Beavah

Yah, I'm a licensed pilot, eh? Sure there are some restricted areas. No, there is no required minimum altitude especially in remote areas. I can feel free to buzz a field of crops to my heart's content (and lots of folks do to spray their crops). Below 700 feet is uncontrolled airspace. Yah, it is. Quadcopter drones aren't possible without high speed computing and sensing technology and microcontrollers. It's the addition of the computer-assist that drastically improves da safety and "flyability" for the average person. And it's the addition of small CCD cameras that have made drones interestin' to the general public. Yah, I do that, too, eh? All of us have multiple tales to tell of crashin' our model aircraft, especially rotorcraft. Dang model helicopters are a pain to fly, and da hobby has had some spectacular fatalities with 'em. RC model aircraft are heavier, faster moving, and much more hazardous. Those are also remote controlled , eh? So yeh have to see 'em to control 'em. Drones are onboard controlled by da processors on the aircraft which keep it under control and can be programmed to keep it out of certain airspace (though that's not really an issue 99.9% of the time). They're also lighter weight, frangible, and slower moving. Safer all-around, but definitely new technology. Yeh do realize that exactly the same argument can be made about kids goin' Scouting, right? Scoutin' fatalities don't happen very often, but the more kids join Scoutin' and go camping, the greater the number of deaths and personal injuries can occur! I still vote for liberty. Beavah

Yah, hmmm.... What do yeh think those are, exactly? One of da interestin' things is that all of the local ordinances against drone flying aren't kosher and would never survive a challenge. Federal aviation law & regulation pre-empts local ordinances and state statutes. Yeh can't have every little borough publishin' different rules over the use of the skies. Personally, I believe da locals should be honest about that and not do such silliness, which only opens 'em up to litigation. I'm all for usin' photographic drones in da parks. It sure beats helicopter photography, eh? Also great for research, SAR, etc. If we don't do a better job of gettin' images of our majestic or just plain pretty wildlands out to the broader public who are campin' less and less, pretty soon we're not goin' to have a constituency strong enough to protect our open spaces from exploitation and development. Bein' restrictive is, I reckon, an overly shortsighted approach. Yah, yah, I can keep my Old Guy registration card. Let me see... "Darn newfangled gadgets!! Makin' a buzzing noise for 10 minutes that partially obscures da racket of my bringing a herd of Boy Scouts into the woods! How horrible!! Better get my broom and chase 'em off just like those pesky kids who occasionally land one of those dang Frisbee disk things in my petunias! " Beavah

LOL! Yah, @@Stosh, that hits da mark! I reckon yeh owe me a new keyboard from spittin' my mornin' coffee up all over it! Beavah

Yah, hmmm... I like @@Stosh's approach here. @@Zaphod, I reckon your lad is in that funny space of tryin' to figure out a new world and his place in it. That's normal, eh? It will be part of his transition to middle school and to high school and to college and to a job. Often da best choice is to sit and watch for a while, to figure out how things work in the new environment. If he's a high achiever and da success doesn't come immediately, that can be more discouragin' than we adults remember. Not somethin' he's used to, eh? It's healthy discouragement, in that as long as he doesn't quit it will help him build da character and skills he needs in da other transitions that will come in his life. Can I ask a question? What is your son really good at? Where do his strengths lie? I think as parents too often we look at our kids' weaknesses, eh? A lad gets 6 "A"s and one "B" on a report card, and we focus on the "B". Mrs. Beavah thinks that's the best way to get kids to hate school. We build healthier kids when we spend most of our time focusing on our kids' strengths. So if you were to identify your kids' strengths, how can yeh give him just a bit of support at home to help those strengths shine and be recognized in his patrol in Scouting? Your son's troop ain't badge-focused, which probably means they're closer to real life where people get recognized for how they contribute. What's the best/easiest way for your son to contribute? Maybe he's a bit of a cook? In that case, I'd have him practice a bunch of great meals at home to get good, and then he'll shine and be recognized for those skills in the woods. Maybe he's a bit of an engineer? In that case, I might grab a book on knots and lashings and get him some poles at home. Pretty soon he'll be the lashings-and-gadgets guy for his patrol. Da other advancement will follow once he finds his place and ability to succeed in da new environment. Beavah

