Beavah

You can't absolutely say "EDGE" method doesn't work. Nor can yeh "absolutely say" that leprechauns don't keep pots of gold at da end of rainbows. But that' not da question, eh? The question was whether there was any research evidence at all that even suggested that EDGE was worthwhile. The answer to that is "no." In the olden days, conservative fellows like me would call such a thing "snake oil." Now I guess we're all supposed to take it on faith because we like leprechauns in da month of March. For novice instructors (like teenagers), the EDGE model is about as good as any other model Yah, hmmm.... And your evidence for that is what exactly? That a few Aussies use somethin' similar to teach canoeing? That it was developed and published by the BSA rather than anybody who does professional work in education or training? As yeh point out, yeh need to define "as good as" and "novice instructors". And then yeh would need to conduct an experiment or gather data. What yeh have is a marketing claim. What quazse is lookin' for is real reviewed research. There's a difference. Beavah

It's a good generic model for skills instruction, and is based on other models for skills instruction Yah, that's a claim, eh? Qwazse was lookin' for real data to support your claim. Do yeh have any? The folks I know who do academic education stuff tell me it's an unsubstantiated and mostly groundless claim, though the model is so vague and generic to be almost useless on its face. From what I've seen of the many ways people think they're doin' EDGE properly, and da equally varied and not very great results, I tend to agree with da pros I know. Interestin' that jet526 thinks it comes out of da Hersey & Blanchard stuff. That's organizational behavior literature, not education/learning literature. Very different beasts, as OGE describes. Beavah

So, please, help me out - give me 5 or 6 specific items we need to work on. Da quote yeh used was me talkin' about a troop I'd worked with, eh? Not about you, BA. None of us here can offer particular guidance to your troop, BrentAllen. As yeh say, we can't see it. What we can see is da way yeh talk and think about it. So the only advice we can give is advice to you as SM, based on what we see from what and how you're sayin' things. That's the feedback we're tryin' to give. Now, if it were real life and you were in my council, I'd go much slower, eh? Just chat with yeh at roundtable or 'round a campfire or after a meeting here and there. Build up a relationship, plant seeds slowly so as not to trigger the knee-jerk negative response to any question or suggestion that yeh have. Do more with example and a lot less with words. But this is a virtual world, and yeh can't do that as easily. So yeh just put a few ideas out there and hope that the fellow on da other end of the wire is a good and thoughtful sort who will take it for what it's worth and think about it beyond his initial defensive reaction. I reckon most scouters are that sort. You included. So yeh have my feedback already, eh? It'd be very similar to Eagledad's. Yeh don't talk enough about kids compared to the really great Scoutmasters I know, includin' old Green-Bar. I tell business people that no matter what they have on their wall as their corporate mission, yeh can always tell what their real mission is by where they spend their money and their time. Yeh spend your time here talkin' about methods and program achievements with great passion, startin' with uniform. But as several of us have mentioned, that's adult stuff, and usually reflects an adult-directed focus. It's also the external, easily-measurable stuff, not the harder, internal stuff. It's just a guess from afar, eh? Could be totally off base. But as yeh say, feedback is a gift, and we took an oath to help at all times, even when our tools aren't that great. Beavah

LOL. Yeh must be jokin', qwazse. There is no scholarly work on nor support for EDGE. As far as I can tell from folks in da field (I know a few), it's made-up poppycock. Beavah

Yah, hmmmmm.... Yeh see that cliff? You're standin' on da edge and the ground is shaky. Step slowly and carefully away from da edge! Welcome to the forums, security_man. I think when yeh run into a situation in a kids' program where there's some controversy, it's best for everyone to take a step back from the edge, eh? Stop worryin' about quorums and bylaws and who gets to "win" on the issue. Go back to being adults just trying to do somethin' fun and interesting for kids. And that means that, since there's controversy, yeh should set the decision aside for the moment and go back to talking about your vision for the program. What is it that yeh all can agree on? What does building character in youth mean to everybody? What does showin' character mean? Now, if the real dispute is about vision for the program, then yeh either talk that out or the Chartered Organization decides it for you. It's their program. But if the dispute is just about some part of the program, like whether to buy a new trailer or new tents, then like good adults yeh just step back, get more input, and work through what will help the vision the most. When in doubt, trust the SM and the SPL, because they're the ones in the thick of things. If yeh have more details, perhaps we can offer yeh more advice. At this point all I can say is that goin' down Disputatious Alley and quibblin' about quorums oft as not tears a troop apart. Beavah

