OldGreyEagle

Sorry Beav, but back when I was abused I didnt know what, how, where to report the fact I was abused. I was so happy when he went on to my brother I didnt even tell him or anyone else about it. So we are going to limit the time it takes to find out someone is destroying lives? Look at me, years of guilt because if what he did to me, trying to ignore it and trying to pretend it didnt happen and all the time knowing it did and wondering if I was gay myself and wanting desparately to be normal again, not having been abused, ok raped, is that better? And because I couldnt find my voice until way into adulthood I would have to stand aside and know that guy is molesting other kids? And you think that is right? Walk in the victims shoes a few miles before you start letting the perps off. This stuff happens and the effects are devastating, there is no time limit to what he did, why should there be one on reporting what he did (This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

Wait a second there, Merlyn, are you saying Beavah's assesment is accurate, other than the part about the records being sealed by the BSA lawyers?

"Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers." You know for an old Greek guy, that Socrates was way on top of things 21rst Century. its the succeeding generations job to disappoint the prior generation...

Always wondered about the term "Quality Control", does that mean we fear Quality and need to control it? Certainly Advancement needs to have oversight. When a requirement is checked off, did the scout demonstrate the skill? Will the sill be used in the next 3-6 months, or ever? If a particular Merit Badge Counselor does not hold the scout to the requirements, is the counselor held accountable? If you beleive the Council SUmmer Camp is a merit badge mill, what have you done to correct the problem? If a Board of Review finds a scout was checked off on a topic he shows evidence of knowing nothing about, is the person who checked off the scout held accountable? No process is without some area that could be improved, I see Advancement in this light

While one should always be careful of information given by someone who may or maynot be able to back up the claims, one should also always be scoutlike as well. I can't say I always with everyone on the forums. I can't say I always behave as I should towards posters as some really rankle me but that doesnt excuse poor behavior towards them. Just because I dont agree with someone doesnt make them wrong, and disparaging comments about them dont help. Let's talk facts, and not the fact how (fill in the blank) the other poster is

AvidSM I am through trying to explain myself to those who want WB to be the WB they took before WB21rstC. I didnt go through what they did, I will never be part of the Brotherhood, I am not fit to cleam out the huge latrine they built. I dont care. In every organization there are those who look into the future and prepare themselves for the inevitable changes. There are those who keep both eyes on the rearview mirror, mourning the passge of time and rueing change. I guess an organization needs both kinds. I wish I could explain myself better, but I am done

I thought that WoodBadge was supposed to be the Mountaintop Training experience that was patrol based so that all who took it. From the scoutmaster and assistant scoutmaster to the District Chair who never was a scout would understand the program. I thought it was supposed to introduce a common vocabulary in the BSA programs, that when a person talked about Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing, all would understand. That is what I understood WB to be. If I am wrong, I am wrong and I apologize. If WB is supposed to be "outdoor" leaders only then thats what it should be. The skills taught in WB21C don't need to be called WoodBadge. They would be just as solid called something else.

This is from the thread on asking whether or not it was time to eliminate Advancement. I guess the question is whether or not its time to overhaul the Advancement Requirements. So, what do you think appeals to todays youth. What requirements would you have? You Youth posters, what requirements would make sense to you? I know this could turn comic, but actually try to be serious, I know I will struggle with being serious, but I will try. What skills are important in todays world and how do you boil that down to a scouty requirement?

Wait a minute Eamonn, I think you may have something. Perhaps the issue isn't doing away with Advancement, it's about making Advancement relevant to the youth. Finding your way at night is no big issue if you have Garmin, and identifying plants and animals certainly won't get you many dates in todays world. Perhaps it is time to overhaul all the requirements. In a velcro world, perhaps knots arent near as important as they once were.

