Beavah

Yah, forgive me, bnellon44, but I think you're missin' the point. Da role of the district or council is one of service, not authority. We who work at that level are here to support da units and da Chartering Organization in their mission(s) and goals for youth. Advancement, as the new G2A says quite correctly, is just a method that units may use to help teach. And, as the Bylaws and Rules & Regulations state, all advancement regulations including the G2A must be interpreted in ways that harmonize with the goals and our proper role of service. It's not a club by which we beat up poor unit scouters in order to get 'em to do paperwork. It's a set of resources that we offer to help 'em work with kids. We forget that at our peril, because when we forget it we drive da best sort of scouters away, and our number of youth served continue to shrink. Beavah

Your not in charge of merit badges and merit badge counselors nor the merit badge program. The council and district is. Yah, I thought it was clear that I'm a silver tabber, bnellon44. Even used to wear that funny yellow color. All that means exactly as much as a cloth patch though, eh? Da real program that matters to a lad and his family is the unit program. They're the ones who know the boy, they're the ones that are spendin' most of the time and effort and funds on his development and growth. Their reputation and liability is on da line primarily, not ours. Our job as district and counselor scouters is not to say "This is ours, go away yeh silly unit scouter!". It's to say "this program is yours, and your CO's. We're here to help yeh however we can." Scoutfish, I think it's an OK thing to expect a lad to actually read the MB requirements, eh? If yeh actually talk to lads at EBORs, they know when a badge was worthwhile and when it wasn't, and when they got da "A" just for showin' up. Just like Calico's lads know when they graduated sixth grade without being able to read. Da question is, if yeh have a 6th grader who isn't able to read, what do yeh do? Calico and bnellon44 say give him a diploma and throw him a party; once da teacher has written a grade down it can't be changed. I say fire da teacher, and then help him learn how to read. Forget da cookie, go back to what scouting is about. Honestly, though, despite da mild improvements in the new G2A, I think BSA advancement has probably gone so far off da rails that it does far more harm than good to boys. Scoutin' would be a stronger program if we just did away with it at da Boy Scout level. Beavah

Yah, allow me to join in da skepticism about "Friends of" Chartering Organizations. These are often short-term things, and they work until they don't. Most of 'em amount to unincorporated voluntary Associations, which raises some interestin' liability questions dependin' on your state's laws. Simply put, it's within da realm of the possible that all of the "Friends" are liable for da actions and obligations of the pack. Yeh want a competent attorney to be involved in da setup of any such group, and yeh want to be scrupulous about articles and bylaws and such. Beyond that, gettin' 501©(3) status and maintaining it in an all-volunteer organization is just difficult, eh? And expensive. In short, there are just a lot of landmines to the approach. We did see more of these get created when we pulled cub packs out of da public schools or when PTOs dropped their charters, which is why yeh can find a fair number of 'em still around in many councils. But they really should be a temporary solution. I think, robertwilliams, that yeh really have to figure out what yeh want, eh? Most church ministries are organized and run by volunteers, as a part of their service to the church. Aside from being recognized by da church, they don't really "get" much, eh? They're there to give. Whether it's da Ladies Guild or da Men's Club or da Homeless Outreach or da Choir. Why should you be any different? Yeh get recognition, they assume da risk, but the ministry work gets done by volunteers like yourself who care. What more do yeh want? Them to start payin' the Cubmaster a wage? Beavah

