DuctTape

No centralized location. Patrols camp, cook and clean on their own. Most begin with 3 bins as that is all they know, but soon migrate away because it is inefficient and a pain to pack/carry.

I wont assume that the OPs observations are in error, nor will I assume that any observations can be extrapolated to the whole. I will however respond to the general idea of what about scouts who do not live up to the values espoused in the oath and law yet seem to be rewarded via advancement or other recognitions. It need not be all, many, or even a few, but if it is one how does this affect the greater good and what do we do about it. Often on this forum the values of scouting are touted via the mission. Issues surrounding advancement and scouts who may or may not have earned a mb, or completed a requirement, etc... Discussion about the faith, religion etc, sometimes get brought up mostly at the eagle bor level. However it seems that the most important requirements for membershipvand advancement are just "signed off". If a scout is not living up to the oath and law, if they are not growing in this regard, why are they signed off on the requirement of show scout spirit? It seems to me that if we are to be true to the mission of scouting, we should hold the show scout spirit requirement in very high regard for advancementvpurposes.

I havent been involved in cubs since the 70s. Is the comment above about after school programs w/ Y, and B&G club mean that cubs dont do their den meetings as after school programs anymore? Or was my experience an anomaly and they never really did?

DC, I can see you are having your fun at my expense. For the record, I do not use the term redneck. You alone own your hypocrisy, not I.

Pack, That is not remotely close to what I advocate. I apologize if anything I wrote led you to that belief. I am referring specifically, and exclusively to the use of terminology which refers to groups of people in ways which are derogatory to them.

No, that is a Reducto ad Absurdum fallacy. I am certain everyone here can think of certain terms which are so offensive and hurtful that even they do not use and likely cringe when they hear someone else use them. As society changes, there are other terms which people begin to realize are also hurtful and kind people will change their vocabulary. If someone without malice says something which is hurtful to another and is then made aware of it, a kind person will reconsider their usage instead of jumping on the "well don't be so PC" bandwagon. The calling something PC is an easy way out instead of considering how ones words may affect another. We cannot be perfect, but we can be considerate.

The term PC was created as a response to justify continuing to use terms that offended some. Just because a word or term doesnt offend someone, doesnt mean it isnt offensive or hurtful to another. When someone says that a word or term is hurtful to them, to continue to use it is unkind. Some try to justify their continuing use by raising the PC flag or some other justification. I choose to be kind.

You are entitled to your opinion. I choose to not stand silent when I witness another person being hurtful to another in words or deeds. More importantly, I choose to use words which uplift rather than denigrate.

While it may be fun to pick on PC, or even be a badge of honor to refer to oneself as "not PC", I think the fundamental concept behind it is sound. If calling someone something is offensive to them, why would we continue to refer to them in such a way as to be hurtful? I thought a scout was supposed to be Kind.

Based on the list of activities, it doesn't sound like the Band, Scouts and Church are all that much. I would sit down with the student and look at his monthly, weekly and especially daily calendar. In my experience, the most time is wasted in the afternoons and evenings during the week and not on the weekend activities. When looking at the calendar, also begin discussing "how much time do you think you should spend on xxx, per day/week/month". A week has 168 hours in it. It is about setting priorities, but is also about organizing. Since he is so negative about school, I would be good money he only does school work with you, and barely enough while in school to not get in trouble. A week has

I dont agree with part of the original premise, that patrols get hurt when only half show up for a campout. I think the majority of hurt is caused bymerging patrols for said campout. I have no objection to a patrol of two boys on a camping trip. The fun they have encourages their patrol mates to really want to attend the next one. I think a better solution is to prmote more patrol events instead of troop events. This allows more flexibility in scheduling at the patrol level. "What weekend is everyone free next month"? Then plan the patrol activity around the patrol members availability. I dont see the issue as overscheduled kids as much as I see it as lack of authority allowed to the patrols. Instead of the patrols dictating their schedule and activities it isdone at the troop level.

No reason why the boys can't plan the entire camporee and included in that planning is finding adults to perform certain tasks.