Hey, you know what? The reason I didnt take WoodBadge in the pre-WB21C was because I viewed it as an elitist bunch of good ol' boys who thought they were so far above everyone else they didnt need to talk to you or even acknowledge your existence. Their arrogrance and attitude fostered a lot of turmoil in the Council. I was told WB21C would change all that. Apparently not. Go ahead be pigs, I wont stop you

isnt Covington, Ky the home of the Greater Cinncinnati and Northern Kentucky Airport? Been there many a times, some memorable some not so much have covered 5 miles there a few times, Terminal C to A when the buses didnt run

So Eamonn, what you are saying is that when adults take over the program and present what they like, such as the Nuclear Science guy or present a program based on what they perceive the youth want, such as Advancement, they short circuit the program. As a youth lead organization scouts sholdnt have boring meetings as they are the ones who planned, ran and evaluated the meetings. That way the meetings are fun and they learn what works and what doesnt. I am not sure it's time to eliminate Advancement, but to eliminate leaders who don't follow the program. Then again if we did that, I am not sure their would be enough adults left to do much of anything. It is a puzzlement

Yes, we pay dues, and because we pay dues we expect to have have some sort of say in how that money is spent. In this country its called Freedom of Association. If I disgaree with an organization that I once supported I vote with my feet and leave that organization. I may make an effort to understand the issues, but in the end, I get to choose how my money is used. I am not sure how international American Bashing is supposed to rally my support to your side, it certainly isnt doing the job right now

Personally I love the story of the Scoutmaster going on and on about how a knife greater than 4 inches has no place in scouting, whilst in the midst of a cooking demo (dont ask) and a scout asking why then the 10 inch butcher knife is OK... Match the tool to the task at hand

Actually Venturing does not have advancement and there are no ranks and if it isn't youth lead, then you don't have a Venturing Crew, you appear to have an older Co-ed Cub Pack, as a Boy Scout is youth lead as well. I have to say I am surprised at the comments, Advancement is one of the 8 methods of scouting. So is uniforming, but there are plenty of people who wouldnt seem to stand for elimination of the uniform. Why the rush to throw Advancement under the bus? Many troops ursurp the Patrol Method, lets dump that as well. It seems as if because we don't want to or can't control adults we want to dramatically alter the program. Great life lesson, treat the symptom, don't touch the disease

It may do well to review what the Guide to Safe Scouting says about knives: A sharp pocketknife with a can opener on it is an invaluable backcountry tool. Keep it clean, sharp, and handy. Avoid large sheath knives. They are heavy and awkward to carry, and unnecessary for most camp chores except for cleaning fish. Since its inception, Boy Scouting has relied heavily on an outdoor program to achieve its objectives. This program meets more of the purposes of Scouting than any other single feature. We believe we have a duty to instill in our members, youth and adult, the knowledge of how to use, handle, and store legally owned knives with the highest concern for safety and responsibility. Rememberknives are not allowed on school premises, nor can they be taken aboard commercial aircraft. So, no mention of lockblades and a warning about, not a prohibition of, sheath knives.

Remember, First Class in a Year is about programming in the Troop. That all the necessary items to reach first class are presented to the scout, not that the scout makes first class in a year. The Troop offers the program, if the scout does not avail himself of the opportunity, then the onus is not on a the Troop to bend over backwards to refurnish the opportunity to the scout. Perhaps a large in house campaign on Advancement is needed, not to eliminate, but to educate its proper use

