Beavah

I both agree and disagree with Calico, eh? I think if we define Scout Spirit just in the negative - the scout is not a bully, the scout has not committed any felonies this year, the scout didn't vandalize the camp, etc. - then we really miss the point, eh? To my mind, bullying isn't a Scout Spirit issue. Bullyin' is a disciplinary issue, like theft or vandalism. If that's the bar for Scout Spirit, we're settin' it way too low. Scout Spirit and da Oath and Law are all about goin' out of your way to be a positive contributor to your troop and society. It means you go out of your way to do your duty to God and Country, even when it's annoyin' and inconvenient. It means yeh help other people even when you don't want to and you don't get anything for it. It means people should recognize your Trustworthiness, your Loyalty, your Helpfulness... your Reverence as being somethin' worth commenting on or applauding yeh for, because it's unusually positive for a lad your age. If we're not holdin' lads up to that bar - of doin' somethin' really positive rather than just not doin' something terribly negative - then I don't reckon we're doing our job of developing character. Where I agree with Calico is on his specifics, eh? I don't like judgin' lads based on single incidents. Yah, and I think that "do your best" comes into play, especially for boys in tough circumstances. A lad from a single parent home who struggles in school might be doin' his best to pull a "C" and make meetings only when he can bike or catch a ride. At the same time, that also means that a lad with a lot of advantages might not be showin' Scout spirit if he skates by with C's when he should be gettin' A's, or blows off meetings to play on his PS3. Beavah

Yah, generally speakin', I agree with EagleDad. I can certainly see, especially for a troop with that kind of expectation, that wearnin' a full uniform to a BOR would be a show of Scout Spirit. Honestly, in a troop like that, a choice not to wear a uniform is clearly a choice, and it's bein' made to be a bit of a rebel. Now, I would still coach that troop that wearin' the uniform should only be one aspect of Scout Spirit, not the be-all and end-all. In other troops, I've seen all kinds of circumstances where it's just fine for boys not to wear uniforms to BORs. Been part of lots of BORs at camp or campouts. They work just fine without a starched-and-pressed set of Oscar de la Rentas. Some units and districts confine BORs to one night a month. Often when a unit or district does that, yeh have some kids who are running from one event or commitment to another. So I've happily helped with BORs where a lad ran in 5 minutes late in a soccer uniform and cleats, or showed up direct from an orchestra concert in concert garb or whatnot. All things in balance, eh? Honestly, by the time we've hit Eagle Rank, I reckon we should be well beyond tryin' to enforce uniform method. By that point, the utility of a kids' program uniform is over. The lad has either internalized the values or he hasn't, and the conversation should turn on those values, not on what he happens to be wearin'. Beavah

