Bob White

Ed when you originated this cliche you were refering to patrol members following patrol leaders. Now You use the term "following" in place of "learning". Choose a point of reference so we can have a balanced discussion. Bob White

According to the BSA manual on Flag Ettiquette a hand salute is used during the National Anthem only if the music is live. A hand salute is not used for recorded music or if sung acapella. Why this is I have no idea, that's just the rule of ettiquette. Bob White

Lots of them Ed, but you wouldn't recognize their names. They are boys who have come through the scouting program in units that I have served. They are anxious immature teenagers with limited attentions spans, and no little or no leadership experience who we teach the skills of leadership to. It's a shame you didn't think of a similar group. Bob White

I agree with Joni and Dave, Conditions do not appear condusive to support this unit at this time. Relocate the remaining scouts and adults and perhaps in the future the troop can be re-established. BW

I would ask the boys to dress in as complete and as correct a uniform as they can, to show their respect to a the man and the program he gave his time to. I see nothing wrong with wearing the MB sash. If the man had been in the OA I would see nothing wrong with them wearing either the OA or the MB sash (just not both). Bob White

No Zahnada. What I would be agreable to is if you stuck to the facts. Everyone did not seem.... Some did not seem..... ONE seemed. Out of 54 posts ONE person made a reference to followers in a negative vein that I could find. Armed with that ONE post you came up with EVERYONE. What I would agree to Zahnada is an attempt at an honest representation of the circumstances. I do not find evidence of that in your posts in this thread. Bob White

Thanks OGE sometimes it just takes a different voice to sing the same tune in order for some people to listen. Bob White

"Kid's got a good point." No he doesn't Ed! What the kid has is a Scoutmaster who A)Isn't doing the job of training leaders. B)Doesn't understand the leadership skills of scouting. C)Isn't paying attention to the needs and characteristics of the Scouts. What the Kids have is a SM not getting the job done. 1)Why wasn't Billy's Patrol Leader taught how to use the skills of leadership to get Billy to participate as a team memeber? 2)Why wasn't Billy trained how to use leadership skills to mend his relationship with his patrol? 3)Why wasn't the patrol counseled prior to the election about the role of the PL, and the responsibility of voting wisely. What you describe is not a problem caused by scouts but one caused by the lack of leadership skills used by the Scoutmaster. But that is a whole other thread of discussion.

"Everyone seems to agree that the term "follower" has a negative connotation." I really didn't want to get back into this topic, but this is the kind of misleading stuff that drives me nuts. Show us any evidence as to the validity of that statement. I find few if any posters in this thread who have even hinted that "follower" is negative. So where do you come up with everyone? My own stand has been that it is neither positive or negative as a term, just that it is unrelated to whether or not a boy can be taught how to lead. Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Welcome bsabrit, The relationship is like brother and sister. They share the same parent but are individuals who hopefully have each others best interst at heart and would not do anything to hurt the other. Program wise they are independent but related. The Venturing members have mussc they can share with their younger friends in the troop. The troop has potential future members to help the crew continue to grow. What's needed in your situation is some parental intervention to remind the siblings to get along. The information you have been given regarding Boy Scout advancement in Venturing is correct. A copy of that section on Boy Scouts advancing in Venturing should be shared with the SM. Once he is aware that he cannot hold advancement opportunities over the boys heads to keep them active in the troop he will be forced to rely on other strategies like...program enhancements. Bob White

Hi Rooster, Good question and I would like to respond to it. As a mentor I do not lead the scouts to follow "me". For instance I lead the Scout to be religious but I do not lead him to follow my religion. I lead him to make ethical decisions, but to make his own decisions based on his own value base, not to do what he thinks I would do. I train scouts to follow Scouting not to follow Scouters. Boys need to make decisions on actions and behaviors based on internal controls not external controllers. I have no interest in a Scout wanting to be like me, I want him to be like himself, and have him base his character on the principles of scouting. As a Scout Leader, my goal is to create more leaders, not more followers. I do not see this as a unique attitude among Scouters. I hope this clarifies things, Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

I am not a professional scouter but I am familiar with the removal process. I trust DSteele to correct me wherever I may err. Your friend should contact the local District Executive and arrange for a meeting with the Charter Organization Head (IH), and the Charter Organization Representative (COR) as soon as possible. The CC has input on the adult leadership and is one of two required signatures to approve an adult application but is not the sole authority on removing a leader. The Institution Head or the COR must make the final decision and then notify the council Scout Executive of the decision. The biggest problem in unit operation is the ability of adults to play nice together. Bob White

8 years as youth, next month begins my 28th continuous year as an adult leader.

No Ed, I have no wish for them to follow me, I want them to follow the scouting program. And Ed... "If not all good followers make good leaders", as you now say, then that kind of blows your whole theory that you have to be a good follower before you can be a good leader, doesn't it?!

I never said anything negative about any posters in general in this thread. I am warning you how this topic came up and how A poster uses it to avoid allowing scouts the full measure of the program. That supporting this psycho-babble of a cliche' only reinforces his behavior. Everybody participates on this board for there own reason. Some to share information some to seek information, some to change the program some to support the program, and some to hurt it. I am here to support the program, and to help make sure that some of the misinformation shared is countered, not by personal opinion, but by references to the scouting resources. That really irritates some people. Good. They should be troubled about not keeping the promise made to boys in the BSA handbook. I have a pretty good idea of who is irritated by what I post, and who isn't, and I make no apologies for the company I keep. I find it ironic that you feel a good leader needs to be a good follower, unless what they follow is the scouting program, Then you find them acting high and mighty. All I'm asking you to do is not justify this cliche', Scouts deserve better than that. I have said enough on this topic. You guys want to take pot shots at me have at it. Bob White

That's fine. That also has nothing to do with discussion. I am not arguing "follower" as positive or negative. My point is that skill of leadership does not depend on your ability to be a follower first. It depends on your ability to use the skills of leadership.

