Scoutmasters hands are tied.

[Oak Tree]

How does a Scout "actively serve" if he does nothing?

 

Ed, Ed, Ed, you seem to insist on applying a logical, common-sense interpretation to the wording. Stop that!

 

I've done it myself, and my sons' Webelos books had their own definition of active, which was very much more than just being registered. But for the troops, National has spoken pretty clearly.

 

So just for the record, here's how I would parse it, officially:

 

"actively" = having an active registration. Your membership is active. There are indeed times when normal, regular people use the word active to mean registered. One of the definitions on dictionary.com is "Currently in use or effect: an active membership."

 

"serve" = hold office. If I asked someone "Who is serving as your troop's historian?", they would typically respond with the name of the Scout holding the position, whether or not he is doing anything.

 

I think the problem is that the combination of words strongly suggests that the Scout should actually *do* something. But there I go with logic again. By National's definition, the word actively is redundant in the requirement, so why do they include it at all? I guess the rationale would be that they want to push the Scout to do the role, and they want to show it's ok for the Scoutmaster to push the boy to do the role, but that they'd still have the minimal interpretation of actively serve to be hold the title.

[evmori]

But for the troops, National has spoken pretty clearly.

 

Being active and serving actively are two different things! If you have a POR and do nothing, you may be active in your unit but your are not serving actively in your POR.