Beavah

Am I the only person on the planet who has never ever played Paintball and Laser Tag? You and I might be, eh? I think it's an age thing. My knees still hold up for backpackin', but not for runnin' around playing the equivalent of capture the flag. Paintball these days currently averages close to 10 million participants per year, of which a bit less than 2 million are "frequent" players. I think the LaserTag numbers are substantially higher, with a slightly higher percentage of "frequent" players. B

And by either definition, I join in the opinion of Mr. (William D.?) Boyce. I perhaps don't mind 'em as much as he does, but I wouldn't be at all sad to see the things go. B

Yah, Jambo is fun, eh? It's a great experience to be around such a large group of fellow scouts, and a delightful carnival. But if you're lookin' for real personal growth in skill and character, the boys should run their own high adventure treks. For one thing, it guarantees they'll all be able to go (while Jambo participation is limited, eh?). For another, yeh can run several treks for the cost of one Jambo the way these things are typically priced. But most importantly, the boys get challenged to their level of ability as a team. Now, if cost is a problem, the national high adventure bases aren't always the best way to go, eh? They do provide a nice, canned program, but they are still a bit pricey. Don't forget that there are a lot of council-based high adventure programs that are very strong, and a bit cheaper than national. But da biggest cost savings comes when yeh run your own high adventure, contracting with a regular outfitter. You could, for example, run a 1-2 week backpackin' trek on Michigan's Isle Royale for substantially less cost than Philmont, or set up a 1-2 week whitewater clinic/adventure for less cost than Seabase. What you're tradin' is the kids' (and scouters') time and effort doing the planning for the extra dollars you would pay for a completely "canned" program. To my mind, that's an excellent trade, because we want the kids to be doin' planning anyway, and bringin' those skills back to da troop.

Also, you cannot turn over all adult functions to the boys. Yah, this is true, eh? But I think there's room here, and we have to be careful not to discount the lads too much. I'm not meanin' to pick on ASM59, but I think he gives a bunch of examples of what we often assume boys can't do, but where our assumptions may benefit from reconsideration. For example, I'm not sure why a boy can't make a reservation at a campground. I've known quite a few troops where adults never make campground reservations. I'm not sure why a small group of boys can't set up a fundraiser? Seen plenty of lads and young ladies in crews do it just fine. If the QM can't drive and he needs a car for some reason, I reckon most lads are capable of askin' a friend or a relative. They do it for all da other errands and social engagements, eh? I'm not sure why one adult would be doin' all the signoffs? A lot of units use PL's or older scout instructors to sign T-2-1 at least. Even fillin' out an Advancement Report Form and droppin' it in the mail doesn't seem beyond the abilities of a scout of average intelligence. And I bet the lads would do better at online advancement than most of da adults! Just a different perspective, I guess. B

Nobody's advocatin' playin' paintball as a Scoutin' activity. Just that the character thing runs both ways. It's not an example of good character to be untruthful about the reason for a prohibition. If BSA is philosophically opposed to "wargames", and that's reflected by a national executive board vote rather than just da opinion of someone in an office, that's fine eh? But we shouldn't be makin' false claims about the safety of a popular sport. For lots of folks, that sport is their livelihood, eh? False claims can do harm to real people. B

Yah, especially given our (much worse) safety record in other areas, eh? Paintball at commercial facilities is safer than Scouting by quite a bit, in terms of both deaths and serious injuries. More popular, too. I wonder if the BSA injuries cited were prior to the revised eye protection / goggles standards. The fatalities mentioned were bizarre product defect stuff involving CO2 cartridges breaking off their regulators and flying off and hitting someone. Three fatalities in ten years with 8 million users per year is extremely low. We kill more people just at Philmont. I'm not a paintball player, eh? I just hate to see folks misrepresent da truth. If we're gonna ban paintball capture-the-flag because it's too military or we don't like kids playin' "wargames" or we like havin' a smaller market share of youth each year that's fine. I'm happy to support if it's coherent and sensible. We shouldn't pretend it's a safety issue, though. Thanks for postin' da letter, GW. There's a lot of "internal politics" goin' on over this issue it seems. I figured it was dead after the Risk Management Advisory Panel got reversed by the "no wargames" rulin' earlier in the year. B