Yah, yah, blah blah. We're tryin' to teach young men character and fitness, not how to weasel out of work on a technicality. If a lad comes to a SM Conference or a BOR and he clearly hasn't done what was required for a badge, then the adults have two obligations, eh? First, they must address da failure of the MB counselor. Second, they must find the boy a new counselor so that he actually gets the real benefit of workin' with a good mentor and knowledgeable person on somethin' of value. We made promises to the lad and his family, eh? We promised them that he would learn somethin' of value by spending his time workin' on a badge. The program owes the boy the full value of da MB that some lazy adult cheated him of. Yeh don't make it up to him by givin' him a piece of cloth, you make it up to him by workin' hard to get him a real, honest-to-goodness MB experience. Now, if a lad comes to a SM Conference or a BOR and clearly hasn't done what was required for a badge, the boy also has an obligation of honor, eh? His obligation is to be honest about where his MB experience fell short, and to complete all da learning requirements of the badge before he wears it on his uniform. Because an honorable fellow doesn't wear somethin' that's a lie, even if adults give him da piece of cloth because they can't be bothered to live up to their own obligations. Advancement is just a method, eh? It serves da aims and the values we want to teach. Nuthin' in a guidebook gives anyone license to dispense with da aims and values because of '22.83.37.12'. Beavah

The larger point, which Packsaddle skirts, is that scientists tend to do a pretty crappy job of public outreach and public education. Yah, that's true, eh? No surprise really. It's not their job. PR and communications is all about tellin' a story - preferably an interesting, emotive story. Scientists are just lousy at that. Once upon a time yeh had responsible journalists who actually understood enough science to be good science writers to help educate folks. That went away sometime back in the 80s or early 90s. Nowadays da journalists usually don't know a thing about what they're writin' about. There are still some good folks in this business, but they work for venture capital firms and angel investors, eh? People who really do know science and da industry and can explain it in effective storytelling ways to non-scientists. Problem is, those folks have a large monetary incentive to stay quiet about stuff and just share it with their clients. And of course there are da academics and teachers, who are pretty effective too. But they're just a bunch of Democrats, leftists, and socialists so they don't count. Beavah

Bums still cry "hey buddy, have you got a dime" Yah, right. That and another $3.50 will get yeh a cup of coffee.

Responsible gay parents of a Cub Scout age boy is against the rules Nah, it isn't. BSA would be happy to have a lad with responsible gay parents. The parent(s) just couldn't register as cubmaster/den leader, etc. They could still participate, still attend events. Individual CO's might decide differently, of course. Yeh can't guarantee anything about da figures on child abuse, because nobody really knows 'em, and until very recently this was a very small population. But that's neither here nor there. If you can have a men's group that excludes women, because yeh feel there are some issues where men need mutual support from like-minded fellows they can talk to and trust, why is it so awful that parents from a very broad spectrum of faiths have an organization with leaders they feel they can talk to and trust with their kids? There's no difference. I suppose people could view your mens' group as being misogynist or da BSA as being homophobic or whatever. Lots of folks spend a lot of time judgin' others or imputing wicked intent where there isn't any. They probably should just get a life. Beavah

Yah, maybe da magical ad fairy thinks you're gay, packsaddle. . Da Bad Idea ads feature a young hottie that yeh clearly wouldn't be interested in. Alas' Bad Idea seems to be a T-shirt place featuring hundreds of mostly amusing, slightly risqu slogans. Just da sort of thing to tickle da imagination of a teen lad or old fart scouter. Right now for some reason I'm gettin' nuthin' but yacht cruise ads.

Yah, anybody remember rec.scouting? When yeh don't have a place for this stuff somebody inevitably hijacks da scouting-related threads with it. So havin' it sandboxed here I reckon is a reasonable solution, though I'm sensitive to RememberSchiff's thought that it can spill into da scouting areas, or drive people away. For me, I find it a bit entertainin', eh? Shows that Scouting is actually a wonderful cross-section of America, with folks from all sides and da broad middle. And it illustrates how frayed our national fabric has become, when even folks who share a common passion for good deeds, solid citizenship, and helping kids can get so knotted up on this stuff. Personally, I'd rather folks come here than go off to one of da echo chambers where some demagogue of da right or left can whip 'em into a frenzy where they forget that our fellow citizens who may disagree with us aren't evil conspirators set to bankrupt us / undermine the constitution. They're just fellow scouters with different views tryin' to work through what's right in a complimicated situation. Besides, da image of Twocubdad in a rainbow tutu is one that's goin' to keep me laughin' all day. Beavah