Yah, hmmm.... Yeh all know yeh can fly real airplanes over wilderness areas, county parks, etc., right? And helicopters with all kinds of camera gear? Not to mention ultralights? I reckon this is another case of us old folks mindlessly objecting to whatever new technology comes along to change da world we remember from our halcyon days of youth. Teach the lads courtesy, but let them participate fully in this century. Fight mindless regulation, both local and national, so as to protect liberty for da next generation. We owe it to those who gave us da liberty to drive cars even though they spook horses, and to those who allowed us to fly coast to coast in airplanes, even though it messes up da pretty blue sky when they were off campin' in da hills. There was a time when da United States embraced innovation and progress. We were a world leader back then, eh? But we also had a younger, less fearful populace. Beavah P.S. Yah, @@RichardB, why does H&S feel it's useful/important to regurgitate this stuff. I'm not aware of any sudden rash of drone accidents, are you? It's hard to see da safety issue here.

Yah, hmmmm... My question for yeh is "Is your son having fun?". For a first-year boy, the most important thing is if he is havin' fun and figuring out how the group works, eh? Where he fits in socially, how he can keep himself comfortable on campouts, how he can contribute to the group in some ways, findin' older boys he likes, etc. If as a parent you're worried about advancement, or he is, then you're doin' it wrong. Unless maybe you're in an advancement-focused/mill troop where Advancement is a big part of da social scene and how yeh fit in, but that doesn't seem to be the case in your troop. If a troop is usin' Advancement well it's a small part of da program that integrates with outdoors and youth leadership and all the rest. They aren't practicin' knots in fake situations in a meeting, they're usin' knots for real in the outdoors. They're not makin' up patrol yells because it's a requirement in the book, they're comin' up with patrol slogans, or patrol theme songs, or patrol chants or patrol totems, etc. just because they feel like it. Advancement is like a suntan, it comes naturally. Da thing to be quietly alert for as a parent of a new scout is whether he's makin' social connections to other boys, whether he's comin' home with stories of fun, mayhem, or daring-do. For da rest, if it seems like the troop has kids of different rank in it, with a good mix of Star-Life's and an Eagle or three each year, then I reckon they'll do right by your boy advancement-wise along the way. Let his progress be his, and his PL and SM's. Beavah

Yah, that's only because he's sittin' in a canoe with others who really do know how to canoe, in da middle of a group of youth and adults who really know how to canoe. If you're followin' G2SS he's also out with trained adult lifeguards and has had 3 hours of closely supervised instruction. But yah, sure, I'm bein' a bit facetious with my folksy expressions. That's why I did insert a smiley. It's really not necessary to start hyperventillatin'. Da only thing I was really commentin' on was that I was struck by @@Tampa Turtle's remark about first doing Canoeing MB and only after that goin' on a canoe trip and "learning by doing". I think I get what his troop is tryin' to do... they're usin' Canoeing MB as da G2SS mandated preliminary instruction, eh? That's just not the Scoutin' program in terms of how yeh should use Advancement. I think he'd find it SO much more fun and the lads would get so much more out of it if he followed da program instead. But yeh pushed my buttons, so I wandered a bit afield. Let's face it, Canoein' MB at summer camp typically involves only 4 hours of on-water time. Sometimes less. I've seen hundreds of lads with the badge who couldn't canoe. The tales I could tell. ... and I'll bet yeh dollars to donuts I'd find da same thing in your backyard. I reckon I probably have. You're Central Region, right? This sort of outcome is what yeh get when badges become a one-and-done test of isolated facts and occasional skills taught in a "class", rather than a fun process of learnin'. Don't shortchange the boys by thinkin' MBs involve teaching them "requirements" to regurgitate. They don't. They involve havin' fun teachin' 'em and coachin' 'em on how to canoe by actually canoeing, and then testing them on the requirements. There's a real difference, and it matters. Beavah

Yah, I know of one troop in these parts that has a simple policy. If there aren't enough seat belts for all the boys goin' on a trip, boys are dropped from da trip in the order of the number of miles their parents have driven, startin' from the least. It gets the point across, and I don't think they actually have to do it hardly at all. Yeh have to watch out for single-parent families and such, though. Sometimes folks just need help, and a Scout is Helpful. Beavah

