mrjohns2

What else is there of value? Beyond the offices, HA camps, and bank accounts, there is nothing. I am ok with total liquidation if local camps are somewhat spared. I would be sad if they were not as well, but I still say, meh. Our troop will be ok. Our district, will be ok. My staff alumni association will be ok. Meh.

Meh. So, we lose the HA camps, the offices, etc. We will come back immediately afterwards.

It isn't the term that matters, but the behaviors of the perpetrators of abuse. This has nothing to do with religion, but it does have a lot to do with good adults being aware of the behaviors of predators. To deny grooming happens, is to turn a blind eye to the start of the abuse cycle. I assume you wouldn't want to be an enabler of a preparator?

I think both are true. You don’t believe in the concept of grooming as a precursor to a lot of abuse?

I think it does more than that. Well, let me brainstorm some things it does. -non-predators avoid bad appearances -another adult will be there on an activity to at least provide second person oversight; that other person must be 21 and potentially be better able to stand up for what is right -lets Scouts know what to look for via the booklet that is covered as part of Scout and Star -background checks -makes a big deal out of all of it to let potential perpetrators know we are looking, go somewhere less vigilant One of the things that the GSUSA does, but I don’t know if it makes a difference, is they contact your character references. I know since I talked to my references. It wasn’t just because I am a male. They called my wife’s as well.

I am happy to agree with you 100%. I do think the SM should not approve this. As a CC, if they approved before we could discuss, I would not “override”. I would, though, discuss with the SM or that it wasn’t a good idea.

You must not have read the same guides I have. The decision to approve rests solely with the SM. Yes, the CC could relieve them, but they cannot override them. It is not how the unit is structured. That is, unless you can point out where a) the committee voting process is a thing and b) the CC does more than support the program vs carting it out. I’m not saying you think they should, but the buck stops with the SM on advancement as long as they follow G2A.

Wait, there are still 2 Varsity Teams registered? It is some things like this that amaze me about the BSA. Make them register as a Crew and MOVE ON.

Uh, that isn’t how it works. This is solely they SM decision under the G2A. You can console him, but not override him. This isn’t an advancement coordinator role or a committee topic.

All non-profits have to have method of, in its bylaws, for what happens to its assets should it dissolve. The disbursement has to be to another non-profit.

Hey, I recall a court case that could shed light on are councils independent or not. I know the Girl Scout model is very different at times, but it is close. About 15 years ago, the GSUSA decided to stop the crazy ad hoc mergers and go from 250 to 110 councils (I don't recall the numbers). So, they announced the plans and started to merge. They had the same reasons as the BSA - lower enrollment, high camp costs, etc. All of their councils rolled over and agreed, except for at least one. They sued and said they were independent. GSUSA lost the court case that ensued and then ended up with 111.

$6000 is not that for sure.

Like the only Jewish kid or the only Black kid in a school, I feel bad that you have to "speak for all who were hurt so badly". I bring this up because I do apricate your engagement and perspective. You could remain silent and save yourself any further pain, but it does help me to think. For me to understand this better, my question on the "rightness" of the $6000 is that it is far from their last $6000. If $6000 was all they could really "afford", then it would be what it would be? But it is clearly not all that they could afford and far from their "last" $6000? Not that any number is right (or wrong) as an amount, but this is wrong because it is like a billionaire making amends and saying "we are even, here is $6000, I'm sorry for what happened, but it is all I can spare"? Again, it clearly isn't all they can afford, nor the right number (no matter what the right number is).

I don't have access, but being business is right. I have heard of hedge funds looking at different cases, such as this one, and then providing the funds to a law firm (making an investment) with the goal being a true ROR. Seems wrong to me.

I don't know if that is true. There was an incident just a few years ago at my old boyhood camp. Based on the court case and articles I read, nothing in YPT would have prevented it (the perpetrator broke YPT). Were the authorities brought in promptly? Yes. Based on what I read, should the BSA pay any money? No. Was it super horrible? Yes. Prevent is hard, promptly and proper response is easy and must be done.

Good discussion. I agree with that 100%. The only issue is, is that how these work? What if they see that as the opening bid and then cut from there?

I don't know enough about about these things work. Was this supposed to be the last, best, and final offer? Or an opening bid? I wouldn't mind if they sold off Northern Tier, Sea Base, cancelled explorers, cancelled sea scouts, cancelled venturing, lost all of the endowments, sold everything they mentioned in the proposal, moved the headquarters to the Summit or Philmont, sold the headquarters. Made every council pay a proportional amount to their claim number and or assets. Even then, though, it might not be enough.

I'm don't think $6000 is the right number. Let's say the right number is $1,00,000. What if the BSA doesn't have that? What if they only have $50,000 per legitimate claim?

I don't believe everyone. I also don't believe the BSA was negligent in all of the legitimate cases. I also believe that the BSA might not have the funds or assets to provide adequate compensation. Isn't that why we are in court? To determine who is due what and what BSA can provide?

Define richer? There are plenty of National Parks and National Forests with backcountry backpacking. For example, Glacier National Park. To me HA would be simple to replace compared to a Jamboree. One can do plenty of HA on their own, you just need to want to. Again, if you are looking for unspoiled backcountry, our country has plenty. If you are looking for an all day hike with an evening of mine exploration or logging camp experience, no, not really available. Then again, that isn't what I am looking for in a HA trip. I am looking for hiking in an unspoiled wilderness where you encounter no one.

I don’t know what you are talking about. Growing up, we were a very middle class troop. No trailer, lower middle class Chicago suburb. We drove to the boundary waters. We packed our own food; no backpacking food, too expensive. We rented some of the waterproof bags, but the rest we lined with garbage bags. We did a 12 day canoe trip for about the cost of summer camp. This was just in the notational forest or what ever public lands. The more I hear about the evening program at Phimont, I’m confused. I thought it was wilderness - not some re-enactment dress up program.

My original point is that the BSA argument is that councils are franchises. What they call a charter is a franchise agreement. I could make some arguments the other way, but that is their argument.

It is my understanding that is true for any franchise system. McDonalds can come and shut you down at will.

Very accurate. I was friends with someone for a long time before I heard a peep about their abuse. And even then, it was just a peep. No details.

I don't think this current DB is quite ready for primetime.