mrjohns2

Squad?

You make a good point. To me, it is clear that there is more meaning in a number of their statements then they let on. An example is non-OA scouts at NOAC being the norm. At least that is what it implies. They seem to be very leading statements without the conclusions.

It doesn't matter if they were inflated last year. If they were inflated every year, it would allow apples to apples comparison. You wouldn't want to compare March to December between 2 years as it wouldn't be apples to apples.

Who holds anyone accountable for any wrongdoing?

This could be an issue in some councils, not areound here.

I think this is key. Just because the “commercial range” allows other calibers, you still have to follow the RaTS rules.

NLS “Chicago” (in Wisconsin west of Kenosha) seemed well attended by youth and adults. At least as good as the NLS I attended in 1992 in central IL. I really liked DYLC.

My wife got a good laugh last night when I said a friend I was corresponding with was the only person I knew that had the OA DSA. I said that they give out about 40 every 2 years. It used to be more like 25-30, but they have increased it. She was like “Oh! This is the org that has much smaller numbers than in the past? The ship is sinking, let’s make sure our buddies get the award before it is gone!”

See the quote below from that page. I didn’t catch what he did there at first. Can you spot the change in restatement about what is not changing? “It’s also important to note what’s not changing: we remain Scouting’s National Honor Society; fellowship, cheerfulness and service remain at the core of who we are;”

Camping was in the purpose. There is a camping requirement. Ok. Some, not all, lodges had a "where to go camping book" and some, not all, promoted summer camp. Ok. It always seemed to be a force fit.

I agree others, from outside of the unit/org, can help mediate, but in the end, it is the chartering org that will prevail in any argument. That isn't to say that reasonable people should adhere to reasonable input and advice. But, if push comes to shove, the chartering org's opinion is the only one. That doesn't mean it couldn't/wouldn't destroy the unit and be counter to anyone's desires.

Does selling them transfer the trademark rights to the new owner?

If they aren’t the COR, then they can. It is their troop, no? Did you ask them their plans? Why not become a committee member? If they aren’t going to work with Scouts as much as an ASM does, why not be a committee member? It is very hard, but you could talk to them about your concerns. Nothing you say above is too bad. Tell them you have concerns that they treat scouts like cubs. Tell them they are already very active on the committee, why not formalize it? Maybe have their friend COR be a MC and they become the COR? I don’t find these conversations easy to start, or have, but may be the best and healthy way to address.

I’d assume, with no inside info, the name will change again. I assume it won’t still be Scouts BSA when the main org changes.

What are they being told is “in scope”, but is not?

I’d say the troop doesn’t become incorporated, but the adults in troops can form corporations for the benefit of the troop (either parallel to the CharteredOrg or to become the CharteredOrg).

Well, that isn't really true. UC's are not committee members of the unit they are commissioners for. They are "external" to the unit. He should no longer think of himself as a committee member (by choice or by default). UC's are more than welcome to ATTEND committee meetings for the units I am involved in. is quite odd for a UC to be an ASM in the troop that are UC for. He should find a unit with a different UC and swap units. One really wants the UC to be an external resources for that "outsiders" view of where to improve and to be someone to bounce ideas off of. So to review: -Member of committee as UC? No. -UC for a Unit the UC is an ASM? No. -Stay as ASM? Sure, just find a new unit to UC for

I believe what @RemberSchiff was talking about was closure of the case (follow-up still needed. engage local resources, engage local law enforcement, or whatever).

@skepticI don’t consider myself much of a grouch, but I agree with your sentiment. I was very active in OA during my youth 1990-1995 time frame. I attended 2 NOACs. I felt like training was / could be a big focus. I went in 2022 with my daughter and staffed training. The horrible communication and organization drove me nuts. I felt like training was a side thought. The rest was looking for a reason to have a big arena show as a rally. My daughter took nothing back and really isn’t interested in going to another NOAC. Take a look at the new mission / vision for the OA. Camping has been removed and it seems to imply they want to open NLS and NOAC to non- members. 😞

Well, $625 is the national fee to attend. 6000 into $2.8M is $483. So, could be pretty close, no? I know there is a lot more to the cost of putting on NOAC than housing and food, but maybe $400 goes to housing and food?

This seems like an untapped idea. We can all think of orgs who could share camps: Y, school outdoor ed, Campfire, churches, even the Girl Scouts. It is crazy that all of these orgs struggle to have, maintain, and use their camps. If we shared it could just work. I don’t know.

I’m not following your point. In your council activities are not done due to fear of legal repercussions? Probably the biggest legal hardship for our camps is the requirement of a sprinkler system for buildings housing more than 4 unrelated people (or something like that). Due to that new cabins will be tough in the future.

Seems very low key vs the photo shoots of the past few years.

I do see a pretty high overlap in our council between commissioners and the district committee. Not in the work, but the people.

Oh, here it is in G2SS.