifting? Skipping school? Where's the line, and who makes it up? BDPT00