I remember bein' like BrentAllen, eh? Most of us do. I was SM for a troop that was more active in the outdoors than what BrentAllen describes, a bit less well uniformed (no socks ), probably a bit more sound in terms of adult relationships and a bit less on advancement. Took me many years to figure out patrol method and real youth leadership. Oh, we were better than some, even many, at least in our own minds. But yeh don't have real youth leadership unless the youth can change da rules and culture and way things are done. I reckon BA's not quire ready for thinkin' further on things at da moment, eh? He's got to get a bit further along before he's ready to see past the methods in the way Eagledad and Eamonn and I am tryin' to describe. Now, havin' been a unit leader in a bunch of different units and since spent many years as a commish helpin' many more, yeh get to realizing that what matters is the boys, not the program. All of the methods, as Eagledad describes, just exist to give da lads the opportunity to make choices and experience results. The real best troops realize that, and their attention is focused on the kids, not the methods. In fact, they're always tinkerin' with da methods to set things up to meet the needs of the kids they have. If yeh ever met Bill Hillcourt, Bill was like that, eh? Didn't care much for static, parlor, book-based scouting. Liked things out in the field where yeh are adjusting things dynamically. That's one of the reasons I think Rover-aged young folks make the best scouters, as most of da world has discovered. They are less likely to get caught up in da books and methods and more likely to keep that dynamic, outdoor focused youthful side of scoutin' going. Us older folks belong on the wisdom and support side where we can't do as much harm. Beavah

I suggest Valium. If you aren't getting complaints, yeh probably aren't running a youth program.

Chilly weather to be canoein', but not a big deal if the lads or the group are prepared. I reckon I'm north of you and I've been out this year. Water levels are fun right now. Not sure anybody could promise on a canoe trip that there won't be a capsize. Beavah

Yah, yeh get a permit from whomever owns the land, eh? And da rules are often area by area, so yeh have to check on the particular national forest or park (or state forest or park, or city park) that you're visiting. So if you're visiting the Bridger Teton National Forest, yeh get a permit from the Bridger Teton ranger district that covers da area you're traveling. Don't ever pee in or take a dump in rivers is da general guideline. It's a good one, since it works almost everywhere. It's almost always better to pee where nitrogen-fixing bacteria in da soil can get to work on things, or where sun can dry it out to basic salts. LNT is an ethic, though, not a rule set. The ethic is to learn and investigate and think carefully about all of our actions so as to minimize impact. Blue water sailors will pee overboard in da ocean, but that's the exception that proves the rule. Compared with freshwater river corridors, there are a lot of nitrogen-fixing critters in da sea. And they're not drinkin' from it, eh? LNT.org has a number of pamphlets that describe best practices in a wide variety of activities and types of country (desert, rainforest, river corridor, ocean, deciduous, high alpine, western US, eastern US, etc.) Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, BrentAllen, that's a lot of stuff about one or two more methods that yeh seem to have interest in and many fine accomplishments, eh? I commend yeh for those. And it's nice to be in a highly resourced area with a lot of youth, but yeh seem like you're doin' a great job makin' use of those resources to their fullest. But there's not a thing there about Aims, eh? So I'm not sure how you or your CO are really evaluatin' what you're doing. Or rather, I think yeh might be evaluatin' off methods and outward appearances. We all have to be careful not to confuse Methods for Aims, eh? Character's an inward thing, as are fitness and citizenship. Accomplishments, badges, and gear are nice and all, but they're not why we're here. If I were just jawin' with yeh around a half-dozen campfires or so late at night, I'd try to draw yeh out on kids and Aims some more. And then, when the time seemed right, mention that da methods yeh seem to talk about least are Adult Association, Personal Growth, and Values. That mentoring bit that's most focused on kids and aims and da internal side of things, rather than achievements and the external side of things. Just to plant a seed, nothin' more. Best to yeh, and thanks for everything you're doin' for the lads in your program. Beavah

