skeptic

As a long time teacher, subbing at most levels, I cannot say that the schools do a very good job in covering these areas noted in the last post. I am constantly amazed at how little kids understand about even the basics of our history, or the foundations of the government. Of course, it would help perhaps if our reps actually worked within these foundational areas after being elected. But, there really is nothing wrong with expecting a Scout earning Eagle to have a better grounding in these areas than his peers, IMHO anyway. That is contingent on the counselor doing their job though, not just looking at the filled in worksheet in a cursory manner; rather actually discussing pertinent points with the candidate.(This message has been edited by skeptic)

Guess showing my age again; earned training for commissioner in late 70's or early 80's, and one requirement was the Arrowhead. Am still on roundtable staff, but no longer considered a commissioner I guess. Thanks for the clarification.

I believe that the Arrowhead is a requirement for completing either commissioner training, which is two years, or the Key, which is three years, and only for "head" commissioners. Of course there are additional requirements for them both.(This message has been edited by skeptic)

While I realize that one of the elements of consideration for location is transportation and supply access, wonder if that element might be a "work around" for a secondary site at Philmont. They have the space, and of course the basic infrastructure is already there for the regular use. One day of busing or train to Raton or Cimmeron could play into the cost for those units coming into large airports, and would not need to add too much to the cost, especially if coordinated on a National level. In 1960, scouts came into Denver from all over, then came mostly in buses to Colorado Springs. We had 57,000 there, so not like it was a small undertaking. Then they could rotate them from East to West (sort of). Still a long trip for the Pacific coast people, especially in the north. But better than 3,000+, and lots of things to see and do on a trip if done on the ground.

"Gentlemen"!?? Even the internet has a "tone". Perhaps we need to take it down a little?(This message has been edited by skeptic)

We always sell individual packets for those that do not want or need the larger ones. One 18 pack gets 18 sales at $1 each. Just slower getting it done. I wish they would bring back the 30 packs that they had. There were 5 boxes of 6, and we sold them for $6 each. Breaking them up tripled or quadrupled our sales on that item. Still would like to see something like a Crackerjack Box item for a low pp; think it would be a huge seller.

The point here is that this is a specifically oriented retreat, rather than a real camp, aimed at, as noted, academically oriented merit badges that likely "should not" be done in a regular camp. It is also held at a church retreat/camp center with dorms and so on. Frankly, I see very little to question about the idea, and could see it being a viable option in other locales. If you look at the council site, it is obvious that they have many outdoor options in their council, both regular scouting and high adventure. Much ado about nothing again, as far as I can see. JMHO

They had their Oath out front, for all to see, as well as a copy of their handbook. Nothing was being hidden. Most of the people showing interest were more interested in the direction of the basic program, which is closer to BSA than GS.

Just came back from a local mall Kids Expo, and the AHG were represented there, right next to one of our larger packs who represented BSA. There were a lot of people that seemed to show interest in the program and the new troop just being formed in our city. It is the 3rd or 4th in the county, and the family working on it is also involved in BSA. Their daughter did not like the GS program, but wanted to do stuff similar to her brother in cubs. I listened to people and was a bit surprised at how many really liked the AHG idea, even some who had been GS, or were already in GS. Still too early to tell for sure, but they have roughly 12-15 signups already.

Thanks for the comments, both pro and con. Having spent years in the weather service, and lived in So Cal most of my life, I am very familiar with the possible repercussions of making a poor decision. It is one thing to be out and get hit by a storm, and being prepared to deal with it; another thing to go in the storm, especially when it is forecast to be as strong as this one. I also have a very small group with only a couple of adults regularly helping; one has MS, and one is just slightly younger than me, and I am pushing 70. My SPL was not at the meeting due to homework issues, and he also is in track, so would not have gone anyway; but I see the point regarding putting it in front of the scouts, just the same. I will make a point to not make a unilateral decision without at least talking to them about it in more than a cursory manner with my opinion. I do know that the parents are relieved they do not have to deal with it; they have already said as much. So, I am comfortable with it, especially with the recent updates. Still, it is another reason to find additional "younger" leaders, and willing parents.

We were scheduled to do a drive in camp to a location on the California coast near the beach in Malibu. No fires are allowed, so cooking would be charcoal or gas. Our weather forecast has a major storm moving in now, and it was predicted earlier. The forecast has actually gotten worse since I decided Wednesday night to cancel, due to the weather. Having camped many times in inclement weather, I know how to do it, and I understand we should try to not cancel outings if possible. But, with a coastal foothill location, possible thunderstorms, and moderate to heavy rain in a flood prone area, it just seemed the best choice. A few of my long time Scouter friends seem to think we should have gone anyway, and dealt with it. Should we, just for the "adventure", camp with such a forecast, and let them learn to "survive"; hoping of course that we do not get flooded or worse? I honestly feel that I made the right decision, but am I just getting too old to deal with it, so decided in this manner, or am I doing the "smart" thing, based on the info at hand? Just wanted to throw it out for discussion. Aside from the possible dangerous issues known to occur here at times (hazardous weather training?), why would you want to get all your equipment wet most likely, especially since you cannot even have a real fire? Comment please. Would prefer not to deal with the "real scouts" attitude though.

