BSA24

> The graph points that out very well. You just did the same thing you accused me of before. You stared at the graph and pulled complete fiction out of your mind and decided that was the cause without any data at all. However, if you go back, you will see that I did not assume a cause. I simply assume at this point, with the numbers trending downward, any change in direction is probably a good idea.

A DE is just a badly paid salesman with really difficult customers. DE's are not "scouts" and are not scout leaders. DE's are recruiters and fund raisers. That's it .

> Not many guys doing martial arts quit when the get a black belt. A friend of mine is a karate teacher. He says you're wrong, and that most people who get their black belts quit shortly after. Asked on a couple of martial arts forums - they report the same thing: most people quit in the first few lessons, or they quit after they get their black belt. > Not many teenage baseball players quit after making the All Star team I now believe this to be a spurious claim as well, though I have no data to back it up. Do you have any statistics or anything you can cite that says this is true? Or is it just something you heard before, like the thing on the martial arts, for which it turns out there is no evidence?

> LOL, abyss? The data is in BSAs face. The Abyss: http://imgur.com/ndaaZ Numbers trending down gradually toward zero while number of available youth has doubled in the same time. This is not a good trend. This is not a stock I would invest in.(This message has been edited by BSA24)

> When you have a boy scout get Eagle and then they leave the program, that is an indictment of your program, that it's weak. Not really. Unless you know for a fact why the young man stops attending troop meetings, I don't think you can slap this sticker on the box and say "weak program" is the reason. Are you also going to say that any other boy who quits the unit equals weak program? Because logically, if getting your eagle and quitting means the program is weak. Then also getting your star, life, first class, second class, or nothing and quitting means the program is weak. Thus, if any boy ever leaves your unit, your program is weak. I don't think you can say that with any confidence. I'd suggest that instead of trying to find a holistic reason for all quitting, treat each boy as an individual and communicate with them about their participation so you can fully understand their personal feelings on the matter. That will probably work better than just planting a flag, sticking out your chest, and saying, "Your program is weak." (This message has been edited by BSA24)

> Expect the Australians to lose scouts and lose relevance. The data would suggest the opposite conclusion is true. The organization performed market research and made this change in response to their study's findings. It would be nice if BSA took the time to perform market research on people who are not currently in the scouts and adapted accordingly. It might stop BSA's plummeting spiral into the membership abyss. (This message has been edited by BSA24)

Recent major study on the topic says it is ineffective. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/education/23single.html "sex-segregated education is deeply misguided and often justified by weak, cherry-picked or misconstrued scientific claims rather than by valid scientific evidence." It's just one study. You need a mountain of studies that are all peer reviewed generally considered bullet proof before you can even say you have a good theory. Looks like the conclusion right now is "Maybe, maybe not." > single-sex education works for scouting There is no data that supports this conclusion.(This message has been edited by BSA24)

There is no demographic that predicts pedophilia (edit: other than being male and usually self-describing themselves as heterosexual). There is nothing you can research other than someone's criminal background history to discover that about them until the horrible truth is realized. Pedophiles are just as likely to be married church-going men. Trying to recruit based on the sorts of superstitions that paranoid housewives spread in the cul-de-sac will not be productive. Recruit away! There's nothing wrong with a non-parent being a scout leader. Consider this is already happening: * The boy who stays on and becomes an ASM * The boy who is a den chief * The old man who's kids have aged out who stays behind and keeps going * Just about all commissioners * Most DE's probably have no kids in the program http://www.journalismcenter.org/resource/child-welfare/more-characteristics-sexual-offenders-pedophiles-non-pedophiles-juveniles(This message has been edited by BSA24)

If he advances through scouting with good leadership, the effects should be the same for the boy no matter why anyone was doing it.