If the adult has not actively done their role then you should not punish the scout for not doing his. Yah, I don't think anybody was talkin' about punishing a scout. Besides, in Scoutin' we use "constructive discipline", not punishment, eh? The question was whether a scout deserved an award. Whether he deserved to be called up in front of his peers and the community and publicly praised an applauded for his exceptional character and service. Not receivin' an award is not punishment, unless da troop is a "social promotion" troop where everybody always gets an award at da same time. But that's not Boy Scoutin', eh? Heck, it's not even Cub Scouting. In Scoutin', kids work on things at their own pace until they become successful and deserve recognition. I think there's always things that we as scouters can do better, eh? But just because we're not perfect doesn't mean a boy deserves public acclaim for nothing. Especially by the upper ranks, the responsibility should be shifting to the boy. Beavah

Ahh, the power of the internet. I got this pdf, forwarded it to Nephew's SM, who in turn shared it w/ the Council Store....who didn't know about it...nor did the Scout Executive....its like being in on a big secret. :) Yah, I think Irving still doesn't quite get the "viral" information flow on the net. No hoax, SR540. The 2 fer 1 sale on switchbacks is to clear out inventory prior to the stockin' of the new pants, which are a darker shade of green. Elvis collar is gone. New baseball cap is as big an improvement as da socks, IMO. Gotta agree that the left sleeve is a bit of a mess. I'd like to see a simpler badge of office / rank system in the future. Be interestin' to see how much the move toward color-muted field-wear is fought by da old guard. I can foresee a transition to more subdued CSPs in the near future, eh? I'd like to see 'em replace knots with a subdued military-style ribbons pin-on device of sorts. B

Hey Gold Winger, science is the only "religion" that works Yah, yeh still don't get that you can substitute "Christianity" for "science" in the above sentence, eh? Or Judaisim, or whatever. You are makin' a religious argument. You are a Believer, and you're stating your belief. Yeh disparage religion sometimes because some formerly accepted religious practices weren't very effective (your "reading goats entrails"). But yeh fail to acknowledge that some formerly accepted scientific practices ("bleeding" patients, alchemy, etc.) weren't very effective either. Yeh disparage religion for advocating "magic" to explain aspects of the universe, but you fail to recognize that science advocates the same "magic" when it talks about invisible, mysterious "forces", "fields" and the like, eh? Some of them turn out to be wrong, too, eh? Phlogiston? Yeh trumpet science for being "right" because its magical tales successfully predict some things, eh? But yeh fail to acknowledge that religion's magical tales are also successful at outcomes. Here in the U.S., it's well established that religious folks give far more money as a percent of income to charity than non-religious. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a pretty successful ethical recipe, eh? So is "love your neighbor as yourself". Moses admonishes that if the society fails at following commandments like "thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not bear false witness", it will become corrupt and fall apart. That, too, has enormous predictive power. Yeh need to go back and read some history & philosophy of science, eh? It's just a human discipline, not a Divinely Ordained one. But I don't expect yeh to be rational about it, eh? You're a True Believer. You think your view is da only "right" one, and yeh want to convert everyone else for their own good. And yeh think that the Government should only support education in your Madrassas, where your view is da only one which is allowed to be taught. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, other option is just to continue da move to youth leadership, eh? Empower your QM. Give him keys, give him a budget, give him the power to purchase gear on his own. Empower your SPL and PLs. Make a boy "honcho" for each trip. Empower your PLC. Have them designate a JASM-level boy as fundraising/service guy. Empower your PLs and Scribe. Have them do all the paperwork for advancement and give out the awards. Takes a lot of work to get the boys up and runnin' in that way, eh? But then it takes a lot of work to get adults up and runnin', too! Thing is, the boys are more likely to really be invested. My experience over the years is that adults perform poorly in outings-related tasks unless they're ASMs and participatin' regularly on outings. Adult Equipment, Outings, etc. folks all fall into that category. They just aren't invested in it the way ASMs and kids are. Beavah

Yah allangr, sometimes yeh just have to go with da flow, eh? If yeh accepted a lad as a member who is a refugee from a defunct crew, I think yeh just help him achieve his personal goals. Your scouts can understand being compassionate to someone whose unit folded on him. In the future, if yeh don't want to do that, don't accept the application. Or at least have the conversation about expectations before you set the expectation. A good rule is that the expectations should never change on a lad between when he gets Life and when he gets Eagle. So if you're new to the SM role, I think yeh finish up the "old" lads and then set your expectations for Star and Life in a way that will change the way Eagle is looked at down the road. And for heavens sake, in the future don't keep inactive boys on your charter! If yeh want a good excuse, your council uses that in count of youth served, which is presented to donors. Claimin' more kids than are actually participatin' is fraud. Beavah