Hiya scrinmemphis, Yeh probably need to get clear in your head what yeh mean by "BSA Policy". The BSA Rules & Regulations define policy. Some other documents define policy for within the BSA, but not for what happens within troops which are owned by Chartered Partners. Some other documents describe program guidance and practices. It's complimicated. There is no universal "BSA Policy" document. And the editing ain't all that great. Generally speakin, uniforming is part of the last group - it's part of program materials, which give guidance to various groups about how to implement the program. If I'm reading your inputs correctly, technically there is no BSA policy stating that a Scout must have a uniform. Not technically. Really! With that said, if the uniform is worn, it must be to the standard established in the Scout handbook. I wouldn't use "must." I'd use, "for full alignment with the program intent, it should be worn as defined in the Handbook and other program documents." Troops may not create their own version of the uniform, though many will "turn a blind eye" to the standards. Depends what yeh mean. Troops can choose to create a whole new uniform. And they can establish local customs about neckers, hats, patch wear, optional patches and such. BOR's, Encampments, etc. will often specify the uniform requirement for participation (Class A or Class B). As discussed in da other thread, BOR's sometimes do, but ultimately that is adding to the requirements and not allowed. Encampments, camporees and such very rarely specify uniform requirements. It's more common in trainings (WB, NYLT) because part of da training is learning how to use the Uniform Method. Aside from the all the great reasons that a Scout should be dressed in the BSA-defined uniform, if a Scout appears at such events and is not wearing a uniform... by BSA policy, can he be asked to leave? For a BOR, no. For da other things, BSA policy does not apply. It's the policy of the troop or the council which matters. Troops and councils are separate entities, and may require different things for participation in their events and on their land. So a troop certainly can require all the boys to be in uniform for a trip. If a Scout comes to a merit badge college and doesn't wear his uniform, can he be turned away iaw some official BSA policy? Same for Eagle BOR, Camporee, etc.? Again, there's no BSA policy. Whoever is running the MB College (troop or council) can set its own expectations. Same for camporee. For an Eagle BOR, most of us think a scout should be in uniform. Most will "strongly encourage" it. Ultimately, a uniform is not required, and cannot be required. The boy would likely prevail on appeal if that was the only reason he was denied rank. If I'm reading the thread correctly, since there is no BSA policy stating that he must have a uniform, the answer would be that he may participate - even without a uniform (not desired, but permitted). Generally, for most things, yest. On the other hand, if he does wear the uniform, it must be complete as defined in the Scout handbook. No. It's desired. Recommended. Strongly encouraged. Beavah

OGE, great question. It's so many things, isn't it? Does it oversimplify to summarize it as putting others before oneself? That encompasses a lot - doing good turns, taking responsibility, assuming extra duties with a cheerful spirit, putting the greater good first including the troop or patrol, helping the out new guy even if he's not popular, supporting leadership, never grumbling - just doing the right thing! Yah, I like SunnyD's answer! Contrary to OGE, I don't think Scout Spirit is a card or somesuch that gets trotted out to block a kid's advancement. I think that's an odd way of viewin' any requirement. Is da First Class swimming requirement a card that gets trotted out to block a kid's advancement? Nah, it's just one of the requirements, and a lad doesn't advance until he works hard and meets that goal. The Scout Spirit requirement is the only requirement that goes directly to our program goals of character development. It's the only requirement for each rank where character must be demonstrated, eh? That to me makes it the last, most important, and perhaps hardest of the requirements. Certainly the one that most kids have to work longer on than learnin' to tie a bowline. And just like the swim test, adults shouldn't "fudge" it, eh? Even if it takes a while for a lad to meet the requirement, or he gets behind his peer group. Beavah

Yah, lots of good responses on this prior thread on the same topic: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=187694#id_187995 Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

New handbook changes that a bit: "Proudly wear your uniform to troop meetings, ceremonies such as courts of honor, and most other indoor functions. When you're headed outdoors, you can pull on a T-shirt with Scout pants or shorts, or wear other clothing that is right for the events of the day." And that's only in a sidebar, not da main text. Book quotin' is better left to preachers and the Bible anyways. I like to see kids in full uniform at BOR's. I encourage it. But I care a lot more about seein' the kid than I do the clothes. The boy's responses and attitude overcome or reinforce his clothing impression just fine, and usually in a matter of seconds. Seen plenty of fully uniformed boys who didn't demonstrate the attitude or values of an Eagle Scout. Seen plenty of un-uniformed boys who did. If it's an interview, I hire the person, not the wardrobe. Maybe we should add a requirement that all BORs occur outdoors. Those were my most fun and memorable anyways. I reckon it would bring a swift end to the fist-like grip of da parlor scouters. [added] I think we also have to remember that we would be surprised by the comments the kids get from other kids about the uniform. And they're not goin' to be the same as the comments adults give adults that Eagle92 reported. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

No. If they choose to wear a uniform, they should wear it correctly (meanin' to represent scouting at scouting functions, not to endorse political candidates or products, that sort of thing). There's no requirement to own a uniform just like there's no requirement to own a Scout Handbook or a backpack. They're just tools. Good tools. Useful tools. But just tools. Uniforming is a Method of Boy Scouting. Like all da methods, some units do it better than others. Just like some units do more Outdoors or more Youth Leadership or more Advancement than others. And, just like Youth Leadership, or Outdoors, or Advancement, you'll run across some adults who don't believe in da Uniform Method or think it's just fine to go part way. Beavah

