Scouter99

18 shakedowns is insane. We go to Yellowstone or the GC every other year, the most shakedowns we've ever had was 3.

Definitely. Me and my boys are there for a week building relationships with Packs. We don't recruit at the event, but if there's a connection we get hold of the people later.

Was reminded of this thread by a Facebook discussion that showed up in my newsfeed today: A Mormon friend's church has a new Branch President. Before, there were so few boys (only 3) that the church wasn't bothering with Scouts, and the boys simply met on Weds nights. But the new Pres says they're to join Scouts and that's that, no ifs ands or buts. Her son had tried Scouts previously, didn't like it, and says if it's Scouts or nothing then he'll take nothing. She tried talking to the Pres, but he won't budge. She posted this to a Mormon FB group asking whether there was any kind of recourse. As a non-Mormon, I find the responses a little absurd; the people who've replied are basically calling the boy an apostate and telling the mom that she's a bad parent: Mormon 1: "If your sons only anchor at church is swayed by this, you still have much to instil in this young mans heart about what the gospel is and isn't. There will be plenty of times in the gospel where people will offend. This is never a reason to quit coming. It is the church that is true, the gospel of Jesus Christ, not the people! People are fallable and always will be! Have a family meeting with your Home teachers and maybe even the Branch President. Pray with your son for inspiration. Make him a part of the solution." Mormon 2: "I agree with [Mormon 1], but would add that there will be times that the church asks us to do things that we may not understand at the time, or don't agree with. Following the prophet shouldn't come conditionally. It is similar to you wanting him to do chores, or homework, or other things he would prefer not to, but are necessary for him to learn how to be a better man in the long run. My husband had a similar experience in scouts- he didn't feel supported, and eventually quit. He wishes now that someone had pushed him to continue to get his eagle. The scouting program does so much more that teach you how to tie nits and build a fire. It teaches endurance, problem solving, self reliance, courage, working in a team as well as independence. As long as you don't think the scouting program will be hurting him (emotionally/physically), I would tell him, "It is what the prophet has asked young men to do, so you are going to do it. We'll look for the blessings together for obeying the prophet." If you don't agree with me about the importance of the program, then perhaps give him a time frame- if he still hates it after one year, he won't have to keep going. Most likely by then he'll have bonded with the kids better and want to keep going." (The mother replies to say she has spoken to the Pres and he's not interested in talking) Mormon 1 again: "Re-read [Mormon 2]'s passage about obedience. Set the example for your son." Mormon 3: "Scouting is done all throughout the church. That is something done in almost every ward, branch, and stake. There is a lot he can learn from the other boys, the leaders, and from the program itself. A lot of other churches do scouting too. Sounds like prayer is the best answer for you. Sometimes its praying for understanding, to soften someone else's heart, soften your own heart, or just for peace. There have been a lot of times the situation has not changed for me but I have changed my heart through prayer. Life is like that. There will always be things we don't like. We just have to go at them and everything else with prayer." While these are just 3 random Mormons, which is not enough to scientifically apply their opinions to all Mormons, let's say they are representative (we know that LDS considers adult scouting positions to be a religious calling, which is the same tilt these people take). We quickly see how LDS units could easily get a bad wrap for not participating in the district or council, not fraternizing with non-LDS units if they do, leaving early, pumping out paper Eagles, etc. when they don't want to be there. As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, it seems like with a compulsive particiaption for both adults and boys, it's probably the rare adult that wants to be a scout leader, and iffy at best with the boys. Frustration from non-LDS units isn't "bigotry" (grow up, and buy a thesaurus) it's a result of an intrinsic problem with the system. In my district, the LDS units are happy to attend Cub Camp, and I have to spend time/resources on their Webelos the same as the non-LDS boys, but I'm not allowed to have their contact info or recruit them. That doesn't rub me raw because I'm a bigot, it rubs me raw because they're freeloaders and that's annoying regardless of why they're freeloaders. I have no opinion of the LDS Boy Scouts or frustration with them because I've never seen one.

Admittedly, my first thoughts were "Again?" http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/03/07/utah-boy-scouts-agree-330000-settlement-for-2002-wildfire/

He can also wear up to 6 in two columns above the right cuff on a long sleeve uniform shirt.