Yah, got a bit confused whether this is a troop or a pack, ItsMe? Why wouldn't the SPL be managin' who was at the cash box? I'm not a big fan of subtle when it comes to poor adult behavior. Here's some options: * Teach the older boys how to confront adults appropriately. Nothin' like da SPL coming over and saying "I'm sorry, Mrs. Jones, we don't say things like that here." Or "As a friendly reminder, it's just as impolite to shout at a speaker here as it would be anywhere else." Or "Thanks for the motto suggestion, Mrs. Jones, but I'm sending it back because this is only open to scouts. If you want, you can suggest it to your son." * Use pointed humor. * Firmly contradict them with your actions, but not your words. Go replace the boy at the cash box yourself, call the "good for nothing" up for a fun responsibility or an impromptu recognition, etc. * Send a MC who is not subtle over to deal with 'em, eh? Sometimes, folks treat others da way they expect to be treated. If they aren't subtle themselves, they probably don't "get" subtle either. Beavah

People spend a lot of time frettin' about appeals, eh? I can't see worryin' about it. In a troop where the SM is firm and fair and has a good relationship with the boys, it's the Scoutmaster's and Troop's approval and recognition the boy seeks, not some BSA official's. I've hardly ever seen an appeal come out of a healthy program with high expectations. Just doesn't happen except in da rare attack-helicopter parent case. I think folks get too hung up over the letter of the requirements rather than da spirit. The requirement is to SERVE and do so actively. Dat's where the emphasis should be, not on "6 months." We want to build young men of commitment and character, not young men who quibble over diction lookin' for loopholes to get what they want. We've had enough Enron accountants, eh? B

Yah, allangr1024, I think you're gettin' the program that's the natural result of da way you're lookin' at it. If yeh think Scouting is a 13-year-old program, and that the Top Award should be earned by age 15, well, that's about what you've got. By 15, they're lookin' to do other things. My guess is that Eagle is significantly enough harder, and significantly enough "disconnected" from the regular program that they don't finish and drop out. Two choices for you. The easiest choice is to make your expectations for Eagle easier, so that it's readily approachable by the average 14-year-old in your program. Add more service projects to your regular calendar so they get "plugged in" to local agencies for Eagle projects. Do a strong job of teachin' planning and independence running simple, small projects and outings at age 13, so they can handle a smaller Eagle project as a 14-year-old. Make a big show of young Eagles, so kids that age are inspired to finish. Then let 'em Eagle out and go join a Crew! Guys that don't finish and fade out get dropped from da roster, just like a Cub who doesn't finish AOL. If he wants to pursue Eagle at age 16-17, he has to go with the rest of the lads and join a crew. Second choice is probably harder for you since you've been part of this troop's culture for so long. Recognize that there really are troops out there where 17-year-olds are happy, regular participants and leaders in their troop. They all stay in, all the way through, not just one or two. They enjoy the challenge of running safe trips for younger boys. As younger boys they always looked up to the cool older lads and looked forward to someday being like that. They typically get Eagle at 17, running a 300 hour project with no adult help at all, and every younger scout shows up at the ECOH starry-eyed because they all know Joe, and Joe is an Eagle Scout. Your second choice is to change your troop into one of those, eh? Either way yeh choose to go is reasonable. I think you're right, and a good SM, for recognizing an important issue and deciding to think about it deeply and address it. Beavah

Yah, our mission is to teach character, not give out paper awards, eh? Yeh do what you need to do to help a lad grow up to be an honorable man, and to learn. Yeh don't worry if other levels of the BSA won't support that mission. That's their choice. Yeh do what's right with your choice. Is this a lad you want to hold up to other boys and to the community as bein' worthy of the highest recognition your program gives out? Is that the example yeh want to set for the younger scouts comin' up? Can't deal with the rumor, though yeh never know if a BOR member would bring it up. But yeh can deal with da behavior you've seen. Your SM should honestly self-evaluate, too... does he think Scribe, as set up in your program, is the right POR for a Life Scout? Is the job description reasonable? Was the lad given training and coaching along the way? The SM should be able to approach this with "clean hands" so to speak. Then he should sit down with the lad and be clear that in order to get his approval for Eagle Scout, serving actively in a position of responsibility for six months is required. Clock starts (again) now. Beavah