Feed the troll and he hits you with a stick, lol. Yah. Or bites da hand that feeds him. Are trolls the same color as the new Boy Scout shoulder loops, or the Venturing shoulder loops? Inquiring minds want to know. B

Yah, honestly, none of the folks workin' in those offices has the time to do the detailed cross-referencing of every little thing that seems to delight the fancy of some volunteers. If we had to pay for that level of continuity editing da materials and da uniform would be even more expensive, eh? BSA has thousands of documents, and supply has thousands of items with tight manufacturin' deadlines and even tighter promo/catalog deadlines. Movies with $100 million budgets make continuity errors all the time. What do yeh want for $15 a year? Don't sweat the small stuff. Sew on whichever color number yeh want, and spend your time worryin' about how to make your next den or pack meeting top notch for the boys. B

NT Times Magazine story on coming out gay in high school, showing a 13-year-old who is on the cover wearing an Explorer T-shirt Yah, just so much wrong there. Explorers is age 14 and up. Explorers is not scouting but rather part of LFL. And what 13-year-old has any real idea of what his sexual orientation is? Get real. Let the kid be a kid, eh? His parents and da other adults manipulatin' him for their sexual politics should get a swift, hard kick in the behind. The BSA policy has always been focused on the requirements for adult membership as a role model, example, and leader. We've always been far more understandin' of youth members and their struggles with such issues. And I reckon it's no surprise to anyone that almost all of our sponsors make a bright-line distinction between orientation and conduct. There's nothing new here other than that it takes a lot of time and input before yeh get a bunch of office workers and lawyers to do a better job of gettin' the wording right. Remember, these are just organizational documents, not statutes or regulations... and how many statutes and regulations get the wordin' right without a few rounds through the blender or the courts? Beavah

If a potential Eagle Scout doesn't have enough respect for himself or the BOR to not only show up in a complete uniform (shirt, pants, belt, and hopefully necker) that is IRONED... Yah, hmmmm... Has anyone tried to iron the new uniform? I'd think da thing would melt all over the iron. I actually sorta like dirty, faded, rumpled uniforms, eh? Tells me they've been worn. B

Yah, I reckon eisely has to judge it, eh? Though havin' a bunch of kids hugging the feet of a cardboard cutout of da president I reckon is right up there with "singin' the praises." The clip is from da "Jesus Camp" documentary, which really does feature some over-the-top indoctrination-style stuff that I reckon makes most Christians' skin crawl. We've got our whackos on da right, eh? And it's no fair goin' after motes in others' eyes without addressin' the logs in our own. Beavah

What is your expectation, Beavah? I was goin' to let some others jump in, but OK. I don't see da EBOR as a "job interview." I see it as an Eagle Review. An enjoyable discussion about Scoutin' with a boy who has spent a lot of time in the program. If it were a job interview, I'd be doin' a heck of a lot more testing and retesting. And if it were a prom, there'd be girls . As a district/council fellow, I like to see lads come in uniform. I don't get uptight about things like socks or wearin' tennies instead of hikers. I really dislike blue jeans with the shirt myself, but I don't pay much attention to official vs. unofficial pants. Don't get out a ruler for patches, and laugh along with the lad at unofficial or joke patches. Don't need a sash to tell me about the boy when I have an application in front of me that lists his badges. So while I like to see lads come in uniform, I'd never be so rude as to comment on their clothing, or so silly as to judge 'em on it. Done all kinds of reviews over da years with lads comin' from church in church clothes or from other events wearin' those clothes. Even done some in da field at camps wearin' rain gear. Those have been some of the best, to be honest. To my mind we're a kids' program, not a job interview. We shouldn't take ourselves too seriously. It's OK to encourage kids to be proud and wear their uniform well, but that's a program thing, not an EBOR thing. I'm not goin' to help the lad learn anything by nitpickin' somethin' at his EBOR if 3-7 years in his troop hasn't taught it to him. And I confess I worry a bit about da adults who try to turn an EBOR into a job interview, or a dissertation defense, or any of that stuff. I worry that they don't quite get it. But I'm interested in hearin' all kinds of other opinions! Beavah

