David CO

That is exactly the same argument parents used when we disapproved our baseball players' participation on an all-star team whose coaches, schedules, transportation, housing, and other activities were outside of our supervision.

Some of the people who are criticizing the CO's for abdication their responsibilities in unit leader selection, will advocate for CO's to abdicate their responsibilities in other areas, like OA. No consistency. People sometimes just argue for what they want, and ignore the CO's need to have broader, more consistent policies that cover multiple programs and a variety of activities.

Ouch.

It is funny that you used the expression "red herring" in a post that completely distracts from the topic of unit non-participation in OA to an unrelated topic of CO approval of unit leaders.

I could easily imagine that many parents might feel annoyed and insulted if they are being pressed to donate their time because the unit is rejecting other willing and qualified volunteers.

Got it.

I am trying to not lose my temper at this remark. Parents can be predators. Predators are not limited to single men without kids. In fact, it is just as likely for a married person with kids to be a predator. Scout units should not let down their guard because someone has a kid in the unit. I cannot stress this enough.

The worse situation is having unqualified adults participating in the unit. No matter how acute a unit's volunteer shortage may seem, or how likely it is that a unit may fold as a result, do not lower your standards.

Yes really. A parent who volunteers for a non-contact job in the unit will inevitably be asked to become a registered leader. This puts them in the same awkward position I described earlier, only now without the face-saving excuse that they don't have the time. Many parents do not qualify to be registered scout leaders. We should not cause any unnecessary embarrassment to either these parents or their scouts.

You really are. You are asking someone to become a registered scout leader and go through an intrusive application process. Some people simply don't want to do that. Others know they wouldn't be acceptable to BSA as scout leaders, and don't want to embarrass themselves, or their children, by admitting it to strangers. Not everybody is qualified to be a scout leader. We shouldn't pry into the personal lives of the parents. If someone politely declines our invitation to be a scout leader, we should just let it be. Those scouts whose parents do not meet the qualifications to be a registered scout leader might actually be the ones who need scouting the most. We shouldn't drive them out of the program.

Nope. The first thought I had when I saw that cake had nothing to do with achievement. I thought about liability. Imagine if a scout gets hurt during a bad weather campout. Now imagine if that scout's lawyer sees this cake on the unit's website. It would be fairly easy for a lawyer to connect the dots and make a case for negligence. So no, I am not going to congratulate the scouters who created that policy, decorated that cake, and posted a picture of it on the internet.

I totally disagree. This sort of mentality borders on fanaticism. I have seen my fair share of fanatics in scouting and sports. My job was to keep them in check.

Yes. Imagine how people would react if a coach said he would never cancel a game due to weather. He would be fired.

I don't think so. OA has a better chance at survival than national.

That is their choice. It does not obligate non-members to cooperate with OA. I realize this discussion may soon be moot. If the CO's are out, and the councils end up owning the units, it is entirely possible that the execs will simply require the units to conduct OA elections.

I totally disagree with all of this record-making stuff. The boys in the troop should feel perfectly free to cancel their activity, if the situation calls for it, without feeling like they are letting people down by spoiling a perfect record. I feel the same way about youth sports. They are way over-doing it with the stats. Too many boys are worrying about their stats when they should be focused on the game, getting exercise and having fun.

No misunderstanding. Since it is a unit function, the unit can choose to do it, or not to do it. It is our choice. Not OA's choice. If OA wants to make it OA's choice, then they need to make the selections an OA function.

I think the bylaw provisions are more like a will than a contract. They can be changed at any time.

Yes, it is a bizarre story. I wouldn't believe it.

There is a lot about this story that I find very difficult to believe. This one leads the list. The COR's name and signature are on a lot of unit documents. It's on the roster. It is inconceivable to me that a scoutmaster doesn't know the COR's name.

The scoutmaster is totally out of line. I don't know if this is intentional defiance or just simple ignorance. Because he has been a scoutmaster for 5 years now, neither reason is acceptable. He should know better by now. This is unacceptable behavior. This alone would justify changing the committee assignments. A scout unit should have no secret meetings or backroom politicking. The committee process should be open, honest, above-board, and transparent. Tell him to follow the rules. That is usually the best advice.

Too socialist for me.

My college major was Health Education, so I have written a fair number of papers on public health. I don't see a paper here.

Maybe we should modernize a bit and use The Lion King instead. I have a group of boys I would nominate for the hyenas.

As I said above, this shouldn't be allowed. It's not just the 5 minutes the DE wasted. It is also the 10 minutes it takes to get the students back on track.