Bob White

Guide to Safe Scouting happens to be where prohibited activities are listed. It probably seemed logical to put prohibited activities all in one place regardless of the reason behind them, and since most are safety issues the G2SS seems the most appropriate place to record the list does it not? If alcohol were purely a safety issue it would be prohibited under any condition in scouting, but it's not.

Sorry Meteu but Patrol and Troop activities are boy lead. Do not think that Scouting is Boy run, it is not. No one is asking for blind disobedience. You have not been told to do anything morally repugnant or illegal. You have been given the rights and responsibilities as a memebr of the BSA. Your rights do not include to use the BSA's image and uniforms as you please. As a Scout you have a responsibility to follow the rules of your community. You also have the right to try and change them, but I remind you of the words from the Boy Scout Handbook as they explain the values of the Scout Lasw which you have pledged to follow. "A Scout is Obedient. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to change them in an orderly manner rather than disobey them". You have an opportunity now to help your leaders and fellow scouts learn something about the program they did not know. Being a good citizen in any community is not about doing only what you want to do. You have a responsibility to obey the rules of the community. Your troop leaders have that same responsibility. It is possible that they have no idea that they are wrong and would welcome your help. I am sure that you and they would rather feel you were properly uniformed and not violating the uniform regulations. The choice is yours, your decision will speak more about your integrity than about your uniforming. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

As it has been explined many, many, times before, the prohibition on laser tag and paint ball is not safety related. It is about the image of scouting. The national executive board has determined that there are activities that while some may see as fun, do not reflect the character of the program. Aiming and shooting at human beings is one of the things they prohibit. The same is true of adults drinking alcohol when scouts are present or on BSA property. It's about the image of the program, and since it is the BSA that owns the image they get to decide what should or should not be associated with it. Debating this issue based on safety is a red herring. It is not a safety issue and no amount of safety will alter the policy.

It is extrordinary the way you twist things Beavah, The fact that you saw these events published does not mean that they did not have permission from the council first as I posted they would need. Did the articles say that the units did these things without permission? All the article tells you is what thet did. I would wager none talk about if any permissions were sought or not. So the article alone does not address BSA policiy in any way. Nor do they estab;ish BSA policies.

And did knowing the boat was going to sink diminish your experience?(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Meteu You do understand from the previous psots that the BSA uniform policy currently (and for many, many, years) says that you never wear the merit badge sash on your belt. Now that you know that is is the policy what will you choose to do? Perhaps your troop does this only because no one in the past knew the uniform rules? Now that you know you could help the others learn more and wear the uniform more correctly. (A Sout is Helpful) Or you could make the personal choice to followe the BSA uniform policies and set the examle of good uniforming in your unit? (A Scout is Obedient)

What I would do if it were within my responsibility would be to teach them the rules, It would be the SE's authority to decide if memberships or charters get revoked. "raise money for the family of a fellow cub scout with cancer," To do so in uniform or using the scouting name or emblems would be improper and in violation of BSA regulations, unless a product or service was sold with advance permision from the council. "solicit donations for care packages for our troops overseas" Without pre-approval from the Council office it would be in violation of BSA regulations. "asking for the loan or donation of a special wheelchair so a handicapped scout could participate" To do so in uniform or using the scouting name or emblems would be improper and in violation of BSA regulations. "setting up discounts for scout programs with local merchants and the like." Without pre-approval from the Council office it would be in violation of BSA regulations. Beavah, you really do not know the BSA policies regarding this issue.

I thought I made my point clear in my first post TwoCubDad? 1) There is no need, no request from the BSA, and no instruction from the WB course, to keep anything secret or surprising. 2) We have discussed far more Wood Badge elements in far greater detail in other threads on this very forum without anyone closing threads down under the excuse that it needs to be a mystery to enhance the experience for others. 3) Knowing how the game is played has not been proven by anyone to actually diminish the learning of the lesson. 4) In neither this thread, or the one that was removed, did anyone actually post how the game was played, yet it was still removed. The most that was said was that there are not any questions involved in the game. Well, there aren't any questions involved in dodge ball either. If there were a thread on dodge ball and we revealed that it lacked questions would we need to close that thread as well? There are far better reasons for closing down threads then the fear that someone might learn something from Wood Badge.

