sherminator505

I find it interesting that some are quick to criticize the current President for not acting effectively enough while failing to acknowledge the previous 7+ years of neglect on the previous administration's watch.

No, but the United States is, and along with that come ideals that we purport to espouse. Now if we truly do espouse those ideals, then why is any BSA policy being unduly influenced by a minority, even a significantly large one?

"...so long as LDS is the 600lb gorilla chartered partner in the room, I don't think it'll go away... " I've seen variations of this theme on various posts, and I've often wondered - if the BSA is, as often reported, non-sectarian, then why is this automatically seen as a discussion killer on any BSA-related issue, including this one? Or to put it another way, why do we afford so much credence to "600-lb gorillas" in what is supposedly a democracy?

Recently there has been a lot coming from National about "creating a training culture." What would such a training culture look like, and how would you go about getting there?

That is much as I surmised, and you're not alone. I had a very similar experience as a staffer for a Boy Scout Leader Specific Training recently. It seems that if we really intend to "create a training culture," we really need to think about what that would look like and reverse-engineer it from there...

This may seem like a totally random question, but how far in advance was this course promoted? In other words, did the Venturing leaders have a sufficient heads-up that the Scouting University would include Venturing leader training?

It sounds to me like you have a SPONSOR! I've never had much patience for sponsors. Maybe I'm just a little too enamored with what the book says, but it is my understanding that a chartering organization OWNS and OPERATES a Scouting unit. I was a Scoutmaster for two troops. Both times I took over a small troop with problems and no pack to draw new Scouts from. One troop steadily grew and regained its place as one of the better troops in town, and still exists today. The other struggled and folded soon after I left. The difference was that the first had a real chartering organization that was interested in seeing the troop succeed, while the second had a sponsor that basically suffered its existence. The difference between a chartering organization and a sponsor can make a huge difference in the success or failure of your unit. I agree with Eagle92.

"How do we solve the conundrum of a boy meeting all the requirements but still not being Eagle material in the eye of a beholder?" Perhaps the reason you are having such a hard time with this question is because the question as it is posed is flawed. If the Scout has, for a six month period between earning Life and now, been active in his troop and patrol, has he has, for a similar six month period, served actively in a POR, and he has shown Scout spirit, and has properly completed his service project and his merit badge requirements, then he is, by definition, Eagle material. If any of the above is not true, then he is not Eagle material yet. I find it very difficult to believe that a Scout would disappear for two years and show up on one's doorstep with a ready-to-sign Eagle application. Something would have had to happen to make the Scout leave, and something else must have happened to bring that Scout back. Further, the Scout would have had to have been very close right before he left to make this scenario even feasible. In that instance, we should be asking what allowed this scenario to develop and fester rather than simply levelling the microscope squarely on the Eagle candidate.

Does the COR have a specific reason for not splitting the den?

What amazes me about this discussion is that we seem to be looking at the YP issue and arguing about that when as I see it, the ASM is showing signs of requiring additional training, and not exclusively YP training. This ASM really needs to "unlearn what he has learned." Wherever he picked up the idea that he needs to be in the middle of whatever happens to be going on nearby, he needs to lose it and pick up on the idea that he should take time to observe all that is going on and to step in only when needed. I had to learn this as an 18 year old ASM, but I did, and I'm sure this ASM can learn it too.

It sounds like you need to get your ASM trained. Now. He needs to understand his role as an ASM and he needs to understand why we have YP guidelines. I think you will see a marked improvement when this happens. If not, then you have a bigger problem that needs to be discussed with your COR and CC. I don't see this as an overreaction on your part. This is a teachable moment, and it sounds like one that needs to be acted upon.

I'd still like to see the 4th corner make a comeback.

I miss the olive leader tie. For some occasions, it is more appropriate.

Post withdrawn.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

The boys paid for them, yes? I would let them have them.

"all FCFY was ever meant to be was a marketing ploy for boy scout retention which never accomplished its goal." I think this was more than a marketing ploy. I see it as a guideline for running an active program that would provide the opportunity for a Scout to earn First Class in his first year. Not all Scouts accomplish this, and in fact many do not, but having a weak program shouldn't be an excuse for that.

Yes, this is a serious matter as health and safety were involved. Yes, there should be consequences for this behavior so that it will not be repeated so easily. Yes, this is definitely a teachable moment for the PL and the boys who went off and did this. Yes, this is a teachable moment for the adults as well, as they were at the campsite and therefore well know why the PL was there. No, this is not a reason to remove the PL.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

I think that the primary reason that these patches don't exist is because no one registers as a lodge chief or chapter chief, or as a member of a chapter or lodge for that matter. They register as a member or leader of a Troop, Pack, Post, Crew or Ship, or into a district or council position. It is for this reason I have often wondered why chapter advisor and lodge advisor patches do exist, as these do not (or should not) reflect the Scouter's primary Scouting job. On the flip side, there are a lot of instances where we could use more descriptive position titles, particularly where commissioners are concerned.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"Unless your Troop is chartered by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, your Troop is below minimum youth membership to recharter." I'm not familiar with this exception. Where can I find it?

"Invented codes, bylaws, pledges, vows - anything above and beyond the Scout Oath, Law, Motto and Slogan are all over the top." Perhaps, but Scouting seems to have more than a few of them! I would include the Trainer's Creed (most recently seen in the Trainer's EDGE syllabus), the Eagle Challenge, and the Outdoor Code as examples, although I've probably overlooked at least a dozen.

I would have some doubts about this flying as an Eagle project. You should be sure that there is an adequate opportunity for the Eagle candidate to show leadership in setting up the project and playing a part in the planning. If the plans are already laid out and all the Eagle candidate had to do was call on other people to show up, then there would be some doubt in my mind as to whether the candidate had the opportunity to demonstrate leadership.

Of all the awards I've seen presented in Scouting, these probably receive the least fanfare. I have seen them presented at Courts of Honor and Blue and Gold banquets, but they usually go up, receive their service star, and sit down. Come to think of it, I don't remember ever seeing a veteran recognition being presented. Perhaps the pomp and circumstance is reserved for those...(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

Below?

I think that doctors, clinics, hospitals and others providing health care services should be able to receive just and fair compensation for the medical services they provide.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

I agree with nolesrule on this one. A Scout pulls together an involved project, provides genuine leadership, and is penalized because he doesn't fit into some arbitrary rule that he wasn't even aware of. This is something that shouldn't be allowed to stand unchallenged. This is a good example of what I like to call the "cookie cutter" approach. This happens when a bureaucracy (in this case, the Council) deems someone's efforts unworthy of recognition and acceptance because it doesn't fit within "their" ideas about how things should be. Best of luck to your Eagle candidate, and I hope things turn out well.