Yah, skeptic and Eagle92, yeh raise some good questions about da role of uniformin' and a BOR, so I spun that topic off. My point had nuthin' to do with whether uniforming was appropriate. Sorry I wasn't clear. The point was whether it was really necessary for adults to give reminders because they think an Eagle candidate can't manage to dress himself without help. Seems like a lad goin' for Eagle should be able to handle puttin' on clothes without handholdin' from an Eagle Mentor. Just like all da other checklists and paperwork scrutiny and whatnot. And it seems like adults at an EBOR should handle what a person is wearin' in a polite, respectful manner as well, eh? I reckon commentin' on someone's clothing in a "job interview" would be a sign that the employer is a cad. If it's important, then teach it for each rank so he's ready by the time he's applyin' for Eagle. If it ain't important, don't add a bunch of reminders and falderal and paperwork hurdles just because it's Eagle and the nitpicky adults want to get their pound of flesh. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

In da parent thread, I made an incidental comment that lecturin' or remindin' an Eagle candidate that he had to wear official pants or somesuch might be a bit out of place (along with running him through adult pre-BOR paperwork and checklists and such). That thread was really talkin' about extra adult hurdles at EBORs. My comment seemed to generate some feedback, so I figured I'd move it to a new thread so the BOR thread wouldn't get hijacked. I've copied skeptic's response here since it was pretty clear: As far as uniforming goes, the district does not control a troop's uniforming habits. But, the scout needs to understand that the uniform is important to putting forth the proper image to the board. We have never had any scout contest this minor reminder. If you went to a job interview in jeans and wrinkled t-shirt, it unlikely you will give a good impression, unless it is for a job in which that attire is the norm; and even then, it might lessen your chances if most others came dressed more appropriately. I find it hard to believe that you would not consider uniforming important for a review at this level, one done outside of the troop. What do folks think of that? Do we feel an EBOR should be like a job interview? For what kind of job? Da original post said somethin' about the lad didn't have to own pants, just had to borrow some for one night. Does that make sense? An EBOR is sorta like a prom, yeh have to rent a tux for the night? Just curious how different folks approach it. Beavah

In our district, which runs all boards for the district, our coordinator goes over everything with a magnifying glass before even thinking about the review board. Once a board is scheduled, he has a check list that is used with the scout to try and make sure he comes totally prepared. One of the things on that list is complete uniform, including pants. Yah, so this is a bit of an example of what I'm talkin' about, eh? Fine-tooth-combin' the paperwork. Adult checklists before goin' to a Board of Review. Uniformin' lectures. Do we do that for First Class or Life Scout? If we don't think it's an important part of growth for those earlier ranks, why do we spring all that falderal on kids at the Eagle rank? Just seems like overkill, eh? Or, if we really think that teachin' 'em paperwork and checklists is an important part of our program, why don't we do the job right and start when they're younger? I honestly think sometimes it's da presence of all that paper that makes the adults all weird. Gets 'em focusing on signatures and procedures instead of doin' their job of focusing on the boy. B

That's really funny, Beavah - "I'm not into drugs, but here, let me give you a hit..." Nothing like promoting what you are supposedly against! Just respondin' to eisely. I was hopin' to get that $10 he was offerin'. Guess that makes me a dealer! B

