Sentinel947

Not posting as a moderator, Merlyn, what is your purpose here? There are plenty of members who don't support the membership policy. You don't need to convince us. Then there are those who will always support the policy. You are never going to change their minds. So why do you continue to make posts about this issue and stir the pot?

Everybody needs to cool their emotional jets or they will be cooled for you. I don't need to name names, yall know who you are. If one cannot participate in a civil discussion without using insults, then they shouldnt participate. Sentinel947

Where in the star rank requirements does it say, "Show leadership?" "While a First Class Scout, serve actively in your unit for four months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility (or carry out a unit leader-assigned leadership project to help your unit):" Did this scout get the POR requirement signed off? If so. He's done the requirement. If the CC has issues with how the Scout performed during his term of POR, he needs to take that up with the Scoutmaster. The CC adjourning the board till the Scout shows "leadership" sounds a little bit off the cuff. If the Scout did not actually do anything in the POR, that's on the Scoutmaster to work with the Scout and not sign off the requirement. It's a little too late to do anything in a BOR. Perhaps I just don't understand the Star Requirements as well as the Committee Chair of your Troop.

Q: never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance.

I believe issues have been resolved at this time.

If I may drop my two cents. My troop has recently made the transition to the Patrol Method. We didn't get any interviews from Scouting magazine. My Troop made the jump cold turkey. Some of the older Scouts. 14-15 years old, had been to NYLT and had been exposed to the patrol method. The Scoutmaster was skeptical, but saw the light at some point. The Committee Chair has been supportive of the Patrol Method the whole time. As the most experienced active Scouter (which that's terrifying to say) I took on a kinda quasi Scoutmaster role. From about September till December, I coached the SPL's and helped them bring their NYLT training to the Troop Meetings and Outings. I realized in a Troop of 60+ Scouts. I can't personally train each of them, but I can train the SPL. He can train his Patrol Leaders, and then the Patrol Leaders will lead. In addition to regular coaching patrol leaders the (A)SPL's conducted the BSA training Introduction to Leadership Skills for Troops. We found it to be a bit lacking in the Patrol Method, so we edited the syllabus a bit. Our primary goal was to use that program to teach and model the Patrol method. I've been training the Scoutmaster and he's ready to take over coaching the new SPL. We as a Troop are not going to backslide like the Troop in the article. When I pushed for the patrol method, I told Scoutmasters and the Committee that it would be messy, and it would not be a well oiled machine. The messiness is part of the point. Leadership involves problem solving and adapting to circumstances. The Scouts need to do that, we can't step in and fix all their problems for them. The Scouts have bought in enthusiastically to the vision the (A)SPL's have laid out for them. So why is the Patrol method important to Scouting? It's simple really. Scouts want responsibility. They want to be a valued member of a team. They want to feel like their contributions are important. My troop has historically seen a high level of buy in from the SPL's (Who are running everything) but not too much from other Scouts. The strong patrol of their friends and peers (which in my mind means mixed or same aged) does that. I think we get too wrapped up in the whole mixed age, same age thing. The important aspect is being in a patrol that the Scouts choose. That the scouts elect their patrol leader. Whether the patrol is mixed or same age and the benefits of each are a separate issue. If the patrols are adult or SPL mandated, then they are less patrol method, less boy led. For years the adults complained about a lack of older Scout involvement. I finally came up with the Patrol Method as a solution and challenged the Adult leaders to step out of their comfort zone. I think because of my experience in Scouting and time in service to the Troop (ten years now), they trusted me initially, but the Scouts making things happen and buying in quickly sold the deal to skeptical adults more than any of my sales pitches could. I hope by the time I graduate from College and leave this troop. (Which is about a year and a half away), the Patrol Method will be deeply rooted and will be there to stay. The former Scoutmaster killed the Patrol Method, it was inconvenient and hard to understand to him. The Troop produced many Eagle Scouts under that Scoutmaster's watch, but I think the Troop lost its soul in the process. I won't harp on the Troop in the article. My Troop still isn't there yet with the Patrol Method. We are still very early into it. Sentinel947

Schiff. Scoutmaster must sign the card if asked. It's his chance to talk to the kid about the badge. If he's got reservations about it (say 50 pound 11year old kid trying to do lifesaving) he should bring up that up. If the Scout still wants to do it, that's the Scouts choice and the Scoutmaster should sign and recommend a counselor.

