OA election - 50% of troop

[ps56k]

How elected without camping - well, not really, but they are in that over 14yr group - closer to 16, and have racked up all their rank reqs, for First Class, Star, or Life, but don't come to campouts, meetings, events, COH, etc - but have met the "reqs" for OA - so some scouts just fill in the ballot with these names, since they are "eligible" and there is room on the ballot.

[OldGreyEagle]

But if they dont have the nights camping, then they arent eligble, did I miss something?

[ps56k]

you're right - I'm not sure they all met the total camping reqs as I have them written down...

--

To become a member, a youth must be a registered member of a Boy Scout troop or Varsity Scout team and hold First Class rank. The youth must have experienced 15 days and nights of Boy Scout camping during the 2-year period prior to the election. The 15 days and nights must include one, but no more than one, long-term camp consisting of 6 consecutive days and 5 nights of resident camping, approved and under the auspices and standards of the Boy Scouts of America. The balance of the camping must be overnight, weekend, or other short-term camps.

 

--

They usually go to Summer Camp - but do not usually come to the weekend events. So, I'd be hard pressed to find the 15 nights total when only 1 week of summer camp would count.

 

[maddog96732]

In regards to ps56k post about scout with ranks 1st class, Star, and Life. And not attending campouts, meetings, events, COH, etc. This is when the SM as the right to take the Scouts name off the election ballot. He can use the Scout Spirit requirement. But once he approves the list of eligible Scout of election then he no longer has a say.

 

Aloha

Ken

 

[evmori]

maddog has a good point but there are some who are of the school attendance doesn't equal Scout Spirit!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Proud Eagle]

Scout Spirit is always a difficult thing to determine, as is "active".

 

However, the level of attendance of a Scout is one of several outward signs of Scout Spirit. Behaviour, living by the Oath and Law, proper wear of the uniform, willingness to take on and live up to responsibilities in Scouting, and a great many other things can all indicate Scout Spirit.

 

All of the rank requirements say, if I remember correctly, to "demonstrate" Scout Spirit. This means they have to be doing and/or saying something to provides evidence in favor of their having Scout Spirit. All too often Scout Spirit is used simply as a give away requirement to any one who hasn't someone how demonstrated the opposite. "Oh, he hasn't killed anyone lately, so that sounds like Scout Spirit."

 

 

[acco40]

I'm still confused. If a Scout is eligible to be voted on by his peers for membership (actually voted on to become a candidate for membership) then the Scout has obtained 1st Class and has met the minimum number of nights of camping in the past two years. Therefore, he HAS gone on outings. To obtain 1st Class he HAS shown Scout spirit. So I ask, under what circumstances should a SM remove him from the ballot?

 

 

[ps56k]

let me think out loud on the camping reqs...

OK - only one week of summer camp, since they all like to go to that, which counts for say 6 out of 15 days... leaving 9 days of camping over 2 yrs. Each weekend trip might count for 2 nights/2 days - so we need 5 weekend trips over 2 years. Also, how does Philmont or BWC count ? Since they are not really "resident" (setup in 1 place) kind of camps, can they be used in addition to traditional summer camp ? In summary, it might not be too difficult to accummulate the req camping days/nights, and yet never come to any troop meetings, never attend a COH or service project, and never be there to offer "cheerful service".

 

[Bob White]

So ps56k, would you as a SM approve the scout you described to be included in the troop election?

 

Just beacuse he meets the camping requirement that does not make him a candidate. It's just ONE of the requirements.

 

 

[ps56k]

The thread has strayed a bit from the initial discussion of how easily we now make it to "elect" candidates vs the "old days".

This then crosses over into the discussion thread about what is considered "active" within a troop for advancement (or OA) for that matter. I have been over ruled several times within the BOR for not wanting to advance a Scout to Star & Life that has just been a paper Asst PL, not attend meeting, etc - vs having a troop level postion.

Same with OA election - we elected 6 Scouts, and 4 of them were not even at the election !

EOF -

 

 

[Bob White]

"I have been over ruled several times within the BOR for not wanting to advance a Scout to Star & Life that has just been a paper Asst PL,..

 

 

And they were correct to over-rule you as being an active APL is not a requirement for rank.

 

Now then the thread only veered off topic for two posts and was then was quickly returned. As long as you do not take it astray by not answewring the recent questions which were posed to you we shall continue on course.

 

If you do not approve a scout who has not met the camping requirements, or who does not exemplify the values of scouting, and if you educate the scouts on the responsibility they have for casting a thoughtful ballot, what is the problem???

 

The election is not easier it simply allows all worthy candidates to be elected rather than just a couple of them.

 

B:)b White

[sst3rd]

Bob,

 

The elections ARE easier. As the Scoutmaster explains his responsibilities in "approving" the Scouts that meet all OA joining requirements, the OA Election Committee/Team explains that the Scouts can vote for as many from the list as they want.

Before this unlimited voting, a Scout had to THINK about all of the candidates in the election, and vote for just the BEST Scouts up to that limit. Since this rule changed a few years ago, every Scout eligible to be voted on, has been successful. Our Scouts now know that if they can get their name on the OA list and past muster with the ol' Scoutmaster, they're in. It's become a given.

 

sst3rd

[Proud Eagle]

Now my experience is just the opposite.

 

Around here the quotas survived a bit longer than the actual policy did.

 

So, I remember several elections with quotas in place. In every case, the quota was filled.

 

On the other hand, I have both conducted and witnessed elections under the current rules where not all those on the list were elected. I have even had a troop decide that no one was worthy.

 

We should not say select the best.

 

We should select those who are worthy of the honor.

 

Scouts are not more or less worthy.

They either are, or are not.

 

It is a yes or no, black and white.

 

Perhaps the fact that not everyone understands this is part of the problem. Certainly those elected should be some of the best Scouts and campers, but just the eligibility requirements pretty well ensures that in most cases.

 

There is far more to being a worthy candidate than just being the best Scout in a group. It is entirely possible for the very best Scout in the entire history of some given Scout troop to not be truelly worthy of being elected.

[Bob White]

Perhaps sst3, you should explain to the scouts that they can vote for as few scouts as they choose, rather than as many. Remind them of their responsibility to elect only the scouts they feel represent the values of scouting.

 

I maintain that if a unit is electing poor examples of scouting into the OA the problem is not in the election mechanics, but in how scouts are trained in citizenship by the unit.

 

 

 

 

[ps56k]

OT - (off topic) as Bob said - "I have been over ruled several times within the BOR for not wanting to advance a Scout to Star & Life that has just been a paper Asst PL,.. And they were correct to over-rule you as being an active APL is not a requirement for rank. ---

Not sure how you read my msg, or the reply.... The Star & Life scouts were Asst Patrol Leaders, (not ASPL) which are not listed as valid "troop level" positions for Star & Life advancement. I brought this up at the BOR, and was basiclly lectured about passing them anyway... (end of off topic)