In my mind it is more about a kid having a chance to be a part of this great organization, and his parents or loved ones having a chance to be there with him. Yah, hmmm... Yeh know, drmbear, there is nuthin' at all stopping a lad from being part of the organization, right? And yeh know, there is nuthin' at all stopping a lad's parents or loved ones from being there with him (save at things like BORs or high adventure trips where they're not physically qualified, etc.). Da only BSA policy is that openly gay folks can't be registered leaders. Now yeh described a wonderful "men's club" that you're a part of that is a "safe place for men". So yeh seem perfectly comfortable discriminating against women when yeh are providing somethin' that you as a man feel is valuable. No daughters, no lads who want to bring one of their two female parents. It's a men's group. Now, I reckon some feminist could go off on your men's club about da long history of violence against women, about perpetuating patriarchal society, about excluding women from positions, about da history of all-male clubs becomin' the focus for civil power structures and relationships that kept women from equal participation in society, on and on. Your mens' club is really of a kind with a sorta ugly historical culture. But in da end, it's just a men's group, eh? Guys gettin' together for mutual support. Can't figure why this is any different. Folks from da vast majority of worldwide religions want a "safe place for kids" where the leadership reflects their values. We are providin' an environment that they as believers of one sort or another feel is valuable. Yep, it involves discrimination same as your club, but da discrimination is much less overt than the discrimination your club practices, eh? It only applies to leadership in da group, not participation, and it more or less discriminates on overt behavior rather than somethin' like gender. And in da end, same as your club, it's just a youth program. People with a few shared values gettin' together for mutual support. Beavah

The Scout is not required to retain any knowledge once he has met the requirement and the requirement is signed off of for rank advancement. Yah, hmmm... I've read through da new G2A a couple of times now, and I haven't found that statement anywhere. Maybe yeh can point it out to us, bnellon44? Da book I've got says "A Scout Learns", not a scout does once. Yeh haven't learned how to read if yeh can't still read 6 months later. Yeh haven't learned to ride a bike if yeh can't do it six months later. Da notion that retention isn't required is just poppycock. How is that keeping oneself mentally awake? Beavah

The problem is this: if a BOR is appealed b/c the BOR found that the requirements were not properly done, who do you think will win the appeal? Da question is "Why would you care?" We all have to act as we feel is in da best interest of the boy and the program, eh? That's our personal honor. Da fact that someone in Irving who doesn't know the boy or the local program might do something different is irrelevant. Yeh do what yeh think is right, regardless of what other people may think or do. And then don't let it bother yeh, or resign if it does. A lad who is truly a young man of character will understand and agree if a BOR discovers he hasn't met all da requirements for a MB, and will be willing to work hard so that he can truly deserve the honor of wearing the patch. A good board will assist him in that, by calling it to his attention and helping him find a good counselor to work with. Of course they should also try to fix da problem, but just because they should fix the problem with the quality of da counselor doesn't absolve them of da responsibility to see to it that the lad gets the full benefit of a real MB experience that he was shorted. A lad who hasn't yet learned our lessons about character and citizenship will try to skate by or appeal. That's a boy asking whether we're serious about our values. He might find out in the end that da BSA is not, but I hope along the way he at least gets to learn that some of us are. Beavah

Trolls come from lands far and near Through legends and myth they appear But right now, Today! To the GREAT USA They wish comfort and love without fear! Yah, who'd of thunk it. Do yeh know the internet is so great and so, well, weird that there are whole pages of troll limericks? (This message has been edited by Beavah)

It's fun when you think of a Troll Be they Tolkenish, Nyform or droll Be they big as a house or a small as a mouse They're all fun to have and to hol' Yah, figured a hopeful limerick would be good for a change.