Sure. I'll buy that. But one can cherry pick facts. People with an agenda can distort things with what facts they choose to select. I'm not familiar with Right Wing Watch. I'm sure they do use real facts instead of making up their own. Because of their name however, and their mission statement, I'm not willing to believe such a website is going to give a unbiased, bipartisan look at an issue. I avoid news organizations that have an agenda they are trying to push on me. I want unbiased reporting with as many facts as possible. I'll make my own decisions from there. That being said this thread is getting derailed. It's about JoeBob, my censoring of his post, and moderators on this forum. Not Right Wing Watch, or any other sidebar conversations. If this thread has fulfilled it's original purpose, we can be done. If We want to discuss "Christian Persecution in America." That deserves it's own thread. Sound good?

Lol. Rick. Rightwingwatch isn't exactly a trusted bipartisan unbiased source of news. It's like if one of the forums conservatives started posting support for their opinions with links to Fox News. I agree in part with what you are saying, but I advise you to find better more credible sources. I think somewhere in the religious rights screaming, there may be tiny, tiny nuggets of truth in there. But I'm not an ideological warrior so both sides would like to hang me for being a political heretic. As for this thread. JoeBob wanted me to reply to him about why I deleted sections of his post. Bold type is to distinguish it from my scholarly criticism of Rick's sources of choice. Being a bit snarky, but the moderator cap is on. I sent Joe a PM explaining exactly why I deleted what I deleted. If you cannot read the PM Joe, I will re post my message here. To Calico Penn, Schiff, and Joe: I do agree that we want the Issues and Politics thread to be as open as possible. When I'm faced with somebody being offended or insulted over a post, I'm going to generally side with that person. Even in the sacred "no go" zone of Issues and Politics. I don't believe on a Scouting forum that such a "anything goes" zone should exist. I think in almost two years of being a moderator I have censored posts maybe three times including this incident. One was for swear words, one was blatantly racist, and then there was this episode which was probably the most borderline call I've had to make. Can that make flag reports easy to abuse? Yes. I trust the members of this forum to act like the adults or young adults that everybody is, and to only flag things that are truly objectionable. I apologize if my standard comes off as heavy handed, but that's the framework I'm operating under. I don't actively read I&P myself. I'm only in that sub forum if a flag report brings me there or another moderator asks me to look over a specific thread. In this situation, I am the judge and the jury. If that's an issue, the only appeal is to Terry. I hope it isn't necessary to come to that. Sentinel947

We all have a right to express our opinions. Thankfully in many Western countries. there are very few limits to that freedom. As a Catholic, when people make disparaging blog posts or cartoons about my religion or it's leaders I get offended, and I decide I will not read their content anymore. I stop going to those websites or cancel my subscriptions. May their advertising dollars be lost. Nothing talks quite like money. Unfortunately their are misguided nutters who think that because they are slighted they can resort to violence. However, I'm pretty sure they would have attacked somebody else for another reason, if the satire hadn't made Charlie such an alluring target for them. What the terrorist's did was a monstrous thing. But the staff at Charlie Hedbo knew they were antagonizing extremists. Extremists, by definition, do extreme things. Like shoot journalists and cartoonists they disagree with. So in response to the OP. My answer is absolutely not. Just because we can, doesn't mean we should. With the government, where we are generally protected, we should feel empowered to say whatever we want. But the pretty idea of freedom of expression doesn't necessarily apply to our dealings with other non governmental entities. We can be punished for our opinions in a multitude of ways. (Who here really cares that Donald Sterling doesn't care for black people?) (Who knows a person who is ostracized from family events because of differences of opinions and refusal to let things lie?) I suppose if one is willing to accept all consequences of their opinions and the vitriol they may receive for them, they should say what they want. For the rest of us lacking balls of steel and a take no prisoners attitude, we would be wise to keep some of our opinions to ourselves. Sentinel947.