Ok, from the thread on What WoodBadge is supposed to be I have a few conclusions. Many posters want to see WoodBadge be a much more Outdoor skill course. If that was/is the intent, then it may be best to allow WoodBadge to morph off into such a program. By definition such a course would be of value to scoutmasters and assistant scoutmasters. Now, what about those who are not assistant scoutmasters and scoutmasters? Cubmaster, Committee Chairs, Venturing Advisors, District Chairs, etc. These people also need training, what do we offer them? In many Councils posters have commented that Boy Scout training pretty much exhibits a vacuum (IE "it sucks")So are we to beleive these Councils will be able to put together an outstanding Outdoors Skill course for Assistant Scoutmasters and Scoutmasters as well as excellent training for the other scouting positions? Could it be that the BSA looked at the training requirements of the various programs and decided that it was impossible to have separate Cub, Scout, Venturing, Exploring, Varsity and Sea Scout training courses? (OK, I know technically Sea Scouts are in Venturing, but they are different, right E?) Perhaps the Outdoor skills course needs an upgrade, to either be called something catchy, Daniel Beard training or something else, Administrative type positions could have something else, the Seton award for example. But what I can see happening is as more training programs are offered, requiring more training staff and more syllabi to be written I dont see a lot of cohesion. Why not allow WoodBadge to be the administrative course and then upgrade the exisiting position specific programs? I know its not how things started, then again, would you as a troop award ranks after first class as Life, Star and then Eagle? I mean thats what was the original way. In the first Boy Scout handbook there was a passage giving information on how a scout could stop a runaway horse drawn cart, is the present book inferior because it lacks the original information? Ok, its inferior for a lot of reasons, but not because the information to steer the horses into the side of the nearest barn in not there. I am sorry WoodBadge changed and became less, but how do we train everyone who needs to be trained at a high level and share a common vocabulary?

Maybe its not time to do away with advancement, but to remember that Advancement is one of 8 methods used to deliver the program. It may be a cliche to say so, but no method is more important or of lesser significance than another. Perhaps if units delivered the program presenting all methods equally, the pressure for advancement would lessen and scouts could enjoy themselves and the program. It's a thought

Heck, maybe if people had talled more about sexual abuse in the 60's, I would have reported the priest who molested me and my brother and we could have stopped him rather than allowing him to continue screwing up children's lives

OK, so many this is overkill on WoodBadge topics, then again, maybe not. Perhaps if we explored what think think/thought Woodbadge is, we may understand perceptions about it. I understood WoodBadge to be training for scouters in all aspects of scouting. As applicable to an Asst Cubmaster, Crew Advisor and District Commissioner et al. What do you think WoodBadge is?

As I understand it, a Post is part of the Learning for Life program. Posts are vocational in nature, such as a Police Post, a Firehouse Post, a Post that is sponsored by a newspaper based on Journalism, or a healthcare one sponsored by a Hospital. Because they are part of Learning for Life, and the Learning for Life Program does not have the same membership requirements that BSA program do. Venturing Crews are part of the BSA and have the same requirement for membership as a Boy Scout Troop.

The Crew whom I serve got started with a bunch of Eagle scouts and Gold Awardee Girls Scouts. The kids had been pursuing goals for so long, they just wanted to "do stuff" and not requirements. So, that is what we did. Backpacking, WHite Water in Maine, etc. They used their skills, but didnt worry about accomplishing recognitions in Venturing (as there arent really ranks). One of the initial members was selected the Northeast Region Venturing President and ultimately was not selected as National President because she didnt even have a Bronze! Had we known, maybe she would have had one, but since advancement isn't a method... or well, now I am just whinning) Anyway, another Crew in Town has multiple Ranger recipients. This group of Scouts and never been scouts is very goal oriented. Actually, if you look at it, us and them are both following the program. We do the activities the youth select, plan and carry out. WoW, flexibile programming who knew?

So Ed, all the participants of WoodBadge for the 21rst Century did noot receive the same experience as you. And as a result we are less. That is exactly the kind of attitude that needs to be eliminated from scouting as it serves no one

During April 2008, on a Monday, inevitably someone will ask a Troop member what they did over the week end. The response can be one of the following: "I went with the Troop to the NASCAR event, it was so cool!" or "The troop wanted to go to the NASCAR event, but the PITA Scoutmaster wanted to go to the council camporee so we went there" (Actually the second response will probably be shortended to "Nuttin") Which reponse is better? BTW there is no rule every scout must attend every event. Non-NASCAR people (such as myself) dont have to elect to go. Participation at the event would be an indicator if the event should be scheduled again next year, or perhaps a few break would be best, either way its the PLC's move