Hi sysprog! Welcome to da forums, eh? I'm not sure how much more clear "THIS IS NOT A PACK EVENT" can be, eh? Ain't got anything to do with ducks. Your son is bein' invited to a private party, like a birthday party. Do you send your son to birthday parties without a tour permit or BALOO trained adult? Alternately, dependin' on how it's structured, this might be a CO event but not a BSA event. Do you send your son on church youth group retreats or school outings without a tour permit or BALOO trained adult? In answer to your questions: This can cause the pack and leaders about as much trouble as an outdoor birthday party or school outing. There is nothing illegal about it unless da laws in your state involving BB guns are unusual. Da hard thing with these things is that it really just depends on the individual case. I'm not real fond of units going "private" on trips just to dodge BSA requirements, eh? But as Eagledad points out, sometimes that's not unreasonable. It's what happens when BSA gets too restrictive; folks just take their business elsewhere, so to speak. Many GSUSA units dodge da Girl Scout restrictions by dual-chartering as a Venturing Crew for that reason. At the same time, there's nothin' wrong with a unit putting the local soup kitchen volunteer night in its pack calendar as "not a Pack event" (just to encourage families to do community service as a family), or to invite da Pop Warner football coach from the CO to recruit interested boys at a pack meeting. Just because folks in the pack are given notice about something doesn't make it a pack event, eh? What on earth to do? The choice you have is whether or not you allow your son to go. Do yeh trust the adults and kids? Then go for it. If not, then say "no." Since they are a Webelos II den and it is May, it seems like it's time for the whole lot to join Boy Scouting, eh? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

How do yeh budget, Missouri? Do yeh have any schedule or figures yeh use for depreciating equipment? What do you consider the life of a tent? Let's say you buy tents for $100, they last an average of 10 years. So figurin' 10 weekend campouts a year, you spend $1 per tent per campout. How about stoves? Pots? Trailer costs? Tarps? Maybe you can just take your total equipment expense for 10 years and divide by 100 to get a rough figure. Then I'd double it, just because borrowers often don't take as good a care of your gear as you will - partly because they just don't know your procedures and the "tricks" of handlin' your gear. Add in your QM's time checking gear out and in, making repairs, ordering more tent stakes to replace lost or bent ones. However yeh do it, calculate what your effective "donation" to them really is, in dollar terms. Then you have a number that's easier to make a decision on, eh? Would your unit be willin' to give them that as a cash donation ('cause that's effectively what you're doin')? Or, being thrifty, should they at least pay for your depreciation costs? Beavah

Wake me when religions agree on how many gods exist, ok? Yah, sure. Wake me when scientists agree on how many mysterious, invisible, magic-at-a-distance forces exist, OK? Or how many dimensions the universe actually has (3? 4? 5? 10? 11?). Or how many "fundamental" particles there are. Ain't it funny how similar da story is between electric, magnetic, and weak forces and the Christian notion of da Trinity? Three different, independent "aspects", one unified Force... And then don't forget that by "science" you mean a Western, European cultural construct that you're claiming should replace all of da other ways of looking at the physical world that other non-white cultures have used historically. Your notion of "science" as being "correct" is a cultural imperialist one, eh? So yeh can't then turn around and say it's not OK for Judeo-Christianity to take the same approach. Your claim of "one Science" is no different from our claim of "one God." B

And based on biblical evidence, we have known scores of times when the end of the earth is supposed to happen. So far all of them have been wrong. Applying that test to biblical evidence doesn't say much for its accuracy. Nah, that's the classic atheist false argument, eh? "Look - there are people who came up with a religious theory based on religious evidence that turned out to be incorrect, therefore all religion is bunk!" How many scientists over the years came up with scientific theories based on scientific evidence that turned out to be incorrect? Phlogiston, ether, bloodletting will help cure disease, and on and on... Even now, yeh can find scientists whose ideas are "out there." Does that mean that all science is bunk? Yeh have to apply the same standards to both disciplines, eh? At least if you're honest. O'course, Merlyn's logical, scientific response to that is just to shout louder. Now, if all da science folks have conceded that science can't address ethics, I'm wonderin' what they propose to help humans learn and grow in that way, eh? B

Talked to one pretty active, savvy troop tonight. Adults are mostly WFA, some WFRs, the rest ARC FA. Committee includes a doc, a paramedic, and at least one mom who's a former nurse. When a new boy joins and they get an initial health history, the doc and the medic review the information. They may make follow-up calls with da parents with questions, or even ask to speak to the child's physician. They prepare a short summary for the scouters on each kid, which goes in a notebook along with permission forms. If there's a really odd case (they had one boy some years ago who had recent open heart surgery), they develop trainin' for the scouters and PLs. For boys with "must take" or "must be available" meds, they obtain Rx's so that spares are kept in the unit adults' first aid kit. For epi (they have 2 nut allergy kids and one adult sting allergy scouter), they carry that as well - and in the patrol first aid kits for that patrol. Older/mature PL's and all adults are trained in administration (yah, a video of symptoms, when/when not, scenarios and practice injections with saline. Kids take it seriously.) Epi kits include chewable benadryl. The unit first aid kits also contain the typical OTC meds, but in small enough quantities that even if yeh took 'em all it wouldn't be a problem. Adult QM keeps track. Boys taught about OTC meds as part of First Aid MB within troop. Permission slip contains meds permission. B