Gotta disagree Barry I think you have your terms mixed up. Almost every decision a person makes is discriminatory but not predjudiced. Predudice is an irrational pre-judgement of a person or group based upon common but unrelated characteristics. You don't really believe that most people make decisions that way do you? To judge someone's abilities based on whether you see their actions as good or bad uses discrimination. Ga is prejudging leadership skills not on the skills that are displaying but by how they choose to dress, even though they may dress correctly.

Thats a bit predjudiced isn't it Ga? If most the scout leaders you knew with successful troops drove blue cars would you then pre-judge other leaders skills by the color of their car? There is no difference. Shouldn't the measure of their skill be determined by the skills diplayed by each person and not by something as unrelated as whether they wear knots? What about the scouters that only wear their knots sometimes? Are they only skilled when they wear the shirt without the knots?

"Remember, less than 5% of the population are natural leaders, so the rest will follow when given the choice. When a leader stands up, the rest will follow." It is said that 64% of all statistics are made up. I would be curious as to what total percentage of the population are in leadership positions? Which population are we discussing? At what age in their development was it determined that they were leaders and came by it naturally and not through observation, practice, training, or power. Being able to make people follow you does not mean that you are leading them in the right direction.

"So when this game got started at WB I pretty much knew what was going to happen. While I can believe you had an opinion or 'feeling" about what might happen based on your personal experience, would you agree that without knowing the experiences and the characteristics of each and every other participant that there was no way for you to know what the actual outcome would be. " And yes, it probably did change what I took away from the game." Isn't it likely that each person comes to Wood Badge and this game with different life experiences and that each would take away something different from the game based on those experiences? "I don't recall it as being fun or enlightening." Not everyone does, even people experienceing it for the first time do not always find it fun or enlightening. "In fact I recall thinking it wasn't especially well-executed and didn't really achieve the outcome intended, and was more than a bit heavy handed at the point in the course when it occurred. " I have seen this same game done very well and very badly, like any other game it depends on the gameleader. "But maybe my view might have been different if I hadn't known what the point was from the outset." "Maybe" being the operative word. You really don't know. You could say the same thing about any and every aspect of your life. The goal of training is to come away having learned. Whether you learned some things before you came or while at the training is unimportant. The goal is simply to see that the information is known. The fact that you knew the game did not alter the game for others or alter the purpose of the game. Nor would the lesson have been lessened if everyone knew the game. It would simply not take as long to play, allowing more time to be spent on another activity or in the reflection of the game. But as long as everyone walked away understanding the lesson then the goal of the training was met. What if everyone came to Wood Badge understanding what Vision meant. Would that ruin Wood Badge? What if at a troop meeting the SPL was going to teach how to tie a one-handed bowline and discovered that everyone already knew how. Is the lesson ruined? Of course not. The goal was to end up with everyone able to tie a one-handed bowline, mission accomplished. The program can now move on to something else. Is your priority that the SPL gets to teach it or that the scouts know the skill? Did the people who previously shared with the scouts ruin their troop meeting? No The goal was not to learn how to tie the knot "at the troop meeting". The goals was to see that the scouts could tie the knot.

How much a person knows or thinks they know really isn't the issue. What is at question from GaHillbilly is...when what they think they know is not correct according to the program then how do you change them. Ga, Changing others is a long and difficult task and usually ends up in frustration for both parties. People change under two conditions, 1) After they first make a personal choice to change, 2) Once they are forced to change in order to get what they want. The easiest way to develop leaders who use and follow the BSA program is to purposefully select them at every opportunity. That includes for unit positions, district/council positions, training staffs, every position in scouting. If scouters knew that in order to be an adult volunteer that they either needed to follow the program or they would be kept in their own small corner where they could do the least amount of harm, then I think they would begin to pay attention to the program Methods and policies that they are obligated to use and follow. The only good news is that for the most part only a small percentage of people who do not follow the program seem to last more than a few years. Oh there are always exceptions. But if the local scouters are smart they keep these kinds of leaders close enough to expose them to good scouting, but far enough away to keep them from infecting other portions of the local program. Unit level volunteers are the responsibility of the charter organizations. The district and council can offer resources to guide them along the right path but the charter organization needs to take responsibility for who they select and who they retain. The BSA has little control over them. The District and Council volunteers should be selected for their ability to do their job according to the BSA programs, and Council and District administrators should not tolerate volunteers who do not follow the official program in a positive and supportive way.