Yah, come on people, even I'm not this cynical, and I've had years of practice, eh? . There's a G2SS for da same reason there's a Patrol Leader's Handbook. Lots of people thought it might be helpful for folks who are planning scout outings or activities. Especially for novices, it can be nice to have some basic information. Back in the day, to put it together, they just pulled stuff from a variety of different sources they thought might be helpful, eh? What's been odd about da G2SS is that morphed over the years into some sort of uber-book in folks' eyes. I kinda see ACP&P goin' the same way. Irving may have started it with da whole "bold for policy" thing, but honestly, I think it's driven by nutty volunteers who keep pestering national for more and more rules and clarifications. If people paid as much attention to patrol method as they do to G2SS and Advancement, I reckon over time the Patrol Leader's Handbook would be pushed that way as well. . Remember, Irving is in the materials publishing business. They mostly produce what their customers seem to want. All yeh need to do is read these forums to see how many people love bashin' each other over the head with rules quoted out of this, that, or da other book, and how many more are absolutely off-their-rocker paranoid about lawyers and lawsuits. We're da folks generatin' this stuff, because it seems like we want or need it. My problem with it is that it's not doin' a lick for real safety for the kids, nor is it at all effective for protection in court. The net effect of the thing has been just to drive people batty. The new rewrite and change in tone is an improvement, movin' back toward da original purpose and away from the rulebook thing. Problem is it's just too big, and even with that da sections are just too cursory to be useful. If Irving keeps wisin' up, I think they'll pick up on da LNT materials model, eh? (Yeh listening, Richard? ). If yeh look at LNT, they have the general training on core principles, then publish short individual supplements on LNT in deserts, LNT canoeing, LNT in rain forests, on and on. A short, general outing safety principles book / training with individual supplements for different types of activities would be a nice way to go, especially if yeh could do a just-in-time push of da supplement to trip planners. Maybe with the online Tour Plan. Check that you're doin' whitewater, get the whitewater pamphlet sort of thing. In da end, though, the staff gets pushed to do what we all ask for, eh? If everybody keeps callin' up asking for rules for power tools, then they'll generate a whole raft of rules for power tools. If someone on da committee gets alarmed by one odd radio water-drinking contest fatality of a non-scout, then water drinking contests become unauthorized activities, even though a bit of that sort of hydration encouragement would have saved us lots of grief and probably a few lives. We get what we ask for. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, what everyone else said. Yeh then seem to be asking about the second bit, number 9(2). Yes, those must also be done on a scout campout. Not on a day trip. Not with the local REI on his own. And yes, as MB counselor you should not award him the merit badge until he has satisfied you that he has met all of the requirements. Beavah

BrentAllen, I don't disagree with yeh. That seems da right approach for you and your unit. Even one that I encourage in others, eh? But then, by your own admission, you're in a very highly resourced area, with a very highly resourced troop. And yeh seem to talk with great passion about some methods (uniforming, advancement, one or two others). Ol' Bill was quite da advocate for outdoors and patrol method, but yeh don't quite show Kudu's passion for those things. We all make choices about where our hearts and emphases lie. Now, if I were your commish, I might be talkin' with yeh a bit more about Aims, eh? Uniforming, advancement, and some of da others can be great tools, so long as yeh know what you're trying to build. I'd chat with yeh over coffee or a campfire and see if I could get yeh to talk about kids instead of methods. Kids, and where they're at, and what you'd like to see 'em become and how you'd like to help 'em grow. What are your Aims for kids? What are your CO's Aims? The parents'? Then, even though yeh live in a highly-resourced area, I'd at least take a look at resources. Human, particularly. Do yeh have the staff that shares the vision for kids? Are there fears and hangups that get in the way of stuff like independent patrol outings? That push toward token advancement? Jblake had your zeal for da youth leadership method, but didn't have the human resources to make it work. Zeal has its traps, especially if it's not focused on Aims. Da other half of the human resources side is local youth demographics, eh? If yeh live in an area with a lot of youth, odds are yeh can operate in a way that pushes out any kids yeh don't want or who don't respond to da methods you've chosen. But if yeh don't have that same large pool of youth, yeh have to go farther toward meetin' them where they're at, rather than havin' them come to where you're at. But da biggest thing is kids and Aims. Sounds like you're doin' fine on program and da methods you've chosen, but I'd want to hear yeh talk more about boys. And then maybe pick da methods to suit the boys, rather than vice versa. Beavah