Bacchus, that's a pretty broad brush you're paintin' with there, eh? Can you give a couple specific examples of what you're talkin' about? My personal take on da cost issue is that nobody's got a clue. There's just too many variables, because yeh can't use da current situation as a guide. Once yeh put new programs in place, people will change their behavior to "play" the new programs. And that's just too hard to predict. On average, though, I reckon it's goin' to be much more expensive than any of the folks who are advocatin' for reform are claimin'. B

Yah, da "one hour a week" can be hard on a spouse. I always tell younger fellas a few things. First is to be sure to share with your wife/husband why you care about scoutin' and working with young people. Talk a lot about your kid, but also about da other kids and your vision and why you think it's worth da sacrifice. Do it often. Share your frustrations and struggles and victories. Your spouse needs to see your scoutin' time as a charity/mission thing rather than as a fishin' trip with da guys. Involve her/him in a few things. Let 'em help out in town, or just have all da other scouters and spouses in your unit over for a BBQ occasionally. If your spouse knows and socializes with da other folks, it's easier. Especially if it gives 'em some buddies to hit da town with when the guys are out in the woods. Save at least as much special, focused time for spouse and family as yeh do for scoutin' - which means to think a bit before sayin' "yes" to any scoutin' thing. Make sure it's really goin' to be a good use of your time and what yeh care about. And every now and then do somethin' to tell da person you're leavin' at home for the weekend that you're thinkin' of 'em. Have flowers delivered while you're backpackin'. Arrange for a romantic Sunday night when yeh get back. Finally, if yeh have both male and female scouters, be alert to those issues, eh? It can be a bit rough for someone at home to imagine their spouse bein' out in da woods regularly with a person of the opposite gender. Especially that person's spouse isn't campin'. Like everything about marriage, it takes work, eh? But I've seen some folks wind up on da rocky shoals because of their scoutin', and yeh don't want to be there. Beavah

Yah, to be honest, the nitpicky stuff at EBORs drives me crazy, too. I suppose it gets boys ready for dealin' with their first IRS audit, but I'm not convinced dat's the sort of "citizenship" we want 'em prepared for. At the same time, I confess I don't much care for 15-minute "How do you feel about life?" EBOR's either. I think if a lad has put a lot of work into a project, and many years of his life into a program, that you honor that by giving him a thorough review. That's a way for adults to show that they care about him and the quality of work he's done. Imagine what any of us would feel like if we just completed a major project, worked long hours to get da final financial and summary report done, and our boss only said "That's nice." So I think all things in balance, eh? Seems to me a unit might be concerned if their boys were doin' all their merit badges at badge mill camps. That might be somethin' that makes for a good discussion among unit committee members on a board, and a committee pushin' the SM and boys back toward somethin' closer to da BSA program policy. Seems like a unit is completely overboard if they're "ranking" candidates. I've got no problem with a board that's interested in how (and how well) a lad did in completing his requirements, and whether they were a challenge for him. Sometimes yeh find they got pencil-whipped or he didn't learn much, and that's somethin' to address. I also don't find a problem with a board that questions a lad about poor grammar or writin'. Just part of helpin' him learn that working on such things is important. But I do get annoyed when either of those things becomes a page-by-page, line-by line critique or re-examination. My experience is these things go in cycles in a lot of units and districts, eh? They drift a bit far one way and then get pushed back. Overall, though, I gotta agree that da paperwork and review process for Eagle has gotten out of hand. I reckon it should be da next step after Life Scout, not an additional mountain. Beavah