> pledges to the queen If they add a pledge to the queen into BSA's scout law, then I will say that homosexuals have gone too far. ;-)

> want others not to exist at all. Oh, boo hoo! Poor you! It's so sad! Those mean old gays and atheists in the scouts want to not be thrown out if they admit what they are! If we can't throw them out for that, we'll be denied our fundamental human rights. Woa is us! Where is Moses to lead us to The Promised Land? Really?!? How do you think it feels to be an agnostic in the Scouts or an atheist? How about someone who was raised religious but went off to college, became a scientist with a PhD, and now is an astrophysicist and became an atheist after learning how the universe operates? Belief isn't just a choice you make. It is the conclusions you draw based on your experiences and what makes sense to you. How do those people feel now? They get kicked out if you discover them. And you're going to whine that they don't want you to exist while you are hunting them down and tossing them out of the scouts no matter their experience or previous contributions? You've got to be kidding. The military accepts atheists. The military accepts gays. The Chaplain still gives prayers. The atheists still are quiet during them. The gays are openly gay now. The guns still shoot. PDA's are still limited by policy. The gay drill instructors still give push ups. In short, the predicted Armageddon did not occur. What exactly is it that is going to happen? (This message has been edited by BSA24)

If scouting is about first aid, outdoor skills, and citizenship (scoutcraft), then the less advantaged boy benefits the most. He is taught to rely on himself, to be able to cope with the world, to struggle through. He learns that if he has a list of what he needs, a plan, some helpers, and some safety precautions, he can do ANYTHING! If scouting is about ethics and values, then society probably benefits this most from the wealthy child receiving this training. He is taught to be merciful, kind, and conduct himself with courtesy. Fun with a purpose should work for anyone. Our challenge is to make it fun and achieve the purpose as a side benefit. Anything we do that is not fun STINKS and should be re-thought. It's supposed to be a game. But most leaders involved today do not treat it as a game. The culture of "Boards of Review" has ensured that the Boy Scout program is not a game. Regardless of our political bickering on this policy or that method in the program, I think our mission has to be to make it fun, have fun, and ensure the boys look forward to everything that they do. That includes EVERYTHING. Including filling out an application for Eagle, writing up a project, doing the project, and being in a board of review. If the lad looks scared and nervous, you failed, because you didn't make it fun with a purpose, and that was our only mission. (This message has been edited by BSA24)

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

I got my hands on an old handbook. Just finished reading it. Uhh... I want to be part of THAT program. Anyone have a time machine handy?

Congressional Charter. Government support. Trademarked expressions and badges. Fundraising.

I have attempted it with four different scout shirts. Dry cleaning might make the badge fall off, but the residue will remain and be nasty as heck. Never use badge magic. You are killing a shirt when you use it. It peels up at the edges. It gets goo outside the patch. The only way I have ever been able to remove the goo is with Goo B Gone and a wire brush.

I was told 200 hours back a long time ago. There were over 300 man hours and I personally put in over 60 myself.

I have no idea how to make a good round table. I only know what I don't like at cub scout round table. Announcements: I hate announcements. There should be ZERO need for announcements in a world with web sites and email. Announcements should be emailed out. No verbal announcements ever. Spelling Ceremonies: Any ceremony where you hold up a letter and say what it stands for, and it spells out some cub scout ideal is completely lame. Themes: I see no use for them and no evidence the boys care about them. I stopped using them years ago, and the boys didn't blink. This is more something that seems moms like to make it rather than the boys like to see it made. I think round table should be what it says: a big meeting with all unit leaders in attendance where there is an agenda (not announcements!) for things to discuss amongst the various units. A kind of committee meeting for the units to agree on activities for the committee to support instead of the committee just deciding things and round table being the worst training session I have ever attended. Maybe a town hall format would work where the commissioner, committee chair, and executive make themselves available for Q&A on various issues. However, I can imagine that quickly devolving into them giving politically vague answers that tell us nothing of importance. I don't know how to fix it. But I do know that I hate it. I feel stupid going to it. (This message has been edited by BSA24)

If your son is working on his eagle, and you are discussing it with anyone, then he's already failed, or you are failing him. Eagle is an award that recognizes those few young men who can organize a project BY THEMSELVES, lead it, deliver it, and write it up. The parents need to get the heck out of it and stay in the back seat. No funding, no scout momming, no asking questions, no getting involved. If he doesn't earn it, there are no consequences. The people here are just trying to be nice by advising you, but really, they shouldn't advise you at all. Your son should come here himself and ask on his own. Once a neighborhood boy was working on his eagle years ago. He needed sign off from me to complete his badge. His mother contacted me. I told her to have him contact me. He did not. She got upset and contacted me some more. I tried to explain this simple philsophy of mine to her: If he can't do it himself, he doesn't deserve to wear the badge. She eventually did earn an eagle badge. He did not. I don't think parents realize that even by asking on their child's behalf, they are making them into a child and encouraging dependence and immaturity in order to get themselves an award put on their son. For themselves.(This message has been edited by BSA24)

Get, Great idea! So just do it. What do you need BSA for to do that? You could just start you own club and do that instead. You basically eliminated any need for support from BSA. You rejected the uniforms, the program, and going to the BSA camps. That's really all BSA is there for. The rest of BSA's support is just gravy. Dump 'em and do it.

