Beavah

Anyone else who supports the ban on those yucky gays who'd like to explain why a particular brand of conservative Christianity should dictate national policy in an officially non-sectarian organization? Yah, hmmmm.... I don't reckon it's one religion there, shortridge. It's the overwhelming bulk of Christendom and Judaism and Islam and Bahai, the majority of Hinduism and Buddhism and Sikhism, the Zoroastrians and the African tribal animists and even the majority of the worldwide Anglican community, eh? That's a pretty diverse bunch. Blamin' it on our LDS colleagues hardly seems fair. The reason the BSA policy is what it is is because it's an odd form of democracy, eh? The vast majority of chartered organizations support the policy. Maybe that's because religious folks are more likely to support private programs that encourage citizenship and character and the like. The nature of moral codes is that to be moral codes they have to impose an obligation on us, eh? Yeh either believe slavery is wrong or yeh don't, but if yeh believe slavery is wrong, then yeh believe it is wrong for everybody. Yeh oppose it with your voice, and through your dollars, and yeh oppose it through your elected representatives and your laws, and yeh oppose it by helpin' slaves escape, and, in the end, yeh oppose it by callin' up the Fourth Massachusetts Calvary to march into Richmond. What is challengin' for those who try to live by such codes is to remember that they are fundamentally codes that in the end demand malice toward none, charity toward all. That we are called to oppose slavery, yes, but not to hate the slaver - as tempting as it is to do so when yeh look at all the sufferin' they have caused. That same moral code that demands opposition to some things also demands tactics and choices that are measured so as to invite changes of heart, and measured so as not to do more harm than good. Like others who struggle with their own desires or foibles or sins, we oft as not struggle with ours in that regard. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Now RichardB, if yeh keep that up we'll be dealin' with another whole round of urban legends for years. Beavah

Yah, hello hls2015. Thanks for your interest in Scouting. This is a hard thing for remote internet folks to comment on, because it often depends on the local characters involved. From the BSA side of things, yeh should answer the questions on the application honestly, and attach a brief explanation. Your background will pop on the check, it will be reviewed confidentially and it is highly unlikely that anything would ever be revealed outside the executive level of your local council. As others have pointed out, when you are applying for a unit-level position you are really asking to be a volunteer for the organization that charters the troop. They are the true decision-makers on your application, not the BSA. So yeh need to take a look at who that organization is. Most established chartered organizations like churches are goin' to have experience with this sort of thing, and they will tend to handle it confidentially and with compassion. What I would suggest in that case is that you submit your application directly to the Chartered Organization Representative and/or the head of the chartered organization, where you can explain your history and make a specific request that it be handled confidentially for the reasons you state. I'm sure that would be honored. The only tricky situation is that some packs and troops are chartered to less stable or knowledgeable groups, like the "Parents of Troop 227", or like a school PTO chapter. Here, I think it's a crap shoot, and I do think you run some risk that word will get out into the gossip channels. PTOs are often the worst for gossip, eh? So it really depends on your assessment of da character of the individual parents who are in charge. Hope that helps. Beavah

Yah, yeh know, we really shouldn't be givin' RichardB any new ideas, eh? I think a parent showin' up to drive is representing to others that they are appropriately licensed to do so. It's not reasonable to run on-the-spot license reviews to see if someone's operator permit has been suspended, and that would be the only real way to ascertain that information since someone with a suspended license may well still be carrying the card. Same with insurance. As to vehicle registration expiring, that's a civil infraction with a small fine. Why would you care? Are yeh also checking to see if there are any outstanding parking tickets? Like da others, SeattlePioneer, I'm not seein' this being much of a "deal", let alone a "big deal". What's your theory of liability? Beavah

Only liquid and gaseous (at room temperature) fuels are considered chemical fuels. Solid (at room temperature) fuels are not considered chemical fuels. Oh, good. So I can still cook things with my block of magnesium! What's interestin' here is that we have achieved da forum equivalent of drawing into an inside straight, eh? We have unanimity of opinion here among people who would at least play devil's advocate on the other side over just about any scouting topic. RichardB, if anything, I reckon that's somethin' worth taking note of and paying heed to. Beavah

Yah, hmmmmm.... I'm a supporter of the BSA policy, Once_Eagle, but I'm not sure that it's the right approach to rally over kickin' a kid's mom out. Truth be told, I consider that sort of thing sad, and I do feel for the kid. Mom clearly knew what she was gettin' into, and the local pack should have known the score as well, so they're the folks who set up this awkward situation. It's nuthin' to rally together for, though. It's just unfortunate that a kid has been put in the middle of adult social agendas. B

