Bob White

Mich, welcome to the board. I have a question for you however. Don't you feel you have an obligation to accept the positions of responsibility that the BSA sets as qualifications for the advancement, not just the offices you say "you" will accept for advancement?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Mrs.Smith, you are both right and wrong. You are right that the BSA program instructs that the troop Guides join the new Scout Patrol and act as a co-leader with the revolving Patrol Leaders. They can as the year progresses draw back more and more as the NSP develops more skills. It is also recommend that the Troop Guides join in with the higher adventure activities that the other scouts in their age group participate in so that they can maintain contact with their peers as well as be members of the NSP. You are incorrect to think that a patrol of older boys cannot function if none of them can hold a patrol job while working on Star or Life. The patrol can work just fine if the scouts cooperate. Have boys hold more than one position of responsibility is not a good situation. Most boys have their hands full trying to do one job well let alone two. The key is in the leadership training and abilities of the Patrol leader, and in the observation and evaluation abilities of the adult leadership. Multiple PORs is not the solution to your problem. Remember also the goal of the Patrol Leader is to help the patrol and its members to succeed. don't worry about filling all the offices. Fill the ones that are the highest need with the scouts you have. One person...one job. Then lead everyone to pitch in as needed for the success of the group.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Caddmommy, Sounds like the boys are getting a nice program....it's a shame they are not getting a scouting program!

"How many SM do you think would say that it is MY troop. My guess would be about 70%." Dan, I would venture to say that number or higher. But that is a lousy defense. It does however support a point I have made before. If you say "my troop" often enough you will convince your self that it is. But its not "your troop" you can't do whatever you want with it. you have a responsibility to the scouts, the CO and the BSA to follow the BSA program, not "your" program. It is in fact the troop your serve. And the point that you think you can do whatever you see fit because you say "my troop" proves my point. The two sem all too often to go hand in hand and both are incoorect. Change one attitude and you will begin to change the other as well. By the way never let the fact that the majority do something wrong be the basis for you doing something wrong. Good character has never been based on following what others do regardless of the numbers, but on following what is right.

Dan, as long as he/she is scoutmaster they have a responsibility to deliver the BSA's scouting program. Just being the SM does not put you in charge, or allow you to do anything you want. Your approach is very adversarial, "I'll do what I please and if you don't like it you will have to fire me." That is not what scouting is designed to be. As scoutmaster you are part of a balanced team. You are not in charge of the team and you do not have the right to do whatever you please. You answer to the Charter Organization's IH, COR, and CC, as well as to the local representatives of the BSA. A good Scout leader does their job, not whatever they see fit to do.

WHAT??? If the committee "has no problems with the CO" then why are you even contemplating taking everything and leaving?? The answer to #1 is NO, its not "your unit" it is the unit you belong to. The CO (charter organiization) owns the unit and its stuff. #2 see answer #1

Greg78 Fish or cut bait. You say you are trained in the program yet you talk about parents and scouts asking the SM to step down. Where in the BSA program did you learn that? Whoever gave you the idea that the boys choose the Scoutmaster, or the parents for that matter? You have yet to tell us one thing the scoutmaster has done wrong but you have shared plenty of things that you and others have erred on. The Institution Head of the charter organization has given you their decision. They are supporting the scoutmaster. You need to do the same or leave. No one is being benefitted by those opposing the legitimate authority of the IH and COR.

Then you will need to explain how that relates to the question you posed in order for us to have any idea how to help.

Mrs.Smith wrote, "Doesn't this mean that a poor leader who is active should be advanced over an inactive great leader." First, there is =no such thing as a scout advancing "over" another scout. Each scout is advanced on his own merits, and just because one advances does not mean that another doesn't get to. Secondly how could a scout be a great leader if he is not applying those skills?

"BUT, As long as he is the SM, he gets to run the program as he see fit." Dan, maybe you should take a moment and re-think that response. Is that what you really meant to say?

I am hopeful that the visitor's program will be as it has been in previous years, however this is the first Jamboree since the attacks of 9-11 and the event is held on a military base. Do not assume that it will be business as usual. The jamboree is still a year away, and whether or not visitors will be allowed in is not a decision for the BSA to make. It will be determined by the security needs and concerns of the US military and no one else.