And yet nothing about Wood Badge or the Win All You Can game has been divulged in this thread either. "you should have explained how this all worked, so we could have played the game better." If someone in you course actually said that then either they were not paying attention or the game was not done according to the syllabus, because the rules are repeated over and over again throughout the game. The scoring is explained prior to each and every round and the scores are posted continually so that everyone knows where they stand. Besides there is no right or wrong way to play the game.

When you say they are ineffective...just what sort of "effectiveness" were you expecting? The recognitions are, for the most part, either earned based on requirements, or presented by others to honor or recognize work done in the past or over a long period of time. Just because someone was not helpful to you does not mean that they were not helpful to others in the area of the BSA programs that the recognition is presented by. I think you are assigning characteristics to the recognitions and to the recipients that they were never meant to represent. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I never said the content did not matter. I said that the content does not rely on mystery, or surprise, or confidentiality from others. The content is available from a lot of other places. The BSA wants people to understand these skills whether or not they attend Wood Badge. Attending Wood Badge just makes it easier to learn and to teach then doing it in little pieces at a time. Learning these skills in a scouting atmosphere is what makes it fun. There was a time when "what happened at Wood Badge, stayed at Wood Badge". It was that attitude that did the course so much harm and build a great resentment among many scouters toward the course. For that very reason the crafters of Wood Badge for the 21st Centrury removed that "cloak" of mystery. Again, we have already discussed far more elements of Wood Badge on this forum in far greater detail than we did with the Win All You Can Game, and no one closed those threads. It seems unreasonable to start now and especially to start with this topic. Two cub dad wrote "But if we are discussing the game specifically, it clearly works better if there is some element of surprise to it." All I can say to that is ...prove it. What data, evidence, or instructions for the game can you reference to prove that? I do not think that you can substantiate that belief. I appreciate that you feel that way, but I hope you will understand that is is just a feeling and it has no actual validation. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Beavahm Sorry but your memory has not served you well in the past I woud rather doubt that you or I can rely on its accuracy now or in the future. InfoScouter was kind enough to type up the related information. Youth and adults at the unt level are not to solicite donations for individual or unit activities. Them's the rules, eh! There is no reason for a unit to not be able to plan a program and budget expenses without soliciting donations. Again nothing keeps a unit from using its resources within the unit and the chartering organization, or from accepting help for their program if it is offered. What is prohibited is soliciting donations (nice words for 'begging') from the community for unit needs, which was exactly what Pack283 was asking about.

Unlike a book or movie where the whole point of the experience is to build up to the cilmatic ending, the same is not true of BSA training. The purpose of training is for the volunteer to ba able to learn and apply the information. So there is no need to encase it in mystery. The BSA no longer has "mystery" as a part of the Wood Badge experience. They want the know,edge used and shared. Someone who does not want to share a ceremony as an example is not required, but neither is anyone required to not share it. Someone who says they are not going to attend Wood Badge because they know the rules to Win All You Can were likely not going to go anyway. The Wood Badge "experience" takes place in the atmoshere of Scouting fellowship that forms between the participants, not in the content of the lessons.

I think you greatly misunderstand the role of the Eagle counselor, it is not to help the scout with the project but to help guide him through the application process and project paperwork. No one has suggested that the counselor help the scout with planning or leading the project. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

And I agree with Packsaddle. There is nothing wrong with leaving Scouting as a 1st Class, Star, or Life Scout. We have a young man right now who will be aging out of Boy Scouts in about 8 weeks. He has 57 merit badges, he has been to Northern Tier Canoe Base, Philmont High Adventure Base, National Jamboree, has held a regional youth office, is an officer in the OA chapter, and has accomplished many other things both in and out of Scouting. He will end his Boy Scout career as a Life Scout, by his own choice. It is not for lack of encouragement or for not knowing what needs to be done, nor is he a bad young man in any way. He had a project he was excited about doing, and it was mishandled at the district advancement committee level and now he has no enthuiasm about doing an Eagle project. He is happy abou what he has done and learned through Scouting and has no problems saying that he is a Life Scout. He still has a couple years to complete his Quartermaster rank and may choose to do so, or he may not. Either way it will be his decision and not not force-fed to him. As far as the unit leadership is concerned he is a good young man and that is what is important.