Yeh have to read da whole book, and understand things in context Gary_Miller 8.0.1.1 "Though one reason for a board of review is to ensure the Scout did what he was supposed to do to meet the requirements..." So TwoCubDad is right, eh? That does still seem to be one of da purposes of the BOR, just as it has been for decades. Beavah

Packsaddle, that's amazing. Never a blister with a single lad? Never a cut or scrape or one of RichardB's flaming marshmallow burns? No bee stings or kid's who won't wear shoes (with da natural results)? Not a tick nor a slipped knife in da kitchen nor da trip and fall and chip a tooth? And da adults are usually worse! Yeh lead a charmed life, my friend. Either karma is goin' to catch up to yeh big time, or you're goin' to make it to da Pearly Gates and owe a guardian angel a heck of a lot of overtime pay! Beavah

Beavah, to my mind, the thing we have to do is head the Scouts off from thinking about it as an hour-counting requirement in the first place. Yah, sure, but that applies to all advancement requirements, eh? Not just service. Checkboxing or signoff-seeking defeats da point of every advancement requirement. So sure, if a lad has been out canoein' with me a bunch at various events, demonstratin' more than enough skill to merit Canoeing MB, he's goin' to get it. And that's as it should be, eh? Da focus is on having fun and learning the skill, and the recognition comes naturally. But if a lad comes out and just wants da badge fast, in minimum time with a quick checkout, then I'm goin' to hunker down and be thorough about testin' him on each of the requirements. I need to be more careful because he's tryin' for da shortest route to da cookie, rather than the natural, fun route. Da right way in scouting is da first way, eh? A lad gets the full benefit of the personal attention and mentoring of a MBC and it's fun and adventurous. The second way is allowed by our system, where da lad gets an examination on da minimum requirements. Same with service, eh? Da right way is that the lad naturally partakes of service opportunities in an active program. It's fun and it's just a part of things, and da recognition comes naturally. What troop doesn't offer at least 6 hours of opportunities over da course of six months just on regular troop events? What's more, those opportunities may be tied into other lessons of citizenship or merit badges or whatnot that make da experience far richer than just logging hours for NHS. Da poor way is to go for da quick checkoff, the test rather than da natural participation. But if a lad goes that way, then just like da fellow goin' for the fast signoff for a skills badge, we need to do our part to have some integrity and teach what we can. So at da point when we're being made to actually count, then double-dipping shouldn't count, eh? It's not consistent with our values and mission. Programs that don't need to do da second thing are far stronger, because they're usin' all da methods in concert, not just relyin' on advancement. But if a unit is relyin' on advancement, then they need to make sure it's a real challenge with some integrity. Beavah

Yah, to follow up on nolesrule's post, I found this piece a pithy summary. Yeh have to get past da language; it is Rolling Stone. Wall Street is Cheating B(This message has been edited by Beavah)

what do you think of that kind of requirement to be active? too much? too little? just right? Personally, I've never cared for "strict" percentage requirements. I've always believed in reasonable discretion. Da problem of course is that there are lots of folks out there who believe discretion means "favoritism", and those folks seem to desperately need "objective" percentage requirements. I can't figure it, since they're trustin' the SM with their kids in da woods, yeh would think they'd trust the SM for somethin' much less important, but that's not how they think, eh? So lots of units at least put da "objective" requirements on paper as a form of self-defense. For da rest, it just depends on what yeh want to teach, and what your youth leaders are willing to put up with by way of sporadic attendees without gettin' too frustrated. As fred8033 pointed out, da "active" requirements overlap da POR requirements, so what we're really talkin' about in most cases is how to define active for boys who hold positions of responsibility. What should a Patrol Leader's level of participation be? Now my experience has been that on average, boys who attend half or less of a unit's activities tend to fade out and drop out, and that PLs in order to be truly successful have to be at "almost" everything. Additionally, as a general average, da programs that have higher expectations for "active" are also da programs that have the better programs overall. That's chicken-and-egg, eh? Yeh can't usually tell which came first, just that they tend to go together. Better program expects boys to show and build skills, because that makes for happy PLs and more adventure based on those skills. And better program attracts boys willing to make that kind of commitment naturally. So I think da best way to view "active" expectations is as strong advice to kids and parents about what level of involvement in da unit is necessary to be successful. For that yeh have to look at your individual unit program, eh? Less than half almost never works for members and less than 75% almost never works for real leaders. More than 90% is in da noise and not worth distinguishing. But yeh have to find your own sweet spots and danger points. For high adventure prep, da expectations are often very high, for safety and group development reasons. For other stuff, lower. Just depends. Beavah