Yah, da policy is no one-on-one, eh? How yeh solve no one-on-one is up to da boy/parent/MBC/SM/unit. Everything else in da literature is just suggestions or guidance on how yeh might go about it. Don't read too much into isolated words like "A Scout's buddy" or "A Merit Badge counselor must ensure." Meetin' in a public place is OK, havin' parents tag along is OK, havin' multiple kids do the badge together (even if they don't know each other beforehand) is OK, havin' a boy bring a buddy is OK, havin' a second registered adult is OK. Whatever. Just don't be dumb and do Home Repairs MB one-on-one in your dark, windowless basement because that's where your tools happen to be. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, I think in a lot of ways da measure of a man's character is whether he can speak hard truth to his friends, eh? I try not to get in da face of the liberal crowd, eh? I'm an old traditional conservative and mainline Christian. I disagree with 'em, but they're fellow Americans and I try to be civil and make the disagreements a reasoned argument over policy. Not up to me to reign 'em in when they get rude. That's up to their fellow liberals who are men and women of character. Now, when fellow conservatives (or folks who claim to be) start gettin' rude or ridiculous, it bothers me more, eh? Just like it bothers me more if my kids or relatives are misbehavin' than it does if someone else's are. Not my place to correct someone else's relatives. Is my place to pull my own aside. These days, I'm just sick to death of da stupidity and vitriol comin' from da pseudo-conservative side. It's disgustin' to be tryin' to associate the President with Lenin, Stalin, or Hitler. And it's intellectually dishonest (or just plain ignorant) to be framin' the public policy debate about health care in terms of communism, socialism, national socialism, marxist-leninism or any of that. I wish people would stop it. All it does is make folks with conservative viewpoints look ignorant. As to da Barney Franks or ACORNS of da world, that's for the folks on the other side of the aisle to speak out against. I don't mind da liberals lookin' ignorant. Beavah [And for da record, there's nothin' wrong with African-Americans being proud of the president, any more than there was of Irish Catholics bein' proud of John Kennedy or Italian-Americans bein' proud of Antonin Scalia or Wyoming bein' proud of Vice President Cheney. Or New Yorkers bein' proud of da Yankees, for that matter. There's Catholics that keep pictures of da Pope on their desk, and I don't reckon their coworkers should go up to 'em and start yammerin' at 'em about their Church's teachin' on birth control or their position on salvation by faith or whatnot. That'd just be rude, eh? Da rest of us might not understand it when a group celebrates an individual or team they call their own (especially the Yankees, for cryin' out loud) . But it's nothin' to get all torqued about. ] (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, another thing from da political porn factory, eh? A few of my friends send me these things regularly. People on both sides just go to these online outlets then mail this junk around because they want to get their emotions stoked. It's da political equivalent of takin' meth. I was never into drugs, porn, or political emotion-baitin' myself. I discourage 'em all in kids and adults. If yeh must have one from da other side, here's what a very quick YouTube search turned up, eh? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-y2QghS2gU Now both sides can feel a sense of righteous indignation and moral outrage. Or feelin' all politically titillated or whatever it is yeh get out of passin' this nonsense around. Da rest of us adults will still be workin' on our nation's problems, and helpin' our nation's kids/scouts. No time for media-induced moral indignation. Beavah

Yah, CrewMomma, I think yeh did what you could, eh? I reckon there are two or three different good reasons for removin' a lad from a unit. 1) He's more than the unit leadership can handle. Not all of us are good at handlin' all kinds of kids, eh? I reckon every volunteer has to be honest about that with themselves and with parents. That's not "giving up on a kid", that's recognizing our own limits. Findin' another troop or youth program that has the ability to serve the kid is a good thing. 2) His effect on other boys / troop culture is too harmful, and it's a better lesson for all of the boys if he's removed. That can be from one incident (like drug use or vandalism) or a long series of incidents. In my experience, da two things go together, eh? If a boy is more than the unit leaders have experience or time or resources to handle, then it's usually also havin' a negative effect on other boys and on da troop. Beavah

Yah, FrankBoss, nothin' wrong with that, eh? Lots of boys have individual interests that their buddies in the troop might not share. A trained MBC knows how to deal with this just fine. Sometimes they meet in a public place with other adults (like a Doc who meets with a boy interested in medicine MB at his office with other staff present and doors open), sometimes they ask a lad's parent to come along and sit in, sometimes they'll buddy kids up from two different troops. Lots of ways to skin a cat, eh? Encourage the lad, and then let the adults worry about how to manage no one-on-one. Beavah