Cambridge: Don't feel bad; I have lived here my entire life and still have trouble understanding much about our political system. What I have even more difficulty with are the numerous people that scream about the government, yet refuse to participate in its election. In some respects, it is like the BSA and the complaints about some council operations. There IS a way to deal with it, but it takes more effort than most are willing or able to give; getting COR's to actually participate in mass is a real undertaking. Yet, when it happens, the council almost always changes. Same goes for our elections. If more people actually voted, we might see better results. Do not know if there are similarities in lack of involvement in England.

Our expectation is that the candidate will appear as a scout for the board, as the board is for a scout award. However, if there are extenuating circumstances, an adult uniform, then a suit or sport coat would be appropriate. Most still wear the youth uniform, as they are still in school, or just out.

Beavah; the possibly violated statute(s) relate to copyright and BSA's right to the items and their control. We "are not talking about old insignia here", rather current, restricted items somehow being obtained without the required paperwork being files. Big difference. And I am not a Francis, and you lost me on that inference. Must have something to do with someone that is too concerned about what some consider minor issues or things. " Is there a rule against selling them?" Actually there IS a rule about selling unauthorized items; that is why they have restrictive paperwork. "I guess I don't see the problem." And here lies the rub, so to speak. Too many people simply do not view pushing the bounds of honesty as important, as long as it does not hurt them personally in some manner. The Oath and Law are part of an "Honor Code". But, as noted earlier, "honor" is a personal thing. And, the seller in this actually brags about being an Eagle Scout. Now whether or not he is cannot be determined. But, "if" he is, then, in my personal opinion he is a very poor example. Maybe part of it is that he apparently lives within my area, and has tried to obtain things through our office. When not allowed to, in quantity (which is really the point, since it is to sell for HIS profit, not the BSA), he was rude to the staff. Whatever. Hopefully someone at National Supply will finally realize they have a problem somewhere, in that a few individuals seem able to obtain these types of things in a less than upfront manner. (This message has been edited by skeptic)

In order to purchase the patch, you are supposed to have required paperwork. It is not intended as a replacement patch for past Eagles, but one recognizing earning the award in the centennial year. NO ONE should be legitimately buying a quantity of the item without such documentation, which is not likely for the amount being offered. Surely, most Scouters should see the violation of Scout Law, not only by the seller on eBay, but whomever is bending rules somewhere (maybe getting a portion of profit)to allow the sale in the first place. As far as actual legal issues, that is, state or federal laws of some type, a legal expert would have to review the specifics. But, if the items are obtained by subterfuge or not following established procedures for the purchase, and since it is a copyrighted item I believe, there could be actual legal implications. Whatever, obviously, there are individuals who feel stretching the Scout Law, and possibly other statutes is okay, as long as they are able to find a way around the safe guards. This individual tried two years ago to purchase large quantities of the centennial patches, cub and scout, as well as a few other "restricted" items from our local shop, as he lives in our council; but the store followed the "supposed" rules and refused to sell them. So, after making surly comments, he went elsewhere; and obviously has been able to supply himself. Maybe the WLAC National shop has the same lax controls noted by another poster. Maybe some are right, that National shops, and indirectly National, does not care as long as they get their money. Maybe the whole thing is too expensive to pursue legally, so they just let it slide, though one would think if the verification process was not followed, as intended, at least someone would lose a job. Just find it really disappointing that there are some who cannot see the hypocrisy in this. Yes, I too see hypocrisy in some of the larger National stances, and wish they would go to complete local control at the CO level. But that is not the same issue. Guess it is like the person that sees taking wrong change, in their favor, as okay, since it is the large corporate entity that loses in most cases (though shortages can cause loss of employment if common); while others of us always correct the situation, no matter what the amount. The world is becoming more and more grey in many areas of right and wrong. Just another old man complaining about the erosion of society and living in another era I guess. Honor is in the mind of the individual; some have higher expectations.(This message has been edited by skeptic)

This individual is again offering restricted items, specifically the Centennial Eagle patch, for sale at obscene profits. Two questions arise again: how does he obtain so many? And why will BSA or eBay not do something about it? To me it is simply wrong, especially from an individual who trumpets his being an Eagle. I realize there are some who apparently see nothing wrong with this; but I truly do not see how it is not illegal, since ranks require paperwork. He also is still offering a few other items from the actual Centennial which were supposedly restricted as well. http://stores.ebay.com/Discovering-New-Deals?_rdc=1 There is at least one other seller, but he is not listing quantities available.