Zahnada private mesaged me prior to originating the post. I am aware of where the phrase came from, and what it was in reference to. It is a convulusion of a discussion about leadership being a learned set of skills, while another poster sees it as the boss of followers, and feels that in order to be raised to that post you must first be a good follower for a couple years before he "allows" a scout to be elected. You might as well argue that to be a good fisherman you must first be a good fish. Unchallenegd this thread will give that poster (and any others like him) all the ammo he needs to continue to ignore the elements of the scouting program. I do not expect him to change, but I cannot in good conscience let the premise go unchallenged. You want to make cracks about me go ahead, I just want scouts to have a chance to experience scouting and not miss out on scouting opportunities because of silly cliche's. Bob White

You know Beaver, I read the posts from Eamonn, OGE, Matua, Mk9750 and DSteele and a number of others I don't feel the least bit lonely. I admit to the4 occassional passionate outbursts, but every now and then I get fed up with the few who don't follow the program, not because they don't know it, but because they don't want to do it. Bob White

Thanks, (I think) and how many scout eligible youth are there? BW

SPL T-15, And what part of the project are you planning and giving leadership too? BW

All possibly true Beaver. All good examples of poor scoutmastership. All unrelated to the point I'm trying to make here. BW

No NWScouter, again you are not getting my point. The originator of the phrase we are debating did not introduce it to elevate the term follower, or to explain the skills of leadership. It was introduced as an excuse to avoid delivering the scouting program as it was designed. It was used as a crutch to avoid having to develop Troop Guides, avoid sharing leadership of the new scouts with an ASM, avoid having to give any responsibility to a scout under 12 years old. If that poster were to agree that all it takes for a boy to lead is to recieve and understand training in the skills of leadership, then I would be happy take part in any irrelevent discussion on "if a leader is a follower, or a follower a leader". But all we do by not acknowledging that leadership is the performance of a set of skills, and not a social position that one rises to, is fuel the fire for some adults to avoid training scouts to lead. Bob White To the previous poster. For what you say to be true one would have to look at scouts as their followers. Perhaps you do. I do not.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

The problem here is one of attitude and philososphy. The phrase that Zahnada used to begin this thread has been used in more than one post by a poster as an excuse to deny open elections of younger scouts, avoiding the use of New Scout Patrols and as a reason for using mixed patrols. He has made it clear that he believes younger scouts incapable of leaderhip until they learn to be good followers. The effort being made by some on this thread is to rationalize not following the program through an academic dissection of the role of "follower". It is a dodge pure and simple. They wish to avoid the fact that developing leaders is the role they chose as Scoutmaster. By not seeing new scouts as leadership potential they releive themselves of their reponsibility to train and to follow the program. Because they can prove through cliche's that new scouts cannot lead. Never mind the fact that the BSA has almost 100 years of proving otherwise. I accept the BSA philosophy of servant leadership which is taught in both basic and advanced leadership courses in the BSA. I see "follower" as members of the patrol who we develop as followers of the program. If the scouts I serve feel they are following me then I have done my job incorrectly. If they follow my example of scouting I have succeeded. To some this may seem like semantics, but there is an important distinction there. I would hope that the same methods and characteristics they emmulate can be seen in all the other adult and junior leaders in the troop. We do not want the scouts to follow us, we want them to follow scouting, to join with us in sharing the values of the BSA program. Some posters make it quite evident that in "their" troop, things are done "their" way. No New Scout Patrol no matter what the troop make up is No leaders 12 or under SM assigned troop offices Persons other than committee members on BORs Attendance limits to determine Scout Spirit Assigned Merit badges at summer camp Merit badge classes for troop meetings Pages of troop rules The list goes on.. That's fine if that's the only way you can get the job done. But be honest with yourself and others. Get your own uniform (use all those "optional" pieces you wish existed) and call it by a different name, because it is not Scouting. If we allow this thread to summarize that a scout must first be a good follower before he is allowed to lead, you will give license to these kinds of adult leaders to rob boys of a real scouting experience. Bob White

What are the membership sizes of the other two troops? BW

NWScouter, you have the program backwards! The Patrol is not there to support the Patrol Leader. The PL is there to support the Patrol. The PL is not a follower of the SPL. The SPL is a support person for the PL. The SPL does not follow the Scoutmaster. the Scoutmaster serves and supports the junior leaders. You and Ed seem to want to have Boss/Follower relationships, and that is not what leadership is about. Certainly that is not how the scouting program was EVER designed to work. There are no followers. "Follow me Boys" was a Disney movie not a BSA training video. We serve others to help them succeed. This notion of "you cannot lead to you learn to follow" is a crutch used by some Scoutmasters as a way to avoid having to follow the program. It is soon followed by the phrase, "The Handbook only recommends it, it doesn't say you have to do it". Then the tri-fecta is completed with the attitude, "I tried it once and it didn't work". "Those who say it cannot be done should stay out of the way of those who are doing it." Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White)