Develop the character", not "account his time Agreed with this sentiment, Gunny. And that's da tension that JM describes, eh? Any "accounting" approach that is taken to be an end in itself is goin' to run afoul of developing character. But given that we're saddled with an accounting problem by various requirements and by folks who insist on approachin' the thing as an accounting problem, then there is an answer. In accounting, it is unethical to double-count. Dishonorable, as in "should be fired, might be jailed, must definitely feel ashamed". We should teach boys to work harder, to earn each award on its own terms, not to find creative ways not to. Simply put, a boy who got creative with double-counting so as to earn more awards may earn benefits (college admission preference, etc.) over others who did more work honestly. That's not OK if we care about character. JM's second point is a good one, eh? But it's really an objection to service hour requirements that we're stuck with or to BSA's checkbox approach to advancement more generally. It doesn't answer da question of whether double counting is OK within that environment. I agree with him, though, that it's da wrong approach. A Star, Life, or Eagle scout should be givin' back to his community in ways that vastly exceed da requirements placed on an ordinary citizen, so that counting shouldn't be necessary at all. Now, goin' back to da practical stuff, as scouters all we can do is decide whether the paltry 6 hours we expect should be somethin' in addition to what is required for other cookies in da boy's life. There are all kinds of good reasons to do that, eh? To help the lad find a new service opportunity that matches his interests, to tie into MB work or troop activities, all kinds of things. Seriously, in any troop that does even a touch of service as part of its campouts and programs this is never a problem. But nuthin' is goin' to stop a SM, Committee, and CO from double-counting if they want to. It's their discretion. Most of da times when I've seen it, it's been a product of program weakness, adult laziness and youthful manipulation, and I don't think da outcomes are consistent with what we want to teach. But not always. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, 5yearscouter, somethin' like that! Fred8033, yeh once again misunderstood. I gave yeh my personal answer earlier on, several times in fact. Da situation is not an advancement issue, and advancement isn't on the table to start. It's about da aims and some of da other seven methods. But you insisted and insisted that yeh wanted da book answer on advancement, so I gave it to you. There's no appeal for T21, so it's completely unit/scoutmaster's discretion. There's no disputed circumstances BOR option for Star or Life, so that too is effectively unit discretion to a large extent. There are a few spots where things are still ambiguous. There has never been, and can never be, a requirement that a unit retain a member or that volunteers must give up their time with their family if they don't want to. That's da "answer" yeh insisted upon, straight from da books. Don't shoot the messenger, especially when he said over and over again that yeh shouldn't approach it that way. Beavah