Yah, hmmmm... I'm not sure why we need to go all da way to ad absurdum. Nobody's suggestin' sending lads out "without any training", eh? G2SS requires 3 hours of training in any event. Besides, we all know that the lads will pinball down a river as they learn no matter how much time a well-meaning adult spends lecturing them on canoe mechanics. This is da Advancement forum, eh? We're talkin' about how Advancement Method is supposed to work. The way Advancement Method is designed to work starts with Step 1: A Scout Learns. In this example, A Scout Learns How To Canoe. How does a scout do that? Hopefully his Patrol Leader schedules a patrol outing, or his troop schedules a patrol outing and his Patrol Leader or APL or maybe a troop instructor puts boys in boats! They demo some basics, the lads practice the basics, and they go out and paddle around with some coachin' here and there by their PL or maybe just another scout in their patrol. If they're like most lads they learn da forward and reverse strokes in the bow, then add sweeps and draws. Then maybe they switch and try steerin' with sweeps and prys and J's. Some racin', some games of sharks and minnows, plenty of mayhem that includes handlin' capsizes and such, maybe some current on a river. They learn by doing with da guidance of friendly older scouts and a counselor. They keep on doin' until they have learned how to canoe. Step 1, eh? A Scout Learns. If a lad has never held a paddle in his life before, this is goin' to take a few times out, eh? Really paddlin', not air-paddling. On real outings. Havin' fun. Gettin' da full benefit of the knowledge, skill, and experience of a counselor, just like da BSA policy says. Along the way, most of us counselors who paddle with the lads just take note of when they have met various requirements. Perhaps we even contribute to an occasional capsize, or "subtract" a paddlin' buddy to allow the lad to solo. Poof! Merit Badge like magic, eh? No seat-time, no worksheets, no "tests". Just havin' fun learnin' how to canoe. Step 2, eh? A Scout is tested by just goin' canoeing. Yah, yah, if we can't spend time paddlin' with the lads, then maybe Step 2 looks more like a series of exercises and evaluations, but the point is that those come after a boy has learned how to canoe. Canoeing MB is not the seat-work school yeh go to before you're ready to go on a canoe trip. Canoeing MB is da recognition yeh get after you've been on some fun canoe trips and learned how to canoe. Beavah

Yah, hmmmm... I reckon that's one of da saddest things I've ever read on a Scoutin' site. Can I suggest yeh at least try the real program, and turn that around? Start with Step 1: A Scout Learns by doing! I think you'll find it's a lot more fun for the boys, it makes da badges more meaningful, and yeh get better results in terms of character, fitness, and citizenship. Not to mention retention and growth. Beavah

Yah, a Master's degree requires 4-5 years of undergraduate education plus another 2-3 years, eh? Silly to compare learnin' to canoe to that. Still, a lad with Canoein' Merit Badge should be able to really canoe. Otherwise there's no Merit in the Badge. It's a cloth patch yeh get from lazy adults who couldn't be bothered to really teach yeh how to canoe. Learnin' to canoe is fun! It takes a few days out, and some practice. Lots of activity! That's Scouting. Bein' taught to a test ain't fun. Lots of sittin' around. Choose Scouting! Beavah

Nah. If yeh just do those requirements yeh have paddled a canoe a total of 100 yards or so. 200 at most. Really learnin' any discipline can't be reduced to a set of enumerated requirements, eh? Especially not when half of 'em are "discuss" and definitions and such. It involves developin' skills and when to apply the skills. It involves learnin' terms, sure, but also how to use the terms. Yeh have to be able to demonstrate things not just individually, but in combination. Doin' just the requirements gives yeh static, disconnected "knowledge". Just like cramming for any test. Learnin' how to canoe gives yeh practical, dynamic, interconnected knowledge. It's the difference between memorizing and understandin'; knowin' about vs. being able to do. Yeh can "pass" da BSA Canoe MB requirements and still be a danger to yourself and others on the water. Seen it lots of times .That ain't a fault of the requirements necessarily; the requirements aren't a bad test (though all of our requirements become pretty lame if yeh take a really aggressive "no adding" stance). It's just that doin' or passin' a test ain't the same thing as learning, as any student anywhere can tell yeh. I reckon that's where I fault da modern G2A. It's not so bad, except that it so emphasizes regulatory sorts of stuff that most of our adults newer to Scoutin' haven't learned how Advancement Method is really supposed to work to achieve our Aims, eh? Beavah