We had our long serving Committee Secretary pass away a year or two ago. He was very active with the Troop. Great man. To honor him the many of the Scouts and leaders went to his memorial service and burial service in their Troop Uniforms. One of the Troop ASM's was a close friend of the deceased and told a few funny stories that he felt put the deceased in a good light during the Memorial Service. If your Troop does anything, making a large showing at ceremonies for him, and supporting his Son and family is huge part of coping with the after affects. Best wishes for everybody involved, Sentinel947

I am not a Muslim. I deleted what I felt was derogatory to Islam as a whole. Things that mock Islamic beliefs or practices. ISIS deserves a good mocking, but the things I deleted I felt crossed a line. Unfortunately in this situation, I am the judge and the jury. I do believe in having as open and free as discussions as possible in I&P but that isn't a license to say anything we want.

I believe firmly in the public marketplace of ideas, where the Truth will rise above the nonsense and the lies. These middle eastern terrorist groups fear freedom of thought, speech and worship. If these things are allowed, there won't be any room for them or their ideology. That being said, ideas and speech that demeans and hurts others should be held to a higher standard of evaluation.

One goal is to help my unit complete its adoption of the Patrol Method. Another is to assist the district and council more in conducting new leader training. Another is to help my unit recruit more adults to become volunteers. (winning the future) so to speak. I'd like to attend Woodbadge if it's financially and time fitting.

You could say something to them. If you knew the campmaster well, you could have confided in him. Ultimately though, what you did was ok. It's not a safety issue for the kids. Eagle kinda said what I think.

As an Assistant Scoutmaster, I'm in favor of Scouts own. Basically a prayer/intentions circle. I do not like "nondenominational" services because they are so watered down nobody gets anything out them. I'd rather see something the Scouts run and participate in.

99. I think it's really important to distinguish between membership in the Scouting movement and membership in a Scout Troop. Take some time away from Scouting if you need it but you are always welcome here. A year ago I was at the cliff of remaining in my disfunctional unit or leaving for something more enjoyable. Sometimes those webelos 3 troops can be fixed and often they cannot be. Don't let that steal your peace or your enthusiasm for what Scouting is and what it stands for.

As a moderators note, we can either greet our new friend, or we can discuss America's politics about homosexuals. If that will be the case this thread will be moved to Issues and Politics. If this thread is to going to talk about differences between American Scouting and other Scouting Organizations unrelated to the membership policy regarding homosexuals and atheists, than it will stay where it is. Sentinel947

I think I'll know it's time to step back when I leave more meetings and outings angry and frustrated rather than energized and excited for the future. Sentinel947

Lets keep this discussion on topic. We aren't discussing Scout accounts here. As for the final statement on Scout accounts in this thread. I'll just insert this link from an official BSA publication, which Scouter.com is not. http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2014/12/03/individual-scout-accounts/ Now, back to a conversation about crazy parents, and not ISA's. Sentinel947

$1,300? Holy moly! What are the parents thinking?

If those of us who are tasked with teaching this course don't know how to explain the patrol method, we probably should be taken out behind the shed and shot repeatedly. I know when the district calls me and says it's my turn to help teach the course, I will beat on the patrol method drum like there's no tomorrow.

Just got a Facebook update from the BSA Volunteer Training Team. "New Scoutmaster Position-Specific Training - A new instructor's guide for trainers leading Scoutmaster Position-Specific Training has been released. The course is intended to provide Scoutmasters with the basic information and tools they need to lead successful Boy Scout troops. Scoutmasters and assistant Scoutmasters who complete this course, "Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills" (S11), and "Youth Protection Training" (Y01) are considered "trained" for those positions. There is no change to the My.Scouting Tools code (S24) for the course and while "trained" Scoutmasters are encouraged to attend this new course, those who have completed previous versions of Boy Scout leader basic or specific training are still considered "trained" as Scoutmasters. Contact Scouting U (ScoutingU@Scouting.org) or 972-580-2000 for more information." www.Scouting.org/training/adult

Lecastor: I'm not sure if his complaints are particularly tied to the patrol method or not. When he was Scoutmaster he stopped encouraging us to use the patrol method and did away with the patrol boxes we had because "the scouts couldn't keep things in good shape." As for what he said on Wednesday. Like I said, I can't really recall anything too specific. Stuff about Scouts quitting the troop. Stuff about our older boys not taking care of the younger guys. Stuff about whether our PLC is giving to the younger Scouts the same opportunities those Scouts received themselves.... that kind of stuff. It's not exactly what he said, but how he said it that was so off the wall.

Good luck Daped. I'll be taking Woodbadge in the fall.