The purpose of holding a position of responsibility is not so that you can advance. Troop and patrol leadership opportunities exist as a method of scouting to allow the scouts to learn and practice leadership and organizational skills, while applying them to the tasks of operating troop and patrol programs. Mrs.Smith If you are baking a cake and you leave out three ingredients, there is no point in worrying about whether or not you should leave out a fourth. You aren't going to get the desired results whether you add the fourth one or not. The troop has not organized the patrols correctly, they are not using Troop Guides correctly, they do not have trained leaders...Whether the scouts hold two PORs or not is irrelevant, you aren't going to get the results you need either way. Jerry Seinfeld tells the story of the TV commercial where the lady shows how well the detergent gets all the blood stains out of the clothing. He points out that "if your clothes are covered with blood maybe how you do laundry isn't your biggest problem!" Look at all the things the troop isn't doing or isn't doing according to the scouting program. Maybe what you are posting about here isn't the biggest problem. Until the big thing gets done (the leaders get trained and understand the program), you are wasting your time trying to solve the little things. PORs should be a natural function created by program needs. If the troop has dues to collect someone has to collect them, call that person the treasurer and give them the emblem of their office to show that is their responsibility. If a patrol leader isn't going to be at 100% of every activity and meeting he will need to designate a temporary leader. Call him the assistant patrol leader, and give him a patch to designate that responsibility. But, the troop has bigger problems than laundry.

Quotes from Greg78 4/8/04 The committee was taken by surprise but was not in the position to change leadership at the time. 4/9/04 She loaded up< U>the committee with her relatives when she began. The workers aren't firing the Boss, The Troop committee is. We will go as far as we can with the committee and approach the CO with the results. - we are at the committee action stage now. We will have a meeting with the committee and the CO and go from there. The committee and ASM's are meeting with the CO tonight. 4/15/04 So, as it became apparent to the committee members and parents After the parents and committee came together and made their recommendations to the CO.. From PNscouter 5/18/04 have worked with Greg on this issue and am the person which the committee may have chosen 5/19/04 All of these issues were discussed at the committee level Which brings us to today when Greg78 writes Please keep in mind there was no committee HUH? Where did they go? Both Greg78 and PNScouter referred to them, and now Greg78 tells us they never existed? Lets keep in mind we still have not had any specific things that the SM has done wrong explained to us. Now thats certainly Gregs right to withhold. But it is unfair to ask us what should be done when we still do not know why any of this has happened. It has boiled down to this. 1.The CO wants to have scouting and has selected and approved a Scoutmaster. 2.Some adults and scouts do not like the choice. They can either A. Stay and work together to develop a good scouting program B. Leave and join another troop or work with a new Charter organization. Solution: Pick one now and do it. It is unfair to everyone to hang around and continue to breed dissension whether in view of the scouts or not.

"then the BOR cannot refuse to sign him off for his service in that position." BORs do not "sign-off" on any requirements. They either unanimously approve the advancement or they site which requirement(s) still need to be completed and how completion will be measured in accordance with the BSA advancement policiesand procedures. The BOR varifies that the advancement was earned according to the conditions of the requirements, as established by the BSA. They also talk with the scout to learn more about him, his feelings about the troop program and to evaluate the performance of the adult leaders in the troop. In the specific case we are discussing, that was not done correctly. The scout was held to artificial requirements created by the BOR and not by the BSA. The scout should recieve a new board where the policies and procedures are followed correctly.

We sign them up June 1st and send them to Day Camp.

Acco40, Thank you for agreeing that the book does have the requirements explained right there in black and white. Page 169 defines active as "you need to be present when things are happening. Take part in meetings, in planning activities, and in the fun of adventures." This is not about just having a heart beat and being registered. If that is all there were to it how could the scout grow, practice and develop? Such an interpretation does little justice to the scout or the program he is supposed to be helping to lead. Every requirement in advancement requires the scout to "DO" something. The leadership requirement in Star, Life, and Eagle is no different.

GearHD, You have summarized the situation correctly. The unit exists only through a charter between the Chartering organization and the local Council. The unit is the outward expression of the Charter Organization's agreement to use the scouting program to serve youth in their organization or local community. Leaders cannot take the unit and go elsewhere, it is not theirs to take.

Other than creating some work for someone to make a new card for the scout when he retests for totin' chip, what was gained by tearing the card up in front of him and getting him worked up enough to brandish an ax in anger?

ScoutmasterTroop194, you invited any thoughts, so here are mine. Your committee, specifically your advancement chair, needs to get trained properly. They were wrong to withhold the rank based on conditions that are not requirements of the BSA to advance in rank. They were wrong to turn the scout away without siting specific BSA requirements that they determined were not met, and for not giving the scout specific ways to meet the requirement in order to be approved for advancement. If the scout were to appeal the board's decision, any appealate board set by the council would pass the scout if they have any understanding of the advancement policies. If they failed to do so, and the scout appealed to national, he would be immediately passed based on the facts you presented in your post. Dancinfox, you mistated the advancement requirement for leadership. There is no advancement requirement that says "hold a positon of responsibilty". The requirement is to "serve actively in a leadership position." "Serve actively " and "hold a position" are two entire different things. What actively serve means is based on conditions agreed to in advance by the Scout and the Scoutmaster or another adult leader. scoutmasterTroop194, setting and achieving goals is not a negative attribute for a scout aged boy to have and he should not be punished for having them. Forget about slowing the scout down. Your job is to fire him up not cool him off. Forget about mom, she is not your responsibility and it is not your role to determine how she should parent her son. Lead the Scouting program, follow the advancement policies. You have every reason to go back to the Advancement chair and say "we messed up, we didn't follow the rules of the program. We did not do service to this scout." He deserves to be held to the requirements of the BSA not the requirements of the errant committee members who messed up his board of review.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