JTE is a set of standards that indicate how well you are delivering the program to the youth in your unit. It will point out where you need to make changes/improvements in your unit and its program. It's a self-evaluation tool, so it will help you focus on what is important and you will learn from this. Yah, hmmmmm.... Do we really believe this? I'm not sure that's entirely how or why it was developed, and I can't say as I'm convinced that that's what it achieves. What yeh have with JTE are some markers that are associated with good units, but just focusin' on the markers is no guarantee of success. Let's take da obvious one: filling out the JTE form. That means that yeh have enough volunteer interest and loose volunteer time to spend on that kind of paperwork task, eh? That, indeed, is a marker for a strong unit, eh? Lots of volunteer time and energy available even for paperwork tasks. But it doesn't mean that if yeh fill out the form on time that you're closer to being a successful unit. Same could be said for many or most of the items, eh? They can be markers of a strong unit, but just doin' the things listed, by themselves, won't make yeh a strong unit. Beavah

Yah, hmmm... Ok, I'm goin' to be charitable here. I think yeh can in a few cases make an argument that a Section 504 kid with a truly severe handicap gettin' school services with full nursing care is just goin' through the motions. It's not necessarily a good public policy choice, though it does at least relieve their primary caregiver for a bit. And I reckon we can all sympathize with a parent who realizes their child's academic experience is negatively impacted by having disruptive students monopolize a teacher's time. There really are classrooms out there that are more like "holding pens". I can even see an argument for paying for a free public education only once... Yeh fail the first time, second try is on your own dime. Heck, maybe it should be like college and the family should have some financial skin in the game the first time around. But beyond that, SP, I think yeh jumped da shark. Like as not, the lad who failed a round of classes did so because mom and dad were getting divorced, or he was strugglin' with a round of depression, or last year's math teacher didn't teach him a thing and now he's just lost. All kinds of reasons, eh? And none of 'em amount to "uneducable". And if yeh just shuffle these kids out the door, then what? What do yeh suppose da social costs of that are? Of a large, uneducated young populace with no opportunity? I'll give yeh a hint. Think Palestine. Throwin' rocks, looting, or even strapping a bomb to your chest starts to look pretty good. A year of prison costs a heck of a lot more than a year of school. Now I don't know what da answer to lack of school motivation is, eh? I'll leave that to Lisabob and folks who know more than I do. But if I were a betting man, I'd say it's stability and support at home, and high quality teaching at school, starting early in life. The first doesn't exist for some kids, eh? Da second has to do with whether or not we resource it. Beavah

Yah, blue cards are just an optional record-keeping tool, eh? Like da meeting plan checklists in program helps. Seems like in some areas they take on an official life of their own. I think that happens because da local volunteers aren't well trained and one of 'em gets a burr in his saddle about somethin'. Never could figure out how anybody could read da signatures on those little things, especially da beat up ones from camp.

