mrjohns2

The council executive board are all volunteers. They don’t have a chance at the salaries. I’m not clear what you are getting at. The volunteers vote on her salaries and budget. Not the pros. Now the pros maybe lobby, but it isn’t like they choose their own pay. You could talk to your council board if you really wanted those that vote on it to hear your concerns. Or you could post here. Or both.

I don’t know if it works that way. So, you are proposing they take a $125,000 pay cut to declare they care about Scouting? You do know they don’t set their own pay, right?

You are moving as the SM of one failing troop to be SM of another?

At times it seems to also be an indicator of those “in the know”. A way of creating a clique of those that keep up with the pointless changes. Those people are empowered while all brand equity is thrown out the window.

Great point. This happens at times at work where they change the name of tools etc with no real change. I wonder where an idea like this idea gets started and how it gets championed into reality.

Side note. It is no longer a Bridge of Review. It changed last year. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2021/08/02/take-note-of-these-11-key-changes-in-the-2021-guide-to-advancement/amp/

Are you playing Devil’s advocate?

No, that is on Part A and the site Approval (SE or designer). Both are done prior to the event. The final part, part B, only has the signature of the STCA. Source: training and forms required to be submitted before and after assessment.

We were supposed to move to that in 2023. They told people and then said they will do it for 2024.

Same here. Not a pro’s job normally.

The charters were extended too. So, they continued to be a unit and count in the numbers. The drop will likely Jan 1 of this year.

I’m not so sure. The way I understood it, at least in my council, the people still had to “reup” or not. It was only the $75 (now $100) charter that was extended. So, they dropped or not already. At least in my council.

My.scouting has that. What they are showing is, for example, say 10/25/22 compared to 10/31/21 to see how the end of October compares to month to date. Are we on track to where we were at this time last year. Then they have the end of the year 12/31/21 to show how far we were max to max if you will. That is, are we on track tend wise to how we ended 2021. It doesn’t show say 10/25 to 10/25 as the exact day is irrelevant. Month totals tell a lot more.

I'm not so sure. They are comparing end of year to end of year. Each year you will have some who do re-up. Yes, there are different ways of slicing it, but if you compare current as of today to end of year last year, that is pretty close to apples to apples. That doesn't misrepresent anything. To get what you want, you would want to compare post recharter to post recharter. Say, April 1st to April 1st. Again, you wouldn't compare Oct to April 1st of this year. It wouldn't be apples to apples.

What do you mean? Attention etc?

Does anyone have last year’s jump due to recruiting? Or is that too hard to sus out?

Packs have rented our camp’s dinning hall (minus kitchen) to tent inside. Most loved it. You could do sledding outside and then go home.

I can tell you about our district. So a very micro view 1600 10/31/21 1650 12/31/21 1740 10/23/22

@BetterWithCheddarI think you are right. I don't want to admit it, but that is what I did and what I am seeing my daughter do.

As someone who was ready to cite your credentials, I still find it interesting you continue choose the word accidental. Here is a good article that covers the topic. https://www.nrafamily.org/content/how-to-avoid-negligent-discharges-2/

Agreed. Incidents like this one are rooted in many causes. If there were often only one cause, we would have more incidents.

Someone’s actions, inactions, etc. Again, having a background in safety management, makes this clear. There are multiple causes, but even car “accidents” didn’t “just happen”. There are causes. Every injury and illness could and should have been prevented. Also, safety can be managed. “Accidents just happening” implies they can’t be prevented. They can and should be.

We’ll have to disagree. It was a negligent discharge. Someone pulled the trigger.

You must have never worked in safety. This was an incident with multiple causes that could and should have been prevented. Firearms of a basic quality never “go off on accident”. Triggers are pulled, muzzle control is not done, and there are tragic results. Not an accident by any means.

Every year that would happen. For year on year growth, our council uses current to last year’s 12/31. As long as one doesn’t compare 4/1 to end of year for % growth, it shouldn’t be bad.