Krampus

What does this SM do during the SMCs? Shouldn't he have done the SC SMC then bor, then FC SMC and bor? That's two chances to catch this BEFOREHAND!!!

"Fury, do you like gladiator movies?".

...or, let's leave the decision of what to do with the military to people who actually know how to protect you. You wouldn't hire a golf pro to teach you tennis, why allow someone who has no clue on how to protect you to make decisions about your security? Thank you Karl Marx, but I'd like to determine exactly what I am going to pay my employees, thank you. If you did that you'd pay $8 for your Big Mac and not even get fries and a drink. No reputable free-market economist thinks this is a rational idea. You don't privatize something that broken, you simply open the contract up to companies to bid on. Privatizing means turning the TSA into a business. That's dumb. It would lose money based on how it is organized and operates. Put the whole process up for contract for companies to bid on. Makes more sense. Why not use the Texas model. Each area has their own independent school district funded through property taxes and other bonds. People are free to move to wherever they think the better schools are. That's true freedom without too much government intervention.

Those are the 2014 numbers released before the 2015 annual meeting. The numbers in the annual report are a bit different from those. The numbers revised later in 2015 were different still. The point: Membership numbers for the previous year are announced in the spring, reported in the annual report and revised later in the year. There have been times when they release provisional registration numbers in the spring for the current year but they are unofficial until they are in the annual report...which are usually revised downward (in terms of membership numbers). Exactly. Everyone knows it was Jimmy Carter's fault.

Historically the numbers released at the annual meeting have been adjusted downward (meaning the loss of membership has been increased, the membership numbers lowered) later in the year (usually July or August). Last year's numbers, I am told, are showing double-digit losses and that may not be something they want to present in May. What I heard was there was a request to "revise" the numbers so that they do not show a double-digit loss. It will be interesting to see what happens....and to see what happens later in the year when the numbers get updated.

It will be interesting to see the membership numbers for 2015. The initial word I got was it was over 10% off what 2014 was, but the date was being "re-evaluated" for accuracy.

Have coffee ready and offer him a cup. If he doesn't drink coffee flat out remind him that we let Scouts do everything unless it is a safety issue.

Hollywood, Spielberg and Lucasnare doing a reboot of this classic. They are busy casting over 100 adults to serve as he council, district and unit advisors to help the boys on their path to Eagle.

All good ideas. One other: Go to a feeding station or park in your area to try to make a list of birds. IMHO the intent of the requirement is to make the house or feeding station, then identify birds that use it. If no birds come, I would think the counselor would want the Scout to make an attempt to track and identify birds elsewhere. Ponds and lakes are a great place.

BSA run by out of touch elitists who are more focused on themselves and what's in it for them than helping their volunteers? Stop the presses.

I've been to one of these. I think it is funny that the cost for that event is roughly that of NYLT...and that's outside!!! They are back-slapping blingfests where these folks can feel good about themselves instead of facing their members and really learning how they can help us. The last one I went to reminded me of that scene in the Hunger Games when the Tributes arrive in the Capitol City and are greeted by all the dilettantes welcoming them.

Glad to see that the money BSA takes in is being used in the most cost-effective manner possible. If it is good enough for volunteers to meet at council camps, camp in the outdoors and use their conference facilities, why can't BSA big wigs do the same thing? This simply sends the wrong message to folks. There's no need for a giant blingfest like this.

Let's face it, those are not rules so much as they are suggestions. What rules -- similar in weight and intention to the "add/subtract no requirements" rule -- have been ignored by scouters and then eventually changed?

A-10 any day. Those boys could drop a whole lot of hurt in a few seconds...and drove a plane that could take punishment like few others.

Really? Name one rule broken often by scooters, which hurt the scouts, that's gone on to be a "changed rule"? If it's happened enough over the years one example shouldn't be hard to find. I still find it astounding your pick the adult side over a scout who has completed what's been asked him and followed the rules. If it happened to you I'll bet your folksy wisdom wouldn't be so civil.

I wonder if the Made in America labels really are.

How about we leave the military ideas to those who've been involved in those institutions, shall we? I don't want someone who has never been involved in military Ops telling me who will resupply me or cover my tuckas when I need it. Different branches run different missions. I wouldn't call on one group for strategic air support and I would call the other for S&R. Same as you wouldn't call a brain surgeon to remove your prostate, and you don't want your Urologist doing brain surgery. Sure they all went to medical school and they all deal with your body, but...