So civilians like President Obama, can pretty much say "go do this .... to support our national interest." Of course they can, just like they can order 'em to wear pink tutus I suppose. Da question is whether they should. What makes the best policy? As OGE and others point out, that isn't always clear. We support da Saudis because Fahd and Abdullah were good at schmoozing with our elite and providing oil. Even though their family continues to finance Wahabbi Islamists throughout their nation and the world. Not Al Queda itself, eh? I agree with jrush on that. But the fertilizer that nurtures the growth of Queda and similar groups throughout the area. Keep da young ignorant and radicalized. So some caution is in order, but some faith as well. Radical islamist notions thrive in dictatorships. They don't do at all well when there is more freedom and self-determination. Supportin' freedom and self-determination is not only consistent with our values, it's good long-term strategic sense. President Obama is in a unique position, because he resonates with da youth of the middle east in a new way. A black fellow named Hussein can be POTUS? Heck, I'm named Hussein! He was even born in Kenya. I think Israel also did a good turn with da prosecution and jailing of their former president. The Jews can hold their leaders accountable? Heck, WE can hold OUR leaders accountable! I'm in favor of da Arab Spring. Feels like 1989. I think we should support it gently, while lettin' it be theirs. And I'm OK with neutralizing the weapons we and the soviets gave to old despots and dictators, but no more. But there are risks, fer sure. Low education levels, too much entrenched tribalism. Mostly, I hope we can get over our old prejudices when confrontin' a new world. Low education and tribalism aren't the same thing as radical Islamism. We didn't do so well with Russia, and turned what could have been a bold new friendship into a lingering cold acquaintance, just because we couldn't get out of da Cold War mindset we were in. Al Queda is history if freedom makes any further inroads into the mideast. That will kill it more surely than if we nuked the entire area to glass. Da question is only whether the young people who made it happen see us as their friends and example, or somethin' else. Beavah

We respond, "no, don't ask them. Hold an election. Let the team come tell them about OA. Yah, hmmm... So it still sounds like you're standing by da quote above. No cheap shot intended, just a sense that a unit leader could take from the tone of your comments. To my mind, of course the SM should ask the boys. It's their time and their meeting. Why not have one of the boys call and ask for da SPL's contact information, sayin' he'd like to make a brief presentation to the PLC at their next meeting? And if yeh really have a reluctant SM, "just hold an election" isn't goin' to win him or her over, eh? Nor is da implication that they have no interest in honoring their best kids. Yeh need to ask for a cup of coffee to listen to the SM and figure out what's up and how to address it. Worries about losing kids? Concern about secret societies? OA like every district or council function is a service to units, eh? An optional supplement or enhancement of their program for youth. Yeh gotta come at it that way. Might be they don't want da service and are doin' just fine honoring their kids on their own. Might be yeh haven't pitched da benefits to the unit in the right way. Might be last year da lads didn't show up in full uniform . Don't come at it with da sense that OA is important. Come at it with a sense that their troop is important. Beavah

This isn't an economic issue. It is the expectations set by the Troop. Of course it is, eh? Even when it's an economic issue that's the case. In a lower economic area, a troop can still manage full uniforming, if that's how it chooses to allocate its resources. Either with funds goin' to uniforms instead of to somethin' else or with volunteer time goin' to da uniform bank instead of somethin' else. How each unit and its adults spend resources (including time and energy) is a culture thing, just like BA suggests. Some units have a real culture of youth leadership and patrol method. Some units have a real culture of outdoor adventure, others don't. Culture is generally defined by da things yeh choose to prioritize without a second thought. If uniformin' is a cultural priority, then folks will prioritize spendin' time and money on uniform instead of rain gear or havin' separate patrol gear or driving 5 hours for da climbing weekend. Even da most well off troop doesn't have the time and resources to prioritize everything. When done right, da culture derives from the Aims, both da BSA's and the CO's, so that da things that are prioritized are the ones that matter. And those should be different between units. Practically speakin', though, it comes mostly from da adult leaders and where they want to spend their time and energy. Troops with uniform-focused leaders develop uniform-focused cultures. Troops with outdoor-focused leaders develop outdoor-focused cultures. So ideally, a troop has to choose its leaders to match its Aims, so that the troop develops an Aims-focused culture instead of gettin' bogged down in individual methods. This is where I find many troops screw up, eh? They get caught up in advancement, the method, and they never really focus on what they want to achieve through advancement. "We want to get boys to Eagle" or "We want to make First Class in a year". That's what leads to badge mills. Or they get caught up in patrol method "300 feet" or "patrol yells" but not what they want to achieve through patrol method. Often, when pressed, da Aims are a made-up afterthought rather than their first thought. Uniforming is a lot like that, eh? With a wide range of post-hoc justifications like "esprit de corps" or "economic leveling", even though da unit never talks about spirit or economic leveling in how they use the other methods, or how they would change uniforming to better achieve those things. Da best units don't ever say "we're a full uniform troop", or "300 feet", or "we get lots of boys to Eagle" because those are just methods. They instead talk constantly about Aims, eh? What they want boys to develop. They talk about character and what that means and fitness and citizenship and what they want boys to really leave scouting with. And then they and da kids constantly fiddle with all the methods to keep doin' a better job on the Aims. Beavah