Just wonder what your expectation was for what came from National? As far as I know, the local troop, or family has always had to purchase the actual award and related paraphernalia. I did not even get a "large" certificate in 1959, only a card and letter. Of course, then the award was only the medal and patch; no additional pins and so on. It was sterling back then though; now the basic one is some kind of cast metal. If you want to spring for the sterling, it still is available, but considerably more costly.

http://m3foto.tumblr.com/post/18595233101/santorum-rally-spokane-valley-washington-2012 Not sure allowing Scout color guards at political functions is acceptable to BSA reg's, as they are not supposed to publicly support political groups. It is a grey area I guess if they "only" do the flags, and they do it for both sides. Still, a bit questionable it seems to me. The obvious boredom may not be the best publicity for the gathering either.

"If you're going to argue intellectual capacity........The other three are leaps and bounds ahead of Obama, especially when it comes to adherence to a personal philosophy." This statement is pretty questionable, especially in respect to the first part of it. Other than simply not liking President Obama, am not sure on what you base it. Guess it depends on your definition of "intellectual capacity". They are all double talk experts, but that does not make them more or less intelligent. Ron Paul is an actual doctor, so his educational background is deep, especially in that area; but some of his statements are almost Utopian it seems. While it would be wonderful to exist in a vacuum of isolationism, that is not a realistic expectation in today's world. The candidates most fitting LisaBob's comment are now gone from the Republican circus. It is telling that the best candidate they had, in my opinion, was Huntsman; but he was too centrist for the current campaign apparently.

When we ran the annual drives, everyone was "encouraged" to donate, but not necessarily pledge. Got a lot of $1 donations. I know at least once or twice, in the last store in which I worked, the store manager expected his underling managers to kick in a donation for any of their employees that did not do so themselves. I ran the drive once, and it we had a dozen or so that refused to participate, for whatever reason. Yet, somehow, we ended up with 100%, due to the behind the scene directive. The real irony was that when less pressure was used, we had better results, even if fewer donated. I made sure that year that everyone "understood" directed donations, and that is how I was able to get quite a few holdouts to contribute.

Still curious as to the thoughts on our SE report at our annual meeting which I noted yesterday. Has anyone else seen such a public exposure of the latest policies? Is it an indicator of a change in direction?

My question would be how can I be shown "proof" that my designation "actually" went to the specified group? Getting a straight answer from them is like looking for the proverbial needle. But, I am retired and do not need to be concerned directly anymore.

We had our annual meeting gathering last night, and when the SE gave his report/speech, he spent a lot of time on this subject, indirectly. Basically, he noted the multi-level youth protection safe guards, and specifically mentioned the file as one of the barriers. While I have no idea if this came from National, it would seem that a SE would not publicly make these comments to a large group of scouters without some type of higher up approval. The fact that we are right next door to Santa Barbara adds to the weight of these statements. Maybe this is a new front on this issue by National; put it out there as our policy, one that was implemented to keep these people out and was way ahead of the time. Would have to disagree that shredding the files would be a good choice, especially now. That just adds fuel to the fire to those that will find issues. Basement, while I too would "think" that in this case the plaintiff is on very soft ground, I would not have predicted the outcome in Oregon. The illogic in many jury decisions, as well as what often appears judicial bias in some judges, constantly amazes me.

"Most of all, perhaps, we need intimate knowledge of the past. Not that the past has any magic about it, but because we cannot study the future, and yet need something to set against the present, to remind us that the basic assumptions have been quite different in different periods and that much which seems certain to the uneducated is merely temporary fashion. A man who has lived in many places is not likely to be deceived by the local errors of his native village; the scholar has lived in many times and is therefore in some degree immune from the great cataract of nonsense that pours from the press and the microphone of his own age." (Learning in Wartime, 1939; C.S.Lewis)

Come on folks; if you want an alternative, it is there, even if you may have to go to more than one group. If you are that disenchanted, then that may simply be your best solution. It is pretty obvious that a few are not content within the BSA systems, and keep complaining and knocking it. Work within it, find personal and local solutions, or go somewhere else. As I have stated previously, if you are so unhappy with BSA that you can find little positive to say here, then I am concerned as to how you come across to those with whom you work. Scouting, within the BSA organization or elsewhere is still a choice. My experience has shown that most people that "constantly" have mostly negative things to say about something in which they participate, carry a similar attitude to other associations. Dwelling on the negatives constantly is not conducive to a happy involvement and likely not a particularly happy life. JMHO