Hiya Winston, welcome to da forums, eh? Some of this sort of thing depends a bit on local interpretation, so your Scoutmaster may be right for your local area and the way it interprets things. Some folks discourage parents from "buying a project", because it impacts the extent to which a boy has to do the work that he learned about in Personal Management MB to budget and plan and make harder choices about resource use, or about goin' out and askin' folks in the community to contribute. It also can come across poorly to other fellows and families. A fundraising application form is not that big a deal, and is a good thing for your boy to think through and figure out. Yeh can, I suppose, encourage your son to tell the SM and the district and the council to go blow and start quotin' guidebooks at 'em, but that's not always the best way to proceed. I'd suggest that your son could mention the documents to the SM if there were a good moment that he could do so, but then that a better choice for him in terms of character and citizenship would be to follow the guidance of the fellow who has worked with him and cared about him for many years, rather than some anonymous characters his dad talked to on an internet forum. Even if we are cute, furry anonymous characters! Please come back and tell us when we can celebrate another Eagle in our midst! Kindest regards, Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, hmmmm.... I'm now shakin' my head in wonder and bafflement even more than I was earlier, eh? RichardB, if yeh can post here even one genuine report of a serious accident from a scout workin' on an approved project re-roofing a church steeple more than 25 feet off the ground I'll buy yeh a bottle of your favorite single malt. A lad who gets lead poisoning from scraping paint off of 25 foot high lightpoles with an unsecured ladder gets yeh a whole case. Have a lot of hobgoblins eatin' young boys in your neighborhood too? I honestly think that yeh have perhaps chosen the wrong career path, and yeh really need to move back into industry. Yeh look out at Scouting and yeh see a vast ocean of untrained, wildly unqualified kids and adult leaders doin' the most bizarre, hazardous things yeh can imagine, with the Angel of Death hoverin' at all of our elbows. We need to be controlled, We need to be your employees, We need federal regulation even though Congress has deliberately and thoughtfully exempted us from all da regulations yeh wish to subject us to. You know better than the Congress. The rest of us look out at Scouting and see millions of wonderful, capable young people and committed, skilled adult leaders pitching in together to make America and their local communities a better place. By and large da folks who are workin' with kids on projects are folks like TwoCubDad, eh? People who have more experience than you do workin' in the trades and workin' with youth, and who are far more familiar with da appropriate standards of care in their communities. Only one of those visions is really compatible with Scouting. If yeh don't share the vision, lad, that's fine, we understand. Scoutin' is increasingly countercultural in its mission and belief that boys can truly lead, and manage themselves, and become skilled and Prepared members of their community. Not everybody is comfortable with the realities of that mission. But if you're not, then this isn't place for you. You'll never be happy, and you'll only generate division. That mission and belief is who we are, and your current path damages the image and reputation of the BSA, and discredits the brand. There are lots of industry jobs openin' up as the economy slowly thaws. Maybe it's time to think about returnin' to the work yeh seem more comfortable with? Until then, I think yeh need to take a few steps back from this particular cliff, eh? Time to tie in and rig some safety lines before yeh get too exposed. Form a commission. Conduct a study. Engage in a comprehensive review. You know the drill. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, hmmm... So ZScout5, I don't reckon any of us here are going' to convince yeh to change your ways if yeh really are that wedded to paperwork that yeh kept some kids from gettin' their badges because the optional blue card wasn't submitted to yeh at the same instant the harried advancement chair was tryin' to buy the badge. All I can say is that if it was our council, I'd be sittin' down with the SE to let him know that if that approach didn't change, it would be a significant issue on his next employment evaluation. We trust these adults to take children into the woods and fields and streams, eh? I'm not sure why we can't trust 'em to do an OK job passing out cloth patches. Our mission is one of service, and respecting and assisting our volunteer leaders is a vital part of that service. We do nuthin' but damage to kids and to Scouting by doin' anything less. National's only interest in restricting items is to not have 'em out there in quantity being used inappropriately. The intent is not to stop volunteers from gettin' their kids the awards they've earned on a timely basis. B

I am speaking from experience on the reading issue, accept it or not. Yah, hmmmm... You're from Republican Country there, eh? I reckon that's about the most eloquent statement of what da modern Republican party has become that I've read in a while. Why read when there's YouTube? We have become da party of anti-intellectualism. Books, even books written at the 5th grade level, are for them liberal elitists. Personally, I don't use da MB pamphlets too often because I find 'em too shallow. I usually have scouts read stuff that's more thorough/advanced/adult. I'm not a fishing MBC, but I expect there are some good periodicals and many fine texts out there. That's where I usually start. B (another old guy)