Yah, it's still here, Crossramwedge. Sometimes the moderators move topics to different forum sections. Since yours had to do with an advancement issue (MB counselors), it seems to have ended up there so that more people who track that kind of thing can see it and respond to it. Beavah

We've had far too many of the reluctant SM's say, "we'll ask the boys if they are interested and let you know". We respond, "no, don't ask them. Hold an election. Let the team come tell them about OA. Yah, hmmm... not to change the topic, but it seems the topic has run its course anyways... Why would the OA representatives want to talk the SM into undermining the PLC? It's the PLC's role to plan and run a meeting. So of course the SM should ask the PLC boys if they are interested in changing their meeting plans for the night to incorporate an OA presentation. I confess I find that the OA undermining youth leadership and the patrol leaders to be far more upsetting than the OA showing up in just shirts. Who was making these calls anyway? Da OA youth or the adults? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

The appearance of a book's cover is important. Ultimately the content of the book is far more important, but making the book attractive and interesting looking in order to get potential buyers to pick up the book in the first place is one of the functions of the cover. LOL. Yah, well, if that's the case then I reckon da BSA uniform fails completely for kids. Never once have I seen a boy-scout-aged lad walk in to a troop and say "I want to wear THAT!" And it also gets us back to my point in that other uniform thread. What do scouters look like in the uniform? Like beknotted weather balloons? Lots of different things make for a first impression, and clothing is low on my list. A courteous greeting and a handshake are up there, and I confess I like to see a bit of fun and chaos among boys rather than too much starch and polish. Now BA is right in that total weakness at usin' a tool can compromise the product. I think that happens a lot with youth leadership and especially Patrol Method, which is why Kudu rants about it so. But lots of fine troops get by on what I'd consider half-youth leadership, quite a few do OK without 300 feet of separation, and I reckon plenty do just fine on half-uniforming. Just depends what your Aims are, eh? Beavah

