The Blancmange

It's actually the district or council's responsibility to verify those things. I think we're on the same page that it is not the best idea, but I also don't think it's a reason to question a scoutmaster's integrity.

As much of a blowhard as this COR seems to be, he is the COR and speaks for the chartering organization. If this is how the organization wants to run its youth organization, then so be it. But that doesn't mean the volunteers who seem to have put on a successful event without interference have to go along. I would have the unit committee, collectively, tell the COR that they will prepare the $3.27 (or whatever it happens to be) refunds at they same time they prepare their resignation letters. Rather than explaining anything to council in his fanciful audit, he can explain why a wildly successful unit folded.

Don't mean to take the thread too far off track, and if so, I apologize, but "diagnosed by the school" is a big red flag for me. My oldest son was "diagnosed by the school" (in actuality by folks not qualified to render any sort of diagnosis) with ADHD, and they were insistent that he needed to be on meds, IEP, etc. We had him evaluated by an independent (there are benefits to the school district for labeling kids in this manner) psychologist, who diagnosed him with anxiety. After some counseling and following several suggestions, and a discussion with the superintendent about unqualified staff playing doctor, things improved greatly. I obviously know nothing about your situation but wanted to throw that out there as a caution against blindly accepting a school's "diagnosis" of a student.

Counselors have pretty wide latitude in deciding whether or not to accept work performed prior to contacting the counselor. It has nothing to do with the worksheets themselves, which are forms prepared for convenience by non-official sources. My suggestion would be for your son to talk to his Scoutmaster about finding a different counselor with whom he might be able to work more amenably. Or bite the bullet and do the work again. If it's personal fitness, it certainly can't hurt.

I would disagree with this as a general rule. Our troop is fairly small. So is one from a neighboring town. 2 or 3 times per year we will go camping, hiking or some other activity with them. I can't imagine anyone considering those district or council activities. On the other hand, if several folks on a district committee work together to put on an event, that is sounding more and more like a district event. Is it not a district event simply because the DE says so? Is our organization volunteer run?

I offer no comment on the merits of the advice, but just thought folks would find this interesting because it purports to include input from the national advancement people: http://netcommissioner.com/askandy/2014/05/issue-397-may-20-2014/ So yes, this means that, a partial pull-up, so long as the Scout has been trying and practicing for at least 30 days, is considered improvement. So is a partial sit-up or push-up. The idea is practice to improve, and so long as both of these have happened, it’s okay.

Simply not accurate. This is a common, but incorrect conflation of two separate rules. One says that you must have 2 deep adult leadership for an outing. The other prohibits one-on-one contact between adults and youth. As long as the two deep leadership is satisfied by two leaders on an outing (possibly, and quite often, travelling in different vehicles), the one-on-one contact rule is followed by having one adult and two or more youth in the vehicle. As you attend more locally-operated training, you will see that misinformation is not all that uncommon.

This might seem hyper-technical, but it's not against YP rules, it's against the "Boy Scouts of America Social Media Guidelines." There is a thread discussing this from when that document was first issued. The point is someone who reviews YP guidelines out of concern over this might never discover these Guidelines.

It seems like more than semantics to me, suggesting a focus on the adult leaders rather than the scouts. I don't see why that is a "BS" point to discuss.

Sorry for not being clear. My comment was directed more at the "My" troop and "I direct the troop" aspects.

Anyone else see this as a red flag?

Hope there are no squirt guns involved, else you'll have a G2SS problem on your hands.

How about asking someone at the school who operates the machine? I'll bet they would be more than willing to offer advice so their machine doesn't get messed up.

The confusion comes when you drill down further into the AOL requirements: "Be active in your Webelos den for at least six months since completing the fourth grade (or for at least six months since becoming 10 years old)" A boy can satisfy either of these to receive AOL, and if he happens to be young for his grade, can be younger than 10 1/2 at the time he meets the requirement.

Well, either they are very generous benefactors of the unit, or they had previously deposited unit funds into their personal account and are now reimbursing it. In any case, sounds like some transparency is in order.

I'm curious how this worked? Councils don't collect financial statements or anything along those lines from units. The only "account" that the council would be involved with would be the unit account used to pre-pay registration fees, advancement item purchases, and the like. The council allows these folks to make deposits and withdrawals from this account?

I certainly wouldn't want that responsibility as a leader. What happens if they are lost/stolen/damaged/etc?

Our council sends refunds to the unit, so this would not be an issue.

Really? In the grand scheme of things, this seems proportionate and appropriate. What did you expect, prison time?

They can make a recommendation . . . to the scouts.

Welcome to BSA training. Not unusual at all for a trainer to make things up as he/she goes along, particularly as it relates to BSA policy.

Any word on this? Our unit's site is on here too. I realize this was a free service that no one was obligated to continue to maintain, but it would be nice to know if it is done for good so units can make other arrangements.

It's wrong. Did someone actually argue that it's OK or should be tolerated? Not sure what there is to discuss.