InquisitiveScouter

Don't forget to sign and return the very last page of the application (page 9 of the pdf)...the Additional Disclosures and Background Information Authorization. Also note, there are many links to the old application out there. You must use the 02/2020 version. Best to get it from the official source... https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/524-501.pdf Second most common mistake in filling out the application...don't forget the two blocks requiring initials, just to the left of your signature block. These are part of the "I hereby certify that:" And if you want to put the best example forward, please follow the Guide to Awards and Insignia when "assembling" your uniform. https://www.scouting.org/resources/insignia-guide/

Family Camping Family camping is an outdoor experience, other than resident camping, that involves Cub Scouting, Scouts BSA, Sea Scouting, or Venturing program elements in overnight settings with two or more family members, including at least one BSA member of that family. Parents are responsible for the supervision of their children, and Youth Protection policies apply. Recreational Family Camping Recreational family camping occurs when Scouting families camp as a family unit outside of an organized program. It is a nonstructured camping experience, but is conducted within a Scouting framework on local council-owned or -managed property. Local councils may have family camping grounds available for rent. Other resources may include equipment, information, and training. ------------------------------ Maybe they are referring to this "Recreational Family Camping" We have had exceptions to the "Troop" rules, based on physical or medical needs. Each done on a case by case basis, with approval from the SE.

I feel your frustration, too... Whenever we have a prospective parent ask, "How many of your Scouts earn Eagle?" We always answer now, "As many as are willing to do the work to earn it." That answer is well-received about 50% of the time...the other 50% usually wind up in a mill...

"Because he didn't ask." ...is my usual response

@David CO We can go further...you cannot love without discipline. They are mutually inclusive. Proverbs 13:24 (among others)

You are welcome to stay as long as you accept the consequences for your behavior and show progress in exerting self-control. That is crux of discipline versus punishment. If your behavior continues (especially if it is harming to others), you will leave. Firm but fair.

Disagree...CO has control of the monies...but agree must be held for Scouting. So, if the CO wants to give it to another unit, that is up to them...

Grrr... Several units in our council are not renewing. No inquiries from council on "How can we help to keep you going?" But several Key 3's (that I know) did get emails from council saying "Please write us a check for any remaining unit funds and close your unit bank accounts." With a mention that they would hold those funds in trust for a period of time (not specified) to be given back to the units if and when they rechartered. (Anyone believe that??) No mention of the fact that that money technically belongs to the CO when the unit does not renew. Grrr...

A parallel... The US Olympic Committee is a 501 C 3 facing consequences for it's role in cases of sexual abuse of gymnasts. If the USOC ceased to exist, sporting competitions and the Olympics would continue. Another group would fill the gap. the USOC is not sports, and sports is not the USOC. https://www.moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?id=4A4EB912-624B-4706-A6A1-64DC88E20C74 https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:07BDl3Txjr0J:https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/olympic-organizations-face-multiple-investigations-by-justice-department-state-attorneys-general/2019/09/13/7e190fa2-d654-11e9-9343-40db57cf6abd_story.html+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us The BSA is not Scouting. BSA is a corporation that markets their Scouting program (monopolistically?). If the corporation does not exist, Scouting still will. Scouting existed in this country before the BSA, afterall. At the local level, I am not concerned. Nor am I at the national level...the movement of Scouting will continue in some form or another, with or without the BSA.

@Cburkhardt, there is so much to unpack there. In general, you cast aspersions at nebulous targets. When you make a derogatory claim against an unidentified target, it comes across as disingenuous...crying "wolf" but not showing us where the wolf is. If you want to help your claims, please be more specific. You make a claim of conspiracy, "...some of these individuals are acting in concert with interests seeking to drive the BSA into liquidation." without identifying the conspirators (who are posting on this site) or their interests. It also seems that you genuinely believe that comments posted here have an effect on the outcome of this bankruptcy in different venues, including local councils and the courts. Do you believe that comments posted on this site influence the actions of Council Boards and Scout Executives across the country? Do you believe that attorneys in the case will use anything said here in their presentations before the court? I do not reach those same conclusions. If you want to instruct the volunteer moderators on how to do their jobs, again, please be more specific. What was a "disruptive" or "abusive" comment that you think the moderators should have taken action on that they didn't? The public square is open to all ideas and expression. It is necessary to have free speech to present all points of view to flesh out sound ideas, and eliminate unsound ones. That's what we do here. When an idea is presented, it first falls on all of us in this community to expose that idea for its absurdity (without disparaging the person), or praise it for its truth and applicability. If the idea infringes on someone else's rights or dignity, then we can call on the moderators to act. What you propose is equivalent to the "cancel culture" and censoring of ideas you don't like. That should be anathema to any citizen.