Sometimes it is not being aware, sometimes it is the events/activities are not desired by the units/boys. In our area, between the district and council there are too many activities/events planned at the levels above the troop. Looking at our calendar, every weekend is filled with some event. A troop which uses the patrol method will have many events and activities being planned at the patrol level and some at the troop level. Every so often they may choose to attend a district camporee or something. It isn't being unaware, it is the units operating as individual patrols and troops and choosing with their feet to not attend the district events. I don't think the goal should be "how do we increase participation in district event xxx?", instead it should be "What event(s) do the individial units desire the most?". Then focus on those.

Sure it would. But I dont see it as incorporating "bushcraft" into scouting, I see it more as focusing on the outdoors aspect of scouting which should have the scoutcraft and woodcraft at the forefront instead of the "one and done prepare a fire" requirement to be checked off. If Scouts used their first class skills all the time, on most every outing then the same thing is accomplished. Instead those skills are a checklist to complete, instead of a set of skills which define a First Class scout and what he does.

Stosh, hence the adjective invidious to specify a certain specific type of discrimination; which isn't defined as lawful or unlawful. Invidious discrimination is bigotry if it exists in ones heart regardless of actions.

Invidious does not equate to unlawful. Invidious discrimination may be either lawful or unlawful.

jamist... You need to do do what you must. After your update, it doesn't even sound like Boy Scouts. Sure the Council will accept the $ and the charter, but what you describe sounds more like a couple of adults trying to run a boys camping club which parents view similarly to little league.. It is a shame National, councils, and districts allow this to happen to troops. I support your decision. Now some advice. Scouting at its core is the Patrol, not the troop. With no support from the troop or other parents, start with your son. Get him a copy of the Patrol Leaders handbook (current and an older one), and together learn how a patrol is supposed to operate. If he isn't a patrol leader encourage him to work with his patrol leader to develop patrol activities and follow the structure of Scouting using the Patrol Method. Start at the core of scouting to help your son, his patrol and maybe the troop.

SMMatthew, I cannot speak for others, but my comments about mbc being too young is in reference to scouts, not 20-somethings. Bsa has turned a blind eye to their own advancement requirements and allow non-adults to function in the capacity as mbc in violation of bsa policy. I agree with you about camp staff and younger (adult) camp staff. However, staff and mbcs need not be the same. As has been pointed out in numerous threads, many mb's "earned" at summer camp are a joke. This is a result of trying to equate camp staff for what you describe (and I generally agree) with mb counselors. This isnt just a camp issue, it has permeated bsa councils and districts with the mb universities, etc... Some might be ok, a rare few might actually be quite goid. But by and large they are advancement mills designed and implemented to rush boys through advancement completely ignoring the real purpose and benefit of MBs.

Yes, our pack and troop meets in the building as well. Schools here allow all community groups the same access.

Those participants didnt want fair, they wanted equal. Equal isnt always fair, and fair isnt always equal. Everyone receiving the same might be equal, but everyone receiving what they need is fair.

Here is a thought experiment. Scout at EBOR is asked what point of the Scout Law is the most difficult for him to follow. Scout answers, Helpful. When asked to elaborate he responds that A Scout is helpful in the law and in the oath I am on my honor to do my best... to help others at all times. There are some people which I do not like and I do not even try to help them at all, let alone at all times. Should the Board of Review consider not "passing" the Scout due to non-adherence to this portion of the Law and the Oath? Why/why not? A similar situation could be created for any of the Laws or promises in the Oath. Do we deny advancement for scout who does not keep himself physically fit and makes no effort to do so, even to the point of being weak and unhealthy?

You captured better what I was trying to say. Focus on the patrols.

Interesting how in the other thread about MB counselors at camp, one of the most common "reasons" given for not utilizing Adult Scouters more is all the extra duties of camp staff. Perhaps it is time we separate the two. MB Counselors at camp need not be "staff".

I know for me, the issue of boy-led vs adult is a symptom of a troop-method vs patrol method. In the article the writer discussed the problem with transitioning to a boy led troop. Instead the focus should be on a boy-led patrol. Until the patrols are boy-led using the patrol method, a boy-led-troop is a pipe dream. Thanks skeptic for pointing out the irony and for making me look in the mirror.`