mrjohns2

Scouting's success is inversely proportional to how much scouting is like school.

Ugh. That is not good.

It is hard work since I did it as a scout and a SM, but like @Tron says: meet every week, campout (2 days, no 1 day wimp-outs) every month except for summer camp. If you do a high adventure, maybe you could skip that, but usually that is a pretty small subset of the unit.

Now that CORs aren't automatically given a vote? I wonder if that translates down to the district? So, it would be the same potentially minus CORs. It is just funny that the same group would potentially vote themselves in.

Why the second 90% reduction? I understand the first, but I don't see where the second one is coming from.

To the CORs and other voting members, we send it out via paper and email. This report works just fine.

I was just thinking about the annual district meeting and what not. Who are voting members? Past members-at-large?

Yes. Based on what BoR are supposed to be, I hate hate hate retests. It is solidly against the G2A. If you really really wanted to put the scout on the spot, and split hairs, have him tie a bowline. Pass him when he isn't able to but talk to the SM about the issue. That is close to the intent of the BOR. How did the scout do, how close is the unit to true north. A review.

That is automatically available in my.scouting. They were given an invite and agenda. I don't know if those 3 will show up again; they were polite, said why they came, but didn't seem enthralled or ask a lot of questions. Back to the original point of the post. I see this not only as removing a barrier to mergers, but also as the first step in changing the policy away from chartered organizations. Maybe not, but this does lay the groundwork for that to be simpler.

We sent out an invite to all 60. The 3 showed up because they were interested. It really was as simple as that.

Well, not no CORs for us. We had 3 out of about 60 show up at our district meeting. So, 5%. We welcomed them and they were a great addition. Not an impactful number overall.

Can you give some examples of what wasn’t up to snuff?

Huh. I work for a fortune 50 company. They share the corporate, corporate subsection, and facility results each year. Then, when shared, they share a plan to improve the results.

Seems like re-testing to me. What if they can't do it? What do you say?

To register as an adult, though, we all have agreed that we must "Subscribe to the precepts of the Declaration of Religious Principle." I'm not saying I like it, I am just saying all adult leaders have agreed to "The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members."

The declaration of religious principals, god is male and pretty much defined as monotheistic "The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members."

I think one link can simply sum up a lot of issues with National: National Staff Cufflinks | Boy Scouts of America. I like local councils for running summer camp, though.

I thought that was acceptable at the time? Either the Green Explorer uniform or the tan shirt with green loops?

Another hard job is the Pack CC. It is very hard being a DL, but having 2 or 3 dens without DLs? Not harder, just impossible? Finding, registering, and getting those DLs up to speed, so they can DO the hardest job, is a hard task.

Correct. One has to either use Scoutbook or import from a 3rd party tool to get advancement in AND they have to enter if they went to camp. To get the data on camp, for the test years, he used our council camp data and then, with the help of commissioners, contacted units that camped outside of council (or didn't at all). The ideas was that we have rarely had enough unit commissioners. So, focus them on the "at risk" units. Units scoring 4 or 5 don't need as much help.

It wasn’t covered in the roll out of the unit metrics, but those are rooted in research. A Scouter in my district was literally the guy who came up with them. Units that score 4 or 5 have a very high (90%+) likelihood to recharter. Units with 0 or 1 have a very high likelihood to fail and not recharter. Data was gathered, by hand, for about 4 years and in the 4th year he could predict units they wouldn’t recharter very well.

There are councils charging more than that for the council fee?

I hope burning of any country’s flag is protected speech. Not that I have felt the need to disrespect any country in such way.

I think it has to all be from memory. If a Scout wants to work with me on a skill, they are more than welcome to use the book. We learn together, we use the book as a guide and aid. That doesn't count for a sign off, though. Come back the next day, demonstrate the skill without an aid, notes, etc, then I will sign it off. This is why I find "merit badge days" so hard to staff. It is hard to do that without requiring pre-reqs that are actually done.

Did the parent know of the new plan?