Nah, jrush, I'm still with General Powell and those who understand the military, eh? Yep, the "people" can through their elected president order the military to do whatever. Much like da people of California can order their government to have mandatory tax caps and mandatory expanding services in a dozen areas. How's that workin' out? The military is a policy tool, and a blunt one. Yep, yeh can try to use da military as a relief agency, but what yeh get is a bunch of 20-somethings with little real relief training, no understanding of the language or culture or local economy, and little comprehension of the medical needs of indigenous populations. For relief in an area, yeh want the NGOs. Yah, sure, with support from the military because they're good at shippin' stuff in bulk. If the military were a precision tool, then those fellows flyin' the pickup mission for the downed U.S. pilot would have understood Arabic and French, would have known that they were in a likely friendly area of Libya, and would have recognized that a bunch of folks from da village were coming out trying to help the downed pilot themselves. That way they wouldn't have gunned down a 4-year-old friendly. If da military were a precision tool, we would have had Bin Laden back in Tora Bora in '02, and we wouldn't have to deal with monthly accidental drone strikes on weddings or a group of over-enthusiastic 20-something soldiers erasing 2-3 years of hard work with smiling pictures over the bodies of dead civilians. Anybody seen NGOs or diplomats smiling over dead civilians recently? None of that is faulting the military, eh? That's all ordinary fog of war and behavior in war stuff. But it illustrates the point. Yeh call the military when yeh want to blow something up, and explosions are blunt. Even from precision-guided munitions. So, quite simply, no matter what yeh tell the military to do, it isn't the right tool for most jobs. It'll salute and go try, but it just isn't capable. As for da rest, it's King Abdullah and the House of Saud, by the way. And his family most definitely does fund what any rational person would call Wahabbi religious extremists. If he were really serious about reigning that in, he'd execute some of them, eh? But that's not the way the Kingdom works. Bin Laden was pretty far down the family tree, and even him they only exiled. 'Fraid I lost yeh when yeh went off into "necessary and proper" and all that. But I did pick up on the last bit, that we should play realpolitik and support friendly dictators against their own people. The devil is "stable" and gives us oil and all that, so it's best to make bargains with the devil. How'd that work for the Soviets? How'd that work for us in Latin America? How'd that work for us in Iran? in Iraq? in Egypt? Demographics and time are on the side of the protesters in the mideast. So is what's just plain right. What yeh propose as realpolitik is really just a lack of strategic understanding. It's in our national interest to encourage freedom. And it's contrary to our national interest to support murder and oppression. Nobody is proposing direct democracy in middle eastern nations. Given education levels and da lack of a sizable middle class, representative democracy will be quite a stretch for them. Heck, it's becomin' a little shaky for us. What we're supportin', though, is self-determination. Or, in realpolitik terms, we're supportin' those with the stronger hand. Da young folks in these countries have the stronger strategic hand, and there's no sense in supportin' octogenarian dictators now when the young are the future. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, we tie ourselves in da most amusin' intellectual knots tryin' to justify bad behavior sometimes. I might actually start to buy into Fscouter's cognitive dissonance thing. If the troop said "No", SR540, would yeh show up at their meeting anyways because you "have a job to do?" Of course not. You recognize that it's their time, their space, their meeting and you are requesting an invitation to come into their scouting "home". Yeh don't just show up uninvited. You are guests at their meeting. How you should behave as good guests, how you should dress, etc. is on you. How they should behave as good hosts is on them. This thread isn't talkin' about how the election team should have behaved, I think we mostly agree on that. We're talking about how the host unit's adults should have behaved toward their guests. Hospitality is one of da oldest, most important "Timeless Values". In just about every religion and culture on da planet yeh are to treat a visitor with the utmost generosity and courtesy - as though you were welcoming your deity who is disguised as a lowly human. These scouters failed that test, and did not live up to their Oath or our Timeless Values. . I get their intentions, but they were misguided. They were focused on the behavior of others, when in choosing their actions they should have been focused on their own behavior. If da pastor of their CO had shown up, would they have sent him off to da uniform closet? Of course not. They would have focused on how they should behave in welcoming the IH as guest. Courtesy means yeh treat even the lowliest as yeh would the king. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Of course these methods are all ideals, and there are a ton of people working hard at improving, but at what point do we settle for second best and quit trying? Nah, jblake, da methods are just methods, eh? They're tools, not ideals. The Ideals are the Aims: character, fitness, citizenship, and whatever else da mission of the Chartered Organization embraces. If yeh think of da methods as tools and the aims as the project, that's about right, eh? Yeh use tools to build a house. Being a good tool user is a fine skill. When building a house it's good to have a talented carpenter and plumber and a fellow who is a whiz with drywall. But the point is to build a house, not to be good with tools. As you yourself discovered, if yeh focus too much on being perfect at any one tool like youth leadership yeh might become a fine craftsman, but end up without a house. Even being good with all the tools in the toolbox doesn't mean you'll end up with a house, eh? And houses are different, eh? If you're building a beach bungalow that's different than building a castle or a townhouse. Sometimes yeh need to focus on stonemasonry and not carpentry. Same with scouting. Some folks and COs believe that how yeh dress is an important part of character. They're lookin' for excellent landscaping, and might use more of that uniform tool. Others don't see clothing as a part of character, eh? They're building perhaps a townhouse or apartment, where the emphasis is more on living together skills and yeh only need landscaping on the outside at the entryways. Less uniform, but more patrol method or whatever. I always tell folks da most important thing in Scouting is to have a vision for your Aims within the unit. That's what yeh never settle for second best on, and always work toward doing better on. Because that's the part where you're actually talking about kids, not just program. Da Methods are just tools. Yeh choose da right ones for the job yeh need to get done, and don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough. Beavah