If your point is that science is ill-equipped to advance human ethics, I tend to agree. So why load that responsibility on science? Load that responsibility on science? Science assumes that responsibility when its Believers dismiss other fields of human knowledge and inquiry as being "just made up stories" or the same as readin' goat entrails. I think yeh need both fields of knowledge and inquiry to have a whole, functioning society and da ongoin' development of mankind. Science's stories about mysterious, action-at-a-distance, invisible "forces." Religion's stories about mysterious, action-within-our-soul, invisible God. Beavah

If yeh were to ask a troop to meet jointly with them, I think a good troop would say "no." That's not really helpful to you, and it impacts their program too much. They might send a few experienced boys or an adult to some of your meetings if yeh have a clear notion of what you need and they can assist. They might let you come along on a campout or two to help yeh learn da ropes. But at the point when you're comin' to most of their meetings, they'd rightly say "either join our unit or stop imposing on us." In theory, this is one yeh kick up the chain to your CC and chartered organization. In practice, yeh might grab a couple of parents and form a scouter recruitment committee and make that your first priority, ahead of everything else. In da meantime, yeh scale back until you're safe. Yeh keep outings within your skill level as an adult, yeh cut back on meetings, and you be completely up front and honest with da parents about the reasons. Sometimes folks are reluctant to step forward until they're faced with a real need, eh? B

Can't say I've ever met anybody anywhere who thought it was a good idea to put dirt or sand into a meal. In fact, I'd never even think to consider that if somebody invited me to a meal. Now, there are some folks with odd tastes, eh? Who eats hot sauce with eggs? And grits! Talk about eatin' sand! Why would anyone ever eat a grit? Beavah

Science is a method to find out what actually happens in the universe; religion are people making up stories to fill up their ignorance. LOL! It's always funny to read stuff like that, eh? The testament of a true, Fundamentalist Believer! Imagine what you'd say to someone who simply reversed da words "science" and "religion" in the above paragraph. And yet yeh don't realize you're makin' the same biased claim. I'd offer that both science and religion tell stories (aka theories, but also genuine tales) in an effort to build and pass along understanding. Da stories are based on the experiences and observations of people. Some of the stories (like Newtonian gravitation, Bernoulli fluids and da like) are literally false, but the community still finds them instructive and teaches 'em to children anyways! Why? Well, I suppose because they help teach a way of thinking about things, and provide a helpful illustration for simple situations. Not really that different for religion, eh? And beyond religion, there are other areas of human thought and endeavor which are also valuable. Art. Music. Literature. Poetry. Like religion, these should not be readily dismissed by the Believers in science. They also comment on what happens in the universe and in human society and da human psyche, based on the experiences and observations of people. They also tell "stories" in an effort to communicate understanding. Religion does not dismiss these things, it welcomes them... and it welcomes da contribution of science, too. Only you odd Science Fundamentalists refuse to acknowledge that bigger picture, eh? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, fgoodwin, I think I understand, eh? Folks should learn how to avoid burning the food, but it's impossible to come up with regulations that prevent all possible ways of burnin' food. And even if we could, they'd be so long that nobody would read 'em! Just because G2SS doesn't list jousting as unauthorized doesn't mean it's a good idea. That's why I'm more in favor of education than policy. I think one of da reasons yeh confused me is that in American jurisprudence, things work the way GoldWinger suggests. There is a presumption of freedom. Law and regulation are to be narrowly construed. Anything that is not clearly and expressly prohibited is allowed. That's the right way to read policy in the Land of the Free. As a result, that's very much a part of our cultural norms whenever we talk about or make any policy/regulation, even in a kids' program. Perhaps it shouldn't be, but it's so deeply ingrained in American citizenship that I reckon we're stuck with it. That's another reason why I think emphasizin' understanding and developin' good judgment with examples and sharing is so much more important than "policy." B P.S. Calico, I think as a good Christian, da last word is "Amen." Revelations 22:21 (This message has been edited by Beavah)