Hiya @@UncleP. I continue to be impressed by your willingness to be there for your nephew. Scout Salute! to you. And keep askin' questions, eh! What we hope to do in Scoutin' is help lads grow. Advancement Method is what we use for the boys who need a bit of guidance in that growth, eh? The ones who haven't yet figured out that to do Big Things yeh have to break things up into Small Things. So when yeh look at Advancement "requirements", what yeh see is a Big Thing like learning how to canoe broken up into a whole bunch of Smaller Things: the requirements for Canoeing Merit Badge. This is particularly true for da lower ranks of Scout-Tenderfoot-Second Class-First Class (S-T-2-1). The Big Task of learnin' basic outdoor and citizenship stuff is broken down into a whole bunch of smaller things, like learnin' to pack your gear, or set up a tent, or start a stove or a fire, etc. Of course, as boys get older we expect 'em to start doin' this on their own, eh? So by the upper ranks of Star-Life-Eagle (S-L-E) we see more broad requirements that aren't necessarily broken up into smaller tasks. Like serve in a Position of Responsibility (POR) for the troop. Could be an up-front leadership position like Patrol Leader, could be a behind-the-scenes staff person like Quartermaster. Lots of times quieter less social kids really excel and make big contributions to the troop in staff positions like Quartermaster or Scribe or Webmaster, eh? Scouting values that as much as bein' the extrovert up front "leading". Just as we value such people in real life! Hopefully by Eagle if we're doin' our job well the boys no longer need us to break up Big Tasks into Small Tasks. They can do it for themselves. That's what an Eagle service project is designed to show - the boy has to find a need in his community that he cares about, and run the Big Task to serve da need. Now, the one thing to be aware of is that different troops do approach things in different ways, eh? So some of da specifics will depend on your nephew's troop. Some "Advancement Focused" (pejoratively called "Eagle Mill") troops put a lot of emphasis on lads just gettin' da requirement boxes checked. Many of us aren't a fan of that approach, eh? Mostly because it makes it possible for pushy parents to get their son an award without really learning. For ordinary kids it can be fine, though, as long as the family adults like yourself push learnin' more than "getting" an award. Yeh see, while da requirements help break the task of learnin' to canoe down to manageable chunks, just doin' the requirements isn't enough to really learn to canoe. Da requirements are like the test in school. The test helps measure whether you've learned, but if yeh just teach da answers to the test questions yeh haven't really learned the subject. In Boy Scouting, takin' the test is da Second Step. The first step is that the Scout Learns. So some troops will really focus on the goin' canoeing and learnin', and then at some point testing. I prefer that, eh? Some troops will focus on the test and "don't add to the requirements" and go straight there. In that case, you as your nephew's supportive family member really need to help him focus on being able to do stuff, which will always involve things beyond da "requirements", as well as puttin' different requirements together. The "requirements" can help guide his learnin', but they're not da goal. Beavah

Nah, this is exactly da wrong way to think about a BOR. Boards of Review shouldn't happen just when a lad is advancing. They should be happening regularly, whether a lad is ready to advance or not. It's part of an ongoing conversation with the scout. It's part of how we keep boys from fallin' through the cracks. Sometimes a board might be about advancement, sometimes it might be about participation, sometimes it might be about the character the lad showed at the most recent set of fundraisers. Sometimes a board says "congratulations", sometimes "you're doin' great, keep working on it", sometimes "yah, yeh seem to be stuck... how can we help?". That's why a boy never "fails" a Board of Review. Not because he gets a rank every time he has a review, but because yeh can't "fail" an ongoing conversation. That ongoin' conversation can also reveal where a boy might not really have learned a skill, where he still has an opportunity to go work on it some more. I've never seen or heard of multiple scouts at one BOR. Da problem I have with it is that sometimes that conversation needs to be personal in nature. At other times, havin' other boys (especially PLs) involved in da conversation can be a good thing. It shouldn't be done for the ease of the Committee, though. It should be done because they feel it offers somethin' to the lads. I might see, for example, that it would put a shy or nervous boy more at his ease to have a buddy along. Beavah