Wasn't our country built by people who had cabins no closer than 2 miles to one another. Didn't they only see other people every now and then, when they went into town for supplies or went to a local church? Were't all kids home schooled previous to our government setting up schools? What are we worried about here? I don't see this as a problem. How much social interaction beyond the family is really required? What exactly is going to go wrong? Trying to say that a minimum amount of community involvement is necessary just looks like helicoptering to me.

You need to attend the next leader meeting and put this on the agenda. Going to the camp director personally around your unit leadership is not your place and would be inappropriate. You will burn your bridges so badly in your district your son will be unwelcome in any unit. You'll be viewed as a troublemaker with extra hot sauce and jalepenos. Let the leaders in your unit handle unit policy. The camp staff is responsible for camp policy. If they allow it, then they allow it. If the other adults think it was fine, and no one agrees with you, then quietly transfer units without making any more noise about it to avoid a round table rumor mill about what a PITA you were. Even though you were right.

The Cub Scout Leader Book specifically recommends splitting a unit once it has crossed into having more than 60 boys. However, this is supposed to be a mutual agreement which allows the leaders to all shake hands and go their own ways. I believe this recommendation even covers not leaving the CO. If the pack crosses beyond 60 boys, it is time to form a second pack. BSA, in whatever wisdom they may have, believes and has believed for many years that 60 is about the max that can get any attention from a cubmaster, and beyond that number you are managing too much chaos and too many boys. I have never seen this done peacefully. I have seen multiple unit splits in the cub scouts. Usually these are caused by a power struggle between the cubmaster and the committee chair. I think a lot of leader training for cub leaders is inadequate and fails to teach these roles. In the three units that split, in every case, the committee chair was under the impression that they were the top leader of the unit, and that the cubmaster was their employee whom they could dismiss at will. That is false. The CC and the CM are appointed by the COR. The org chart picture in the leader book and in the training seems to cause this confusion. It displays a CM reporting in to a committee, as if they are his boss and tell him what to do. People do tend to look at the pictures and ignore the text. The text clearly tells the committee that the CM does the program and they support him. The CC is supposed to be trained that they are the chief adviser of the CM, not his boss. I think the training is to blame for failing to clarify that the committee is supposed to schedule, fund, get badges, take notes, publish newsletters in support of the program. SUPPORT... not control. Also, in almost every case, the adults were upset about themselves and their own situations. I've seen very few instances of youth wanting to split. But I have seen it. The youth in one boy scout troop got angry with each other and some of the leaders, and a group of them initiated a new troop to get themselves away from a particular leader and his cadre of bullies. Good on them.

> It's ironic that the Supreme Court, > which fancies itself the protector of the constitution, > is the biggest and most persistent corrupter of that > poor document. The Supreme Court can be overruled by majority opinion. Just amend the constitution. It's quite simple. It has been done 27 times before. HOW TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION To Propose Amendments In the U.S. Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate approve by a two-thirds supermajority vote, a joint resolution amending the Constitution. Amendments so approved do not require the signature of the President of the United States and are sent directly to the states for ratification. Two-thirds of the state legislatures ask Congress to call a national convention to propose amendments. (This method has never been used.) To Ratify Amendments Three-fourths of the state legislatures approve it, or Ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states approve it. This method has been used only once -- to ratify the 21st Amendment -- repealing Prohibition. From: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/usconstitution/a/constamend.htm

I don't think "A Scout is trustworthy" applies to SP's situation. We're talking about bureaucracy. Finding loopholes through red tape to achieve something good is not violating the trust of another person. He is not being unreliable. He is not being dishonest. He has not forged anything or told any lies to anyone. He's doing it right out in the open. Apparently he can be trusted by his DE to deliver on membership and find creative solutions to impossible tasks. He can be relied upon to actually do the job. And he tells everyone flat out exactly what he is doing.