And they're out: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/us/article/Boy-Scouts-remove-2-men-who-toppled-ancient-rock-4913736.php

Make sure your topics are timely. I get so sick of going to RTs that are a month late on the topic; for example, troops are making their calendars and budgets in late June through July around here (and I gather nationally) then I get to the August RT and the topic is annual planning. Right, wasted time and gas. I'd follow scoutergipper's advice. Send out an email or letter, or, better yet hit the telephone and tell SMs you want to implement RTs again, and you want to know what topics would be helpful for them.

Ironically, while getting riled up over my choice of rhetoric, you demonstrate my point perfectly: You want to speak from a position of authority assumed by interpreting them as strictly as possible, yet you do so from a position of ignorance. That is exactly why the Guide to Advancement specifically addresses the "no more, no less" issue. For your enlightenment, the requirement regarding the actual swimming reads "Swim one mile over a measured course that has been approved by the trained instructor who will supervise the swim." Not one mention of what type or size of the body of water. And as pcola pointed out, for those who read more that what's actually written on the page, the literature references swimming pools 3 times, but silence from you on the issue. Like I said, tin gods. It's admirable and desirable to push our boys to reach their full potential, and I know that's your goal, but in the course of doing so we do not help them by making up requirements that don't exist.

Dumbass Taylor, Jr. ought to be kicked out, too. If he advanced one more rank after cheering on his litigious fatso dad it would be over my dead body.

The Mile Swim award is just that: an extra award. It's not a survival metric, it's not a real-world training exercise. Some of our guys have done it in the pool, some have done it in the lake. Both each swam a mile without stopping/standing/resting. Any boy that can "cheat" by pushing off halfway across the pool is an experienced swimmer who will not be challenged by a mile in open water, anyway. If you think he has to do it in a lake because that's more challenging, hey, why be schmucks and stop there? I say they oughta have to do it in a rip tide. If a boy wants to earn the Mile Swim and he wants to do it in a pool, and you've decided that he must do it in a lake you're in his way, not helping, and you're setting yourself up as a tin god in violation of the GtA. It's "swim a mile," not "swim a mile in the most difficult circumstances your SM can think up." Funny story: I "earned" my Mile Swim at camp a while back. I went down to watch/photograph one of our boys since the camp asked each unit to send an adult to spot, and when I met him after he got out, the lady handed me a clipboard and told me to sign. I thought I was signing as a witness since they'd told us all to send an adult. We got home and the Advancement Chair hands me my card and patch, and says "wow, well done, that had to be really difficult." We had a good laugh about that.

I've only done the Rockwell thing twice, and with my bank account in the shape it's in, it'll be quite a while before I hit #3. As I said "as Bob Basement pointed out, I’ve already spent thousands of hours and thousands of dollars on every boy much less the Eagles."

I recently found that quote by accident, and I like the reasoning behind the number: "The numbers in a Troop should preferably not exceed thirty two. I suggest this number because in training boys myself I have found that sixteen was about as many I could deal with - in getting at and bringing out the individual character in each. I allow for other people being twice as capable as myself and hence the total of thirty-two." (Aids to Scoutmasterhip) In the context that the quote was used, the author asks a pointed question that really got a chuckle out of me: "Please explain to your troop leader that running a troop of 60 members means that you think you are four times as capable as the Founder!" (http://www.scout.org/information_events/resource_centre/the_leader_s_questions/the_patrol_system) Well, well. And so it follows that the leadership of the troop KDD visited must think he is more than 5 times more talented than Baden-Powell.

Does your CO have a kitchen with the requisite certification?

I would definitely complain, but leave the proletariat chip at home. If your letter has the same tone that most of your posting has, it's just going to get tossed in the trash.

If your troop uses TroopMaster, then he can ask the Advancement Chair to input the information there.