Yah, curfew ordinances are funny things, eh? They're a law that treads on the line of Constitutionally protected liberties. We tolerate 'em as a society when they're used as a sort of response to loitering and mischief. Otherwise not so much. Kids who are asleep in tents at an approved campsite that they paid for (and where da park accepted their payment givin' 'em a contractual right) aren't likely to run afoul of curfew ordinances. If they do, they should assert their right to peaceably assemble... Besides, by and large curfew ordinances are a feature of urban areas, not da rural areas with outdoors around that yeh actually want to camp in. Most of 'em have exceptions for errands and other activities done under the parent's direction, and many have exceptions for activity as part of a youth program of some sort. Beavah

Yah, definitely don't send letters to the committee! That's a sure way to burn bridges. First, yeh talk to the fellow. Somewhere out of the way where his ego is less likely to get involved. Somewhere public where behaviors are moderated. If there's an old, wise fellow with a lot of social capital associated with your unit (former SM, long-time committee member, etc.), have him participate in da conversation. Old, wise fellows aren't as ego-threatening as someone your own age/status. Recognize that controlling talkative fellows you need to argue with a bit. Like yeh said, they take silence as consent. They need push-back, and then they need space and time to think about it. Odds are they won't agree right away, but they'll go home and mull it over and then might make some changes. Be prepared for that. Keep da focus on the lads, and what you're seeing, and what yeh (both) want for them. That also keeps it away from egos. "We're working together on this", not "you're doin' this wrong". It takes courage and kindness to help a brother scouter learn to do better. And, like as not, a lot of patience. Good luck with it! Beavah

Yah, @@ASMInVirginia, welcome to da forums, eh? Hope that you're otherwise enjoyin' the Holiday down in the Commonwealth. I agree with your Scoutmaster on da three points above. Patrols should stay intact if you're really doin' Patrol Method, scouts should teach skills if you're really doin' Youth Leadership Method and MB classes have no place in a good scout meeting. Merit Badges aren't school, eh? On everything else, not so much. Sounds like it's pretty frustratin' for you and the other ASMs, not to mention the youth leaders. Sometimes fellows just don't have the temperament for the Scoutmaster position. Not that they don't care, eh? Folks who want control care a lot, and they take responsibility and ownership. All of those are good things, and should be respected. Sometimes they just don't do it well. Can I ask what you'd like to see happen? Are yeh looking for ways to help the fellow do a better job as Scoutmaster, or are yeh looking for ways to find a new Scoutmaster? If you're looking to help him do better, then I'd suggest having a couple of ASMs take the fellow out for coffee/tea/lunch and gently share your observations. Make it about the boys, not about him. Your goal here is to be supportive, but also to gently pry his fingers off of a few things. Maybe an ASM can work with the PLC? Maybe another ASM can take on supportin' lads approaching Eagle? Da other thing I've actually managed to do once or twice is video a troop meeting or a PLC, and then ask folks to watch it, or even watch it with 'em. We're all the heroes of our own stories, eh? Sometimes it's only when we see ourselves through raw data that we gain new insight. It's hard not to notice when you're the one talkin' for an entire PLC and cutting boys off. Know that helpin' the fellow (and working with and around him) takes patience and kindness and fortitude. On the other hand, like I said, some fellows just don't have the temperament for the SM position. So then yeh just have to figure out gentle ways to get 'em to move into a position they're better suited for. Occasionally a good UC can find 'em a district job to promote them "up and out of the way" . Sometimes they're good for positions where an adult runnin' things can be OK, like treasurer or paperwork. The way yeh make a change respectfully in a troop is for the troop committee to come to view da SM position as something that has a 1-year term that's renewable; or perhaps a 2-3 year term that's renewable only once. Reaching the end of your term and stepping down or letting someone else step up is an understood and acceptable thing. Being removed for doin' a poor job is a contentious thing. So perhaps as da next charter renewal comes along, the Committee Chair lets it be known that it's been (sounds like) two years for the current SM, so it's the end of term and it's time to ask if anyone else wants to step up. Throw the fellow a good "thank you for your service" at a COH. Of course, then yeh have to have someone who's ready to step up for the next 2-year term. Beavah