Yah, hmmm... So this was a public meeting with hundreds of people present, on a hot topic? Havin' been to any number of those myself, my guess is that the young man was far more calm and respectful than many of the adults who were offerin' public comment. Passions run high, and folks get caught up in the moment, eh? The lad was wearin' his uniform because he was in public with a group of lads for Citizenship in the Community MB. Nuthin' in the least bit wrong with that, eh? It's something we encourage. The boy has a right to give public comment at a public meeting of an elected body, and what a great topic! Somethin' that he himself and his fellow scouts will be impacted by. A form of citizenship that we absolutely want the lads to experience and engage in as we work to develop their citizenship. Remember, public comment is not partisan politics. It is citizens giving' feedback to their elected officials. Nuthin' wrong or unexpected with any of that, eh? Now, do we really want the lad to strip off his shirt and pants before he steps forward? I reckon that would require a bigger apology. I think we all make allowances for 12-year-olds who are learning. What is disappointin' to me is when we adults don't live up to what we would expect. * We mentor youth. If there are apologies to be made, we have the youth apologize. We don't apologize on their behalf, or belittle 'em in public. * Public officials don't "allow the youth to attend and speak up". Public officials are obligated by law to conduct open meetings and entertain public comment. * Gettin' "derogatory" comments from constituents is part and parcel with public service. If what amounts to a gentle chiding from a 12-year-old upsets yeh in the least, then the old saw about heat and kitchens applies I reckon. All that havin' been said, the SE did his part in handlin' a small PR issue. I think he could have done a better job without belittling or hangin' the boys out, but he did an adequate job. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, hello ZScout5! I think da notion of restricted items in the age of EBay is a bit of a laugh myself. I think there's also a proper balance between tryin' to be all high and mighty about "restricted" kids' patches and providin' good customer service. Many council scout shops know the people in their units, eh? We do a lot more damage to Scouting by annoying and upsetting our volunteers who are just tryin' to pick up the awards for that night's COH than we do by havin' an occasional unrecorded advancement or stray patch out there on EBay. Besides, as others have pointed out, if a unit wants to they can send all their boys in to buy "replacement" badges and patches and build up a supply. I reckon at least a third of the strong units out there do this, because they take the BSA's notion of "immediate recognition" more seriously than the BSA does. So I reckon this isn't worth gettin' your knickers in a twist over, especially in the age of internet advancement. Beavah

Yah, packsaddle, that's true for unit activities and service projects, eh? Da problem is all of us who deal with Eagle projects, which require approval from the district/council. Even more important, under da new rules the district/council only approves the proposal, but the final plan where all this stuff shows up doesn't need to get completed until further along, where it can hit a boy at an EBOR. Around these parts, I'd guess the large majority of Eagle projects have boys usin' one or more of the prohibited items, eh? As we see all the time from da forums, various official-types at districts and councils aren't always the best at goin' with common sense and da flow of things for the benefit of kids, when they are caught between doin' that and somethin' they perceive as a RULE from on high. So the impact of this is that it will double the paperwork for Eagle Scouts, at least, possibly eliminate lots of potential projects that the boys really care about, and undoubtedly affect a whole bunch of Eagle candidates across the country very negatively as they run into officialdom at the initial or final project review. Stuff that impacts kids that way is not "nothing" in my book, eh? It's worth a bit of Ado. Beavah

Yah, hello Fabs5342. Well, first, I'll cast my vote for "if yeh wait until the last minute, yeh should read the requirements carefully yourself." From now on, and for the rest of your life. Don't expect some adult or college professor or boss to spoon feed you. Stand on your own feet. Second, there is no appeal at this point. Yeh can, if you believe you have completed all of the requirements, request a Board of Review. If the outcome of that Board of Review is negative, you may appeal it. You would have to decide if, in good conscience, yeh felt yeh actually had met the requirements in order to request that. I do not personally believe that any appeal is likely to be successful. The third option is to request an extension of time. This is best if requested by or strongly supported in writing by your Scoutmaster and unit. Then yeh go off to college and join a local crew, convince 'em to elect you as an officer and finish up. I think this is unlikely, but possible. Most likely yeh finish as Life Scout, with 7 great years and all kinds of skills under your belt. Those are the things that really count, eh? Not some tin badge yeh wear on kids' uniform. Beavah

Can't wait to see what happens to BSA's licensing agreement when Dremel finds out their product is banned for use by Cubs. Yah, talk about da right hand not knowin' what the left hand is doin'! This is the other thing that I think gets us into trouble, eh? When we start suggestin' to large groups of people that the products or services offered by others are unsafe. I would think any business would and should rightly object to such a characterization. Beavah