@@Beavah, I really find it hard to follow your logic. You talk about ranks and entitlements, but that TOTALLY misses the point that this Scout did the work required of him and now adults are asking him to re-do something as a condition of signing off on requirements. It is not an entitlement to get something for doing the required work. The process of the Scout getting that badge -- and therefore achieving what he's capable of, as you point out -- is part of the process the SMs and other adults should help this Scout with WHILE he is working toward rank. It is NOT something you do AFTER the fact. Imagine how ill-done you'd feel if you just did your taxes and filed for a refund, but now the IRS wants you to document every mile you've driven before you can get your refund. You can probably time your incredulity in nanoseconds, and yet somehow this Scout is supposed to swallow this injustice in the name of "what he's capable of"? Forgive me, but that's just bollocks!! Your quote of what the BSA defines as "active" is incomplete as it omits the very definition of active outlined in the GTA. Lastly, if you looked a bit further in the same document you'd find another quote that blows a hole in your support of the Scoutmaster denying this Scout his signature: If you are going to use that document to hold the Scout to some ambiguous level of activity, the you HAVE TO hold the adults to the bolded parts of that same document...which requires them to follow not only the Rules and Regulations, but the Oath, Law AND all policies and guidelines!!!! So, in short -- and using your own source -- if the SM and other adults are not using the GTA and applying it correctly, they are violating the very same document you intend to hold the Scout to. Where is your sense of fairness?

I posted the wrong link. We are doing the 7-day treks. Thanks for the input. Where's the crashed bomber?

They were looking at 7-2, 7-10, 7-4, 7-5, 7-8, 7-12 in that order. 7-2 looks like a good route and hits a few places you mention above and does not just stay south of Tooth. 7-10 was popular for the shooting sports and ends by hiking the Tooth ridge in to camp. For the old-school guys hiking the Tooth ridge back to camp earned you the right to wear the bull tail over your right shoulder. 7-4 and 7-5 were strictly for the activities. 7-8 was filler and 7-12 was for those who wanted to hit Baldy. The guys gave these objectives: Want to do Baldy or Tooth. Any "food events" were a plus. Ranger skills, shooting of any kind, black powder, gold mining/blacksmithing/cowboy events were big. Getting their arrowhead 30-50 miles These guys did high adventure last summer in CO and had a blast. Leisure is important. Level of difficulty is not important but they didn't want to be hoofing it from station to station.

That's pretty close to the BSA definition. They add "in good standing" which I assume you take in to account too. Most units I know don't have an attendance policy or don't track it well so they never know if anyone is truly not meeting it. Those who do have it rarely invoke it. Only in the very rare instances you have a guy who pays but never attends, then shows up and wants an SMC.

Have two crews going to Philmont this August (Leader Guide here). Just made trek selections. The guys used a matrix to prioritize the activities they wanted to do. For them it is more about hiking from "cool thing to cool thing" and not about the miles they put down. They want to relax, enjoy their trek and have fun. That said, I've been a few times but nearly always north of the Tooth on the north part of the range. Seems most of the treks these guys have selected are around the Tooth, along Shaefer's Pass, back along Phillips Junction and around the Black Mountain area. The questions these guys had for me to ask are: Any must see, must stay locations on the south range? Any activities that sound boring but are really fun? Any activities that sound cool but are really boring or poorly done? Thanks in advance!

Huh? Following the rules depends on circumstance? I must have missed that part of the bylaws and charter agreement that allowed us as adult leaders to do that. I understand discretion. As leaders we exercise discretion all the time. HOWEVER, there are certain things we cannot exercise discretion over. In the situation we are discussing we have a Scout that is DONE with a requirement and wants his SM's signature. The SM is placing conditions on the signature totally unrelated to the completion of the requirement!! Not only is that wrong but it breaks several rules and policies of Scouting, not to mention failing to demonstrate the exact thing you are advocating the Scout should be exhibiting (trust, honor, integrity, loyalty). So by siding with the SM on this you are 1) punishing the Scout and 2) demonstrating the exact opposite of what you want the Scout to show. Where is the Scoutmaster's respect for the Scout, the rules and the policies he is supposed to follow?? This kid did not procrastinate from what the OP notes. The kid completed a requirement and wants it signed off. It does not get any more clear cut. There's no reason for "different answers". The answer is pretty clear. Really? Why would re "reckon" that? Given the propensity of these adult to not follow the rules, what's to say they don't throw ANOTHER road block in front of this kid? Given their disloyalty and dishonesty with him on this issue, what give you that warm, fuzzy feeling these adults won't drag their heels at every turn for this kid? But forget all that, ask yourself this: Since this kid has ALREADY MET the requirements for getting these Eagle requirements signed off (except the remaining MB), why should he have to do MORE?? He's met the level of activity laid out by the BSA. The troop has failed to produce their level of activity requirement (if they even have one), so why should the kid have to re-do anything?? You want to teach all these valuable lessons but you are missing the biggest lesson this kid is learning in all of this: Adults cannot be trusted. Let's make this clear: HE'S DONE THE WORK!! Why in God's name are you asking him to re-do it? Exactly!!

Exactly. Had several scouts forget rain gear on last camp out. Torrential rain happened. They got soaked. Next camp out planning meeting they were evangelizing the use of rain gear...and not forgetting it. One made a point to tell me he's already packed it.

Huh? I think you missed the analogy. In soccer, the league does not make up the rules. The league has to follow the rules laid down under the Laws of the Game (LOTG) by FIFA. So in this analogy FIFA is the BSA, the LOTG are the GTA, the League is the troop. No troop or adults have the right to add/subtract from requirements, just like soccer leagues cannot say that the players can use their hands.