Yah, not that uncommon, eh? That's why traipsing off to da IH, whether individually or as a group, is usually not productive. Organizations that are mostly passive sponsors don't want to deal with headaches or refereeing adult squabbles, especially if a bunch of da adults aren't really members of their organization. I've seen 'em say "this isn't worth it" and just shut down the program. Honestly, it's not unreasonable for 'em to expect adults who live by da Oath and Law to manage ourselves, eh? So you're left with either treatin' each other with good grace and respect and workin' through your "storming" phase, or moving on. Yeh might start a new troop as suggested, but I'd offer caution there. If yeh really don't have enough lads in the local area to support a new troop, like as not yeh hurt Scouting by doing so. Both troops are smaller/weaker and usually one troop or the other ends up collapsing. Sometimes both. Without knowin' more about your situation it's hard to offer any more advice or conversation. Usually in cases like this I help adults take da long view, moderate their egos, and be creative. Beavah

Yah, our laws and regulations aren't always that coherent, eh? Fourteen year old lads in Wisconsin can hunt with a firearm by themselves with no adult (or buddy), but they can't camp out with their scouting buddies in a county park? When this stuff is regulatory as it often is, the local land manager generally has discretion. It's often possible to work things out. I also reckon there are all kinds of private campgrounds around, eh? In Wisconsin there's also da MFL and FCL private lands that are open to the public, eh? Those landowners are usually quite friendly. It's a shame, though, when our public lands don't allow the youth. One wonders if they expect these future voters and taxpayers to support da public lands as they get older? This is where I sometimes feel we in da BSA fail our membership. Almost every other state and national association in da outdoor industry is actively engaged in lobbying efforts to maintain access to public lands. Sierra, AW, ACA, AMC, IMBA, Access Fund, NRA, etc. They work on behalf of their members. What do we do? We work to impose squirtgun regulation on our members! We should do better. Beavah

Of course yeh can! And yeh should! Just not as a BSA activity. Beavah

Perhaps, but only if they want to join a different troop, eh? They might like their troop, and respect its adults, and enjoy da friends in their patrol. They might have seen Mr. I'll-Give-You-Your-Badge at summer camp or the most recent camporee and decided they'd die before ever joining his troop. Either way, I reckon they'll come back da next week with a uniform, and proudly earn their patch, and then start planning for their next outing with their friends. It's only adults who get their knickers all in a twist over Advancement, not the boys. Show me a rigid by-the-book Advancement troop that quotes da Guide to Advancement regularly, and I'll show yeh an adult-run troop that hasn't really figured out Youth Leadership method. Beavah

Yah, forget a Board of Review, eh? Shouldn't this be grounds for suspension or dismissal? Why would yeh even worry about rank? Yeh have to address da behavior directly. Never mix Advancement up with discipline. They're two very different things, with different methods, goals, and purposes. Advancement will never work as a method to inspire and build character if we turn it into a method for disciplining kids. Beavah

Aaargh! Yeh need to go back to Sea Scouts, matey! (And seriously, was a KKK reference at all appropriate? ) Privateers are given letters of marque by a nation-state. The United States commissioned many privateers during the Revolution and the War of 1812. Those seamen were patriots, and were in many ways more effective at disrupting British commerce and supplies than the regular U.S. Navy. On this Fourth of July we owe a debt of gratitude, and perhaps even our Independence, to the courage of the American privateers. I reckon they're a fine example for our scouts, eh? They were the Minutemen of the sea. Beavah

Yah, welcome to da forums, @@scouter957. Yeh haven't given many details to light our way, so I'm forced to echo what my colleagues have already said. The Organization owns the unit, not the BSA. The head of the Chartered Organization (pastor, principal, etc.) can hire/fire da COR/CC. You can approach that person. You are unlikely to be successful. Parents griping about a scoutmaster not followin' the program are like parents griping about a school teacher not followin' the curriculum. How often does such a teacher get replaced? Pastors and principals aren't typically very open to that sort of griping. There is no one on the BSA side to "escalate" to, eh? There is a fellow called a "Unit Commissioner" whose role it is to be a friend and advisor to the unit. That person can sometimes gently nudge and guide folks in a troop who are willing to be nudged and guided. Unless there's somethin' like child molestation or scouts in da 4th of July Parade carrying signs saying "Atheist Scouts", the BSA is goin' to defer to the chartered partner and its representative. So your options, I'm afraid, are either to go along to get along, or to move along to another troop. Fightin' adult wars in a unit does nothin' but harm kids with collateral damage no matter who is "right". If yeh can't sit back and accept da call, don't storm out and yell at the umpire. Go find a different game. Beavah

Uh oh. Now that sounds like a story. Care to share? Beavah