Yah, I know some troops that have built their own web solutions, but not ScoutNet certified. A few firms like Scoutmanage (http://www.scoutmanage.com) and Scouttrack (http://www.scouttrack.com) offer web-based solutions; not sure if they're ScoutNet compatible, though. If I recall they're not. It's hard to interface with da BSA's archaic system unless yeh can print punch cards. Beavah

Yah, at least it makes things more transparent, eh? As an educator friend of mine says from time to time, da real purpose of public education is to lock kids up for the day so the adults can go do adult things. B

Yah, I see we appear to be headed off on yet another Kudu thread. Perhaps we can spin that off and keep da focus on the topic of the new health & safety initiatives. B

Yah, hmmmm... I thought this was a joke at first. I'm not often flabbergasted, but I confess I'm left a bit speechless. Wheelbarrows and paint rollers? This might become da best example I have seen of how a support group like Risk Management can co-opt and undermine da mission of an organization. One of da things yeh have to understand about attorneys is that their furry lot (or scaly lot for da sharks ) are honor-bound to provide yeh with the best legal advice. In a similar way, the Risk Management folks are trained to provide the best risk management advice. Da thing of it is, the best legal advice is not the best business advice, or the best communication/PR advice. The best risk management advice is often too expensive in time or impact on da mission. In each case, someone with authority in the organization has to say "thank you for your input, but no, we're goin' to do this anyway because it's the right thing to do for our business and mission." What yeh see goin' on here is that H&S/RM is inserting itself into the various program divisions and runnin' roughshod over 'em. Good attorneys and risk management folks know when to step back or quietly signal that this is an area where a business decision may be more appropriate. They stay in their service and support role. Poor ones like da control or sense of authority and step too far into areas where they don't have expertise. This current work is da hallmark of poor ones. Sorry, RichardB. Gotta call it like I see it. If it was a young fellow in my shop, I'd pull him aside and have a mentoring conversation about the difference between providin' advice and runnin' a corporation. Simply copyin' da DOL / OSHA stuff also strikes me as bein' amateurish and lazy, quite frankly. Anyone in da field knows what Pappadaddy just described - that we're an educational program, and the rules about child labor have not a lick of bearing on our work. The legislature was very clear in passin' those laws to limit their scope, and as such they clearly don't establish a standard of care in our industry. They're naught but a red herring, and you know that. Similarly, the notion that yeh don't have the ability to vet the skill and experience of volunteers workin' with kids is true about everything, eh? It's true about swimming and hiking and climbing and camping and counseling kids and skiing and sledding and skating and woods tools and... and... and... If we're goin' to start restricting ordinary things (mowing lawns??) in the BSA because the BSA is a volunteer organization then we're done for. That's the nature of a volunteer organization, and I reckon we've done just fine teachin' kids how to use tools for 100 years. Yep. Flabbergasted. If I were your supervisor, we'd be havin' a "Come to Beavah" meetin' right about now. Beavah

Hiya, Minstrel, welcome to the forums! Blue cards are for the most part an optional record-keeping device. The real record of a Scout's advancement is the Advancement Report filed with the council office and the report yeh file through online advancement. So do whatever yeh think is best. Lots of units don't keep 'em at all. B

Sometimes units need guidence and mediation so that they don't implode.. But I guess that is not the job of the UC. The job of a UC is to help a troop become better, eh? To offer ideas and suggestions and gentle nudges. Sometimes there's a bit of mediation, but in order to do that well yeh really have to be in the middle, eh? Not taking sides, listening carefully, tryin' to pull people together. Sometimes yeh help by connectin' people with new resources or helpin' 'em think differently about their approach. Lots of times, yeh try to be a sounding board and the fellow or lady with more perspective who helps 'em see past the petty worries of the day to the bigger picture. In many ways, it's not that much different from what a good SM does for an SPL and a PLC, eh? The BSA does not supervise units or tell 'em what to do. That's not our role. As Oak Tree points out, a commish that tries to come off that way does nuthin' but alienate people, and is quite likely to be shown to the door and told never to return. I've never seen a commissioner be successful at saving a troubled unit by comin' in and "strongly guiding". I have seen some remarkable saves through patience and thoughtful direction. By and large, though, no outsider is goin' to ever stop a unit from "imploding" if that's what they're hell-bent on doin'. That requires an insider, eh? Someone who is personally committed to the unit who is willin' to step into the role of workin' fantastically hard to build a fresh culture and repair bridges and all the rest. Units that are imploding need a Scoutmaster and a CC, eh? Things that the BSA can't provide. If yeh feel that is your calling, then you are called to unit service, not to the commissioner corps. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Hiya ardie6500! Welcome to da forums! I'm just goin' to "ditto" KC9DDI. Yeh stopped the incident, yeh brought it to the attention of the SM, now any discipline is up to the SPL, the SM, and perhaps the committee. This is more than a conversation sort of thing in my book, eh? It's a premeditated and dangerous planned assault, and the lack of remorse is a serious issue. It's more along the lines of a suspension and serious conversation with the parents sort of thing, with a separate conversation with the rest of the troop so that boys know the expectations, and know where to turn if they are being bullied. B