If a Scout goes to work at a Community Garden for a number of hours, does he not get to eat his share of the produce(divided as agreed in the Community Garden rules) if I count those hours for Scouting? Huh? Now this old furry critter is really confused. Maybe I just don't understand da Community Garden thing. If a boy is working in a community garden because he gets a personal benefit in the form of a share of the produce, then it's not service at all. It's labor for remuneration. Like a business partnership, eh? He works, and gets a share of da profits. That's not service. So qwazse, let me see if I'm understandin' your point of view (all done up in bold ). A lad does six hours of community service for Life. He uses da same six hours of service for NHS. He uses da same six hours of service for FFA. He uses da same six hours of service for church youth group/confirmation class/bar mitzvah. He uses da same six hours of service for young Rotarians or whatever. None of those organizations are giving him a free-will recognition, the way a lifesaving award might be. They each have requirements of service for the status conferred. So for da same six hours he gets feted and rewarded and can claim honors from any number of organizations, because he (or his parents) are good at filin' paperwork in quadruplicate. He can present himself as more qualified for college admissions or jobs than another fellow who has actually done the individual work expected of several awards separately. And that's honorable?? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Sigh. I see we can't get out of precision-Scouter land, where spendin' our time on page 67 of da book is more important than the child standin' in front of us. This is da sort of attitude in Scoutin' that makes a commissioner cry for a bit, and then go talk to a COR and IH about makin' changes in their staffing. Fine. For da precision scouters out there, da real answer is... If the boy is goin' for Tenderfoot, Second Class, or First Class, the Scoutmaster refuses to sign Scout Spirit based on his recent lack of participation, and/or the BOR tells him no for the same reason and sets some expectations for him to improve and it's done. There is no appeal for T-2-1 advancement. If da boy is goin' for Star or Life there are two possibilities. In one, da SM simply tells the boy that his participation has been so low that his membership has been dropped, and before any advancement can proceed he must apply for membership. Then da unit can set whatever expectations it wants before accepting his application. Alternately, the SM can refuse to sign for Scout Spirit, in which case one can interpret da book to mean either that no BOR need be scheduled (and we're done), or that a BOR must be scheduled because da lad "believes" he met the requirement. There is no provision for a disputed-circumstances BOR for Star or Life. If da unit chooses to have a BOR and the lad is denied on Scout Spirit or other grounds, that can be appealed to the council, but no farther. If the boy is goin' for Eagle, then those same possibilities repeat, but with an added twist. In da first possibility, the troop tells him he's no longer a member and has to re-apply. If he's still registered with da BSA, then there is ambiguity. He can apply for a BOR under disputed circumstances to the council, and they can choose to hold one or not. If they choose to hold one then either they or national can give the lad Eagle on appeal. If they choose not to hold one because they accept da unit's statement that he has been dismissed as a member, then it's done. The boy of course can apply for membership in a different unit and, if accepted as a member, proceed on that basis. On da other hand, if the unit still considers the boy a member and the SM refuses to sign Scout Spirit or the unit refuses to endorse, then the lad can ask for and receive a BOR under disputed circumstances from the council, appealable to national. Those groups can decide however they want to, eh? If we judge by past practice, national at least is likely to just give the boy the patch to avoid da headache. Practically, of course, all of this tom-fool nonsense only happens when some adult has their head up their arse. Usually a parent, often a precision-scouter, occasionally just personalities and poor communication. Any halfway decent sort is goin' to handle things in the way that I and Oak Tree and TwoCubDad and eisley and others have described, eh? In a way that's mindful of the boy and of da particular goals and mission of da unit program in which they serve, and which puts da whole program first, not da advancement method. Of course, we'll now get another 6 pages dissecting each of my paragraphs above in light of da new G2A, but relatively little on how to help individual boys or programs. Ah, well. Everyone has to have a pasttime. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Huh. You made a choice to be a registered leader in the BSA. As such, you made a choice to support BSA advancement. What your promoting is not the BSA program. Absolutely it's da BSA program. Yeh just have to understand da BSA program. All aspects of advancement must be interpreted so as to harmonize with da aims and purposes of da BSA. Givin' kids five awards for da same six hours of service doesn't teach character, fitness, or citizenship. Gunny, skills are a bit different. I'm not familiar with da new ARC class, but da old ones did the CPR component as part of da first aid class. That is to say an 8 hour first aid class was really a 3 hour CPR class followed by a 5 hour regular first aid class. What's being discussed here as double-counting to my mind is more like a lad who is both bugler and scribe in a small troop completing Star in two months, because he has 4 months in two different PORs served simultaneously. Although at least that lad actually did two jobs. Da service double-counter would just count bugler twice. Beavah

6th graders don't have OA, PLC, college classes, girlfriends, work for pay, multiple clubs and such to balance against scouting activities Yah, but those are all choices, eh? Choices are part of life. Yeh can't have everything. Choose family first, it might mean gettin' less from a career. Spend lots of time with girlfriends, have less time to study. Those are da sorts of choices kids need to make as high schoolers, where it's still pretty safe to fail. And how to negotiate competin' demands for themselves. Doesn't do a lick of good to let 'em by with less by double-counting. It's da wrong lesson. IMNSHO, anyways . People vary, programs vary, goals vary, mileage varies. Beavah