IIRC, the BSA used to publish a book called The Language of Scouting that addressed titles. The current online resources don't cover such things anymore. https://www.scouting.org/resources/los/ I have a much older printed version around here somewhere...if I dig it up, I'll try to post an excerpt or two, if applicable.

No, but I am responsible for imposing accountability, or consequences...that role I have no problem with.

That is the lament, brother... and why I just say I am only responsible for my own actions, not anyone else's

What is the solution to the onslaught? Other than gathering a group of like-minded leaders, with similar conscientious behavior, to scrub every requirement with a Scout to make sure they were done? For many Scouts, Scouters, and parents, my simple standards of "What does the Handbook say?" and "What does the requirement say?" seem draconian... A little over a year ago, when I found older Scouts were not adhering to requirements as written, I stopped all youth sign-offs. (The were pencil-whipping, for various reasons...) Only ASMs and I can sign off requirements. Advancement has slowed (no First Class in a year LOL) , but the "product" is much better. Our Scouts know and can do more now. And yet, in line with their "human nature", they still seek out the ASMs who are the most lenient, or dare I say, lax on requirements. I find this character element of integrity the hardest to teach. Our Boards of Review focus more on the Scouts' experience in the program and reflections on Troop leadership, rather than their co-equal task of "...determining if a Scout has met the requirements." Esse quam videre

And there is zero desire to conduct a process improvement team here... We did this with the council's L2E process, with great success...project and application returns to candidates is way down... Our MBC process is WAAAYYYY broken. But there is no incentive seen to fix it...everyone seems to have implemented their own "county option" to it. The worst is this...in Scoutbook, unit admins can approve any merit badge. Skip the counselor, and just award Jimmy the badge when you think he has done the requirements. I have talked with unit leaders from other units who, frustrated with council and district inability to get MBCs signed up, use this "stroke of the pen."

Refreshing, although dated... https://thisibelieve.org/essay/16630/

I believe in the ideals. It's the people who work so hard at tearing them down, who seem to be gaining in influence, that erode faith... I, for one, am standing in the gap as best I can.

Well, given events of late, it's not just the BSA's long-term future I am beginning to lose faith in...

???

Initial membership numbers and recharter are not looking good here. My spies tell me our council has about a 50% loss from last year...ouch But, first reports are always wrong... Wonder if the court will request or look at those kinds of stats to inform the decision??

1. I never address or refer to our youth as boys, girls, or kids. They are always "Scouts." They have picked up on this, and notice that it is my way of showing them respect. 2. I call Scouts by their first names until they turn 18. At the age of majority, I refer to our new Scouters as Mr./Ms. in front of the Scouts. This takes some getting used to 3. Adults refer to each other, when talking to Scouts, as Mr./Ms Lastname... Adult-to-adult is always first names. 4. I never throw in a title request...if anyone asks me to use their title, then I ask them to use mine, "Colonel." Only one person has ever insisted I call them a title (outside the military), and I asked for the reciprocal courtesy. They looked sidelong at me for a sec, then complied. 5. Some of our Scouts and adults call me "Colonel". I have never asked them to. They know of my military service, and those who understand what it means show me a great deal of respect by using it. 6. When Scouts ask me what they should call me, I say "Mr. XXXXXX", but because my last name is a bit difficult, "Mr. X" is fine. 7. I grew up in a part of the South where we called adults we knew Mr./Ms. Firstname. It was and is a sign of "familiar respect". If you didn't use Mr./Ms., and only used "Firstname" you'd receive a word to mind your manners. I never got a switching for this, but know a few who did ----- You called the adults you didn't know Mr./Ms. Lastname. 8. If none if the above are suitable for you, you may refer to me as "Your Majesty"

I understand the words...just don't understand why they would imply being at a council camp brings on a different rule set...

Yeah, what the heck does that mean?

I struggle with this daily...Scouts emailing me directly without cc-ing parents. I have a cut and paste now to add to all those emails: Please include a parent or another registered adult on all communications. At least, when they contact me through Scoutbook, the system automatically includes parents. I do like that feature.

The biggest change I see is that the Medical Screening Checklist was updated. follow the link to find the updated Dec 2020 version. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/HealthSafety/pdf/680-057.pdf Although, question four is a subset of question one, therefore redundant... anyone see it differently?? Am I mis-reading it?