But, it is what it is.. Nah, it is what we've made it. Plenty of units do a fine job of settin' high standards, and the national materials support that just as much if not more than the other approach. Yeh just have to care enough to do it, eh? That means occasionally sayin' "no" and gettin' grief for it, and soldierin' on patiently like any good umpire or referee. Honestly, it's not that hard, it's just a little hard. Beavah

Hiya Cheerful! Yah, nothing wrong with a double BOR in one night for T-2-1, eh? It's actually fairly common, and happens for example if swimming was the last requirement, so the lad has everything done except the 2nd Class and 1st Class swim requirements. These are the sort of things that a smart unit will cheer on rather than get in the way of. A boy is pullin' it together and achieving. Besides, if it weren't for the last minute most of us would never get anything done, eh? I reckon the lad can ask the SM for a conference before hand if need be. Go to the SM's house even so as not to inconvenience the SM. The real thing though is that as leaders yeh want to help and cheer for lads like this. Don't let the lesson yeh teach be that mindless bureaucracy takes precedence. Beavah

Hi, I've come to this forum for advice. I'm a committee member in a small troop and I've only been around a few years. Initially I thought this troop was going to be a great experience for my son, but it's become increasingly frustrating. I want my kid to work hard and earn his ranks, and he has been. As troop scribe he's been on the PLC, and part of the role of every boy on the PLC in our troop is that you take a hand in planning outings. As a small troop, that seems to work best, and gives all the boys some fun and responsibility. I know my son would be bored to tears if he only got to record meeting minutes as Scribe. The problem we have is that the Scoutmaster (well, just past SM but he still really runs things) is a guy who is mostly in it to get his son to Eagle as rapidly as possible. His son gets MBs signed off by dad, his son was troop librarian and didn't do a lick of work. All of the boys knew that even the things he claimed credit for were really done by someone else. None of them spoke up, though, because they were afraid of the SM. Then the boy went on to being Quartermaster because his dad pressured the SPL into giving him a PoR since he "needed one". The boy left the gear room a mess all the time, and didn't follow through with his duties once. Now the boy is coming up for Life Scout. He's only a seventh grader, and has been advanced by dad way ahead of other kids his age. The new SM says it's OK, but most of the boys and parents are disgusted. The problem is that the former SM and the current SM are "best buddies", and they are personal friends with the Unit Commissioner who is one of the little group of cronies that seems to always pave the way for their sons or their favorite kids. Most of the rest of the parents are increasingly frustrated by it. This isn't what I want for our troop, and my son is increasingly disappointed and losing interest in scouts. We know several families who were looking to join, but went elsewhere when they were turned off by this little group of leaders who just push things for their own kids. The unit commissioner thinks he's going to help by pushing recruiting, and is always talking "recruiting this" and "recruiting that", but the reason we don't get many new boys is because they are turned off by the pack of cronies. What I need help with is that I'm advancement chair, and the former SM's son is being put up for Life Scout in the middle of seventh grade, continuing his dad-driven quest for a paper Eagle. The boy hasn't done the work expected of the other boys, he's really just a lump and is surly to other adults when dad or dad's buddies aren't watching. If the BOR rubber-stamps this kid's advancement I think my own son will be so discouraged he'll want to quit scouts, and I know some other families who might as well. Of course, all of the paperwork is complete, signed by dad and dad's buddy, but everyone knows the boy hasn't really done the work. What options do I have? I have to guide the other parents on the BOR, some of whom aren't familiar with the BSA program and don't understand this shouldn't be the way. ---- Yah, anyway, you get the point. I wonder what we would say to this person? Call the COR! Get the SM removed! Send the former SM for retraining because he clearly doesn't understand the program! And yet, it could easily be the very same situation where the other side was presented in the parent thread I spun this one from. Again, I recommend that we all be thoughtful, slow, and wise about these things, eh? And those of us who are servin' in the Commissioner Corps in particular. B