A Charter organization has a responsibility to support the scouting program and its methods and policies. The Uniform is a method used for achieving the aims, and so like all the other methods, its use should be promoted and supported by the CO. Can a CO require complete uniforms? Yes it can, but it should be considerate of the individual's resources when doing so. Be especially careful not to predicate advancement on uniform wear. That would be the same as adding a requirement, and that is not withing the authority of the CO.

Are we really hated by the rest of the world? Does anyone actually know that as a fact? I would be interested on how that data was gathered. Do some hate the USA? Yes, no doubt. History is filled with examples of people who were hated for poor reasons or no reason at all. But there are others who love the USA, envy us, admire us, risk there lives to get here, leave there homes and families to work here. A federal court judge, at a ceremony I attended where a hundred new US citizens were sworn in, said that more people choose to become citizens here each year than in any other country. These broad generalizations condemning the United States are more a condemnation of our educational system than of the reality of the world. We are not perfect as a people or as a government, but the news is often full of stories or people who want nothing more in their life than to come to the USA, when was the last time you new of several families who crowded onto a fishing boat so that they could escape from America to go to Haiti, or any other place. It's easy for those in other countries to take their verbal shots at the USA, many of them have never had the freedom to complain about their country. I couldn't care less how others view us. I don't think the forefathers fashioned the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution with any concern of how others would think of us. God forbid we become a people who govern, or are governed by, the results of a global popularity poll.

merlyn, Nice try changing the topic But I'm not biting. if you want to discuss something else start a new thread. it would be nice if gave an actual reference so that your comment was relevant and accurate. NJ, You disagree with his position and instead of debating his point you want to criticize his approach. I can understand that. The course of action of those attacking the BSA has been similar in their approach. Many of the posts opposing the BSA on this forum have been filled with half truths or outright falshoods using invectives toward the entire membership. Just read some of Merlyn's attacks as an easy example. So why the sudden astonishment when one person turns the tables. Is it because you expect something more of a BSA member? and why is that? Because you expect them to have a higher value base? That's why they restrict the membership. Will everyone live up to the tenets of the program? I think more do than don't.

Rather than a web site I would direct you to the the BSA adult membership application and the Boy Scout Handbook where it explains the Scout Oath and Scout Law. Specifically the explaination of "Duty to God" and "A Scout is Reverent". That is truly everything you need to know about the position of the BSA.

Deloe First you have to understand what the Scout Law is. It is a personal committment to a set of values. The Web site merely reprinted a newpaper column that appeared in support of scouting. I do not see that they made any other assertions regarding the column. Perhaps the writer believes he is living by the Law by being Loyal; by speaking out in scouting's defense, Helpful; by presenting a viewpoint that will help others to understand another side of the story, Cheerful; because he wanted to say something positive about the Scouting organization, Brave; because he knew that he would be attacked for having an opinion that some disagreed with, and Reverent; for his support of scoutings Duty to God. What bothers me more is your hypocracy. Scouting has no problem with you being an athiest. You are welcome to continue in your daily life not believing in anything you choose. But scouting as an organization has a set of core beliefs, and you don't want them to have those. You would rather see the program end then for its members to be able to believe differently then you. As a Christian I have no interest in belonging to an athiest organization and could not care less how big of a club you have or don't have. Why are some athiests so interested in belonging to an organization who makes it clear that one of its main tenets is a "Duty to God". The BSA is more than happy to leave you alone but you don't seem willing to do the same. You have no qualms attacking us, you just don't like us to defend ourselves. If you want to shout hypocrite at someone, stand in front of a mirror.

Unless specifically stated in the BSA requirement that an activity cannot be repeated, then it can be. "each hike can only be used for 1 requirement. and they have to be distinct events" Absolutely False! "You cannot double dip on requirements between MBs." Not True, unless specifically stated in the requirement. "you cannot apply the same hikes you complete for the Hiking MB to the requirements for the Backpacking MB" True, but only because of this statement in the Hiking Merit Badge requirements.*The hikes in requirements 5 and 6 can be used in fulfilling Second Class (2a) and First Class (3) rank requirements, but only if Hiking merit badge requirements 1, 2, 3, and 4 have been completed to the satisfaction of your counselor. The hikes of requirements 5 and 6 cannot be used to fulfill requirements of other merit badges. Lastly, "You are getting in to the no more, no less rule in Scout advancement." Correct! (This message has been edited by Bob White)