Then they're already several decades out of date Arguing that you use the inspection sheet and that's enough is not an argument against changes in uniform policy, since the inspection sheet you use now is different than the one that was used before it. The uniform inspection sheet already goes into minutiae like "the top button is never buttoned" and the insignia guide already goes into the over/under neckerchief question. It already addresses personal issues like combed hair. So if your vaunted inspection sheet already addresses minutiae, then you don't have a leg to stand on in using it to argue against tucked in shirts. What this boils down to is innate differences between how the sexes operate. Men gravitate toward abstract notions of justice (policies that apply equally across the board) while women focus on individual circumstance (but I'm a special snowflake). BSA could hire Michael Kors to design the best darn female uniform shirt on the planet and if he designed it to be tucked, there would be many women who still wouldn't tuck it, and if he designed it to be untucked, there would be many who would tuck it anyway. On top of this psychological difference you add in post-modern fluff like "I want to feel beautiful and confident" and "my body is so strange that I need a custom uniform" and there's your herd of cats. The most annoying patch policeman I know manages to annoy someone in our troop at least once a month, and I can't imagine even him bothering a woman under the special circumstances they keep bringing up because that's exactly what they are, special circumstances and people recognize/understand that. The other 99.99% of the time, a policy is a policy. And, like you said, they're the ones that asked.

How many did you write? I can see at least 32, maybe the rest are awaiting moderation because 15 was enough.

I was literally dumbstruck the other week when our Advancement Chair told me that we only paid something like $5 for the troop necker we award at First Class; it's two-colored and has a custom patch. A plain necker from National is now $10, which is unconscionable. I don't know about a custom necker for your pack, but if you're seriously serving families that are that cash-strapped what you could look into is making knock-offs. You can get yellow cotton fabric for ~$1-2 per necker, sew the corresponding rank patch onto it, tada! you just saved $5 or more per boy.

Interestingly enough, adults could earn Eagle until like the 1930s or 40s. For myself, it's not something I really think about. I didn't make it, big whoop. Adult Eagle Scouts as a group don't impress me at all, which probably makes it easier to not care. Now, I was pretty pissed when I found out that it is not true that merit badge partials expire; my Scoutmaster lied to me and I could have been Life rather than Star if he had not, but again, oh well. It means I went and bought a copy of the Guide to Advancement and if I hear a lie like that now then I won't stand for it for the Scouts, because it's not too late for them.

From Scouting Magazine's "Ask the Experts" segment: "Question from Dave: “Can a single task satisfy the requirements of two (or more) separate merit badges? For example, Scouts in my troop are going to visit a courthouse and view live court to satisfy a requirement for the Citizenship in the Community merit badge. Can they use that same visit to satisfy a requirement for the Law merit badge? My instinct is no, Scouts need to complete each merit badge independently, but I thought I would Ask the Expert.†Answer from Chris Hunt, BSA Advancement Team: “We address this in the revised Guide to Advancement, which should be released within the next 30 days. It will be posted on scouting.org first as a PDF and then printed and distributed to Scout Shops. The book is in final editing and the actual wording may get some minor adjustments. If folks follow us on Twitter they will be the first to know about the release of GTA 2013.†4.2.3.6 Fulfilling More Than One Requirement With a Single Activity From time to time it may be appropriate for a Scout to apply what was done to meet one requirement toward the completion of another. In deciding whether to allow this, unit leaders or merit badge counselors should consider the following. When, for all practical purposes, two requirements match up exactly and have the same basic intentâ€â€for example, camping nights for Second Class and First Class ranks and for the Camping merit badgeâ€â€it is appropriate and permissible, unless it is stated otherwise in the requirements, to use those matching activities for both the ranks and the merit badge. Where matching requirements are oriented toward safety, such as those related to first aid or CPR, the person signing off the requirements should be satisfied the Scout remembers what he learned from the previous experience. Some requirements may have the appearance of aligning, but upon further examination actually differ. These seemingly similar requirements usually have nuances intended to create quite different experiences. The Communication and Citizenship in the Community merit badges are a good example. Each requires the Scout to attend a public meeting, but that is where the similarity ends. For Communication, the Scout is asked to practice active listening skills during the meeting and present an objective report that includes all points of view. For Citizenship, he is asked to examine differences in opinions and then to defend one side. The Scout may attend the same public meeting, but to pass the requirements for both merit badges he must actively listen and prepare a report, and also examine differences in opinion and defend one side."

Ah, my mistake, DuctTape. I thought that when you said there are "Eagle Scouts who never got the patch" I thought you were being sentimental in the vein of people who say things like "well, you're an Eagle at heart."

On second thought, I know at least one Eagle who "never got the patch" he cared so little that he never had his ECoH and never even came to any meeting post EBoR, so his patch, medal, letters, etc have been in a filing cabinet since the 90s.

Looks great!