It requires neither right nor athority to be able to read, attend training, apply the Scouting program, or to share the contents of the BSA resources. I think if there is any personal attribute that is related to our differences it is the choices we make to keep one's word and follow the rules of the game. It is not our game. It belongs to the BSA they determine its elements and the volunteers agree to deliver it, not change it at their personal whim. The BSA provides the same training and resources for everyone to use, but for some reason some people join the team but refuse to learn the game. Beavah It would seem you never met Bill Hillcourt. I had the pleasure of dining with him on a few ocassions. Hillcourt was not the quiet man you suggest. He was very set in his beliefs and undeerstanding of Scouting and he was not patient with those who did not follow the Patrol Method and the Scouting Program. He was not humble about it at all. He understood the program and he expected the unit leaders and other volunteers to follow it. By the way, you continue to write things that simply have no basis in truth. "So yeh can imagine my wonderment that you can claim authority on the materials that no one else has, eh?" If I have ever claimed authority on the materials then you show folks where that was. There is a search engine on this sight. Find a single post where I claim to be an authority. I have always attributed the authority to the BSA. It's their program. Lots of volunteers have been involved in developing it over the years but I have NEVER claimed authority over it. That was a gross and purposeful misrepresentation you made, and it is unfortunate that you so frequently resort to that kind of embellishment in order create support for your views.

There is nothing in the lessons of Wood Badge that rely on surprise twists, mystery, or the like. WWW, the most information that wasw shared was that there were no question. A fact that is told to the participants at the very beginning of the game. There is no surprise to be ruined. LOTS of games do not involve asking questions, that should not shock or spoil anyone's experiences. As far as thinking that knowing what is going to happen in advance will spoil the fun, anyone who has ever been on Wood Badge staff knows everyything that is going to happen in advance and we still have fun, and we still learn more each time. None of what is taught in Wood Badge is unique to Wood Badge. The Win All You Can game is a common excercise in innumerable corporate leadership seminars. Those currently holding staff syllabi will find in the opening instruction from the BSA to the WB staff that the attitude of WB being secritive is a thing of the past. To compare it to the ceremonies of the OA is a mistake. The OA ask that such things be kept confidential to heighten their experience. Wood Badge makes no such request. To assume that the BSA wants or needs WB training to be secretive is a gross misconception of the training. Wood Badge is supposed to be shared with others. The fun comes from the people you meet and interact with, the information is just good solid leadership skills that can be found in many different books and training courses. There is nothing secretive or suspenseful about Wood Badge. And there is nothing in the course, or from the BSA, asking or instructing that its elements be a surprise. This is an artifical attitude that is being attched to it by Scouters improperly relating The current Wood Badge to the old WB training methods and to OA neither of which are correct comparisons.

ursus, my question was to Jet. I do not see how he can anticipate that a Scout will know which adult has had what training or would be knowlegdeable in this area. Why set the scout up for a problem by having him select an Eagle counselor who may not know the correct process. It would seem to make a lot more sense for the unit's adult leadership to make that assignment based on the adult's training,knowledge, and experience, rather than have a Scout guess as to who might be good. And no, your response did not seem logical.

how is a scout going to know that?

To think that the elements of Wood badge cannot be discussed in public is a throw back to the old way and old habits of Wood Badge training prior to the year 2000. This concept change is even discussed in the opening pages of the staff syllabus for Wood Badge for the 21st Century. To think that anything is off limits for open public discussion is not an attitude that is supported by Wood Badge for the 21st Century or by the BSA. In addition, consider the fact that on this very forum we have already openly disussed such Wood Badge course elements as Tickets, SMART Goals, Mission and Vision, Empathetic Listening, EDGE, Group Dynamics, Diversity and Inclusion, Planning, Evaluation, and others. Doesn't it seem inconsistent that after all those elements are discussed that we are unable to discuss a simple game? The Wood Badge course has moved beyond the concerns that it has to we secret to be effective, as scouters and trainers we need to move beyond that kind of attitude as well.