CA_Scouter Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 Wow. Incredible arrogance. I could only wish to be that perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob White Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 CA Perhaps you could share anything in the post that you found inaccuarate. I would be happy to reconsider any point that you can refute with evidence from LisaBob's posts or my own. I am sorry you see this as arrogance, but there seems to be a bunch of folks who with no evidence that the adults did anything right, are more than happy to say that the scout was wrong. Based on what requirement not being completed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kudu Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 Lisabob forgot to start this thread with her customary admonition not to upset her with details about the Patrol Method. This gives us leave to note that Boards of Review and Scout Spirit Requirements are legacies of the first decade of the BSA's history when the YMCA founders and their fellow-travelers rejected Baden-Powell's Patrol System in favor of a tightly-adult-run program. Adult Association is just another word for adult-run. Qualification for advancement should be determined by the Patrol Leaders in Council, not a bunch of indoor Cub Scout Wood Badge Committee Members. Rather than taking the easy way out and sucking up, I hope the Scout in question Googles "Mumbled, mono-syllabic answers," finds Bob White's advice, appeals the BOR's decision, and administers to this Committee a very sound and public spanking after each and every BOR. Now THAT is articulating an answer beyond a shrug and "dunno"! By the time he gets to his Eagle BOR this positive Scouting experience may have inspired a career in law. I love this Scouting stuff! Kudu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 Assumptions (not a good thing to do) were made about Lisabob's post that the Scout had completed all the requirements & therefore the BOR had no valid reason to deny this Scout his advancement. No where in any of Lisabob's posts is it stated if the Scout had or had not completed all the requirements yet this is still being dwelt on! WE DON'T KNOW THE REASON THE SCOUT WAS DENIED ADVANCEMENT BY THE BOR! Get past it! Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Winger Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 BSA advancement is ticket punching, just like the the training "awards" that are given to adults. Fill in the boxes, stand in the right place and you get the badge. Does it matter if you are a good Scout? Does it matter if you know your stuff? Not in the least. At one time BSA recommended that the SM contact the boy's teachers and pastor to get another view of his behvior outside of the troop. Not any longer. Why does BSA want to pass everyone on to the next rank? The $12 registration fee and the enrollment numbers. If Johnny Malattitude gets passed over for promotion, it is very likely that Mr. Malattitude won't say, "Hey Johnny, you need to straighten up and fly right." No, he'll yell and scream about fairness, threaten a lawsuit and then pull Johnny out of the troop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob White Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 LisaBob, Did you not post the reasons for turning the scout away in your second post? You did not find the scout articulate and you did not like the answers to some of your questions. But the questions you mentioned were unrelated to the advancemenrt requirements. While I understand your frustration, but I hope you consider the scout's frustration and how he is the child and tha adults are there to help. In hindsight are there ways you think the board could have approached this situation to bring things to...if not a better solution, at least to one that met the policies of the BSA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RememberSchiff Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 GW Yes, I remember my SM calling my church priest to check on my Catechism class attendance, usher service, etc. and similarly my school principal too. It came under the "Scout Spirit" section of rank requirements. Included in that section, a scout had to "satisfy" his Scout Leaders that he did his best in everyday life including "do your share in helping in your home, your school, your church or synagogue, and your community". Had better advancement quality control in the 60's. Scout leaders focused more on the intent of the rank requirements than the legal interpretation of the requirement. So for the requirement "take a hike',YOU planned the hike, YOU prepared for the hike, YOU got the map...there was no just show up at an adult planned 5 mile hike in troop program according to FCFY. Tenderfoot Charlie Brown had to learn to plan his own hike. Today, there would be screams "That is in violation, you cannot add requirements." Just seems logical that if you are going to "take a hike", then you first have to plan and prepare, even if that is not explicitly stated in the requirement. A lost Scout value - scouts planning their own hikes and campouts. Back then, We busied ourselves on "Scoutcraft" with the goal of mastering the skill or accomplishing the task not meeting a deadline. You only worked on one rank at a time, so the analogy of being on a trail was accurate - you did steps in sequence towards a goal. Membership numbers were much higher too in the 60's! So giving away badges is not reversing the membership decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrentAllen Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 As we all know, there are many ways to run a troop. Because of this, we end up with very different Eagle Scouts at the end of the day. To me, these Eagle Scouts are walking billboards for the troops they came from. Last summer, our previous troop had an 18 year old Eagle Scout attend camp, as an adult. During a conversation about knots, he admitted he couldn't tie anything beyond a square knot. On an earlier campout, I saw him try to cook a frozen pizza in a frying pan over flames in a fire, which of course just burned the bottom. I wondered how in the world did this guy earn Eagle with such poor outdoor skills? Well, he got all the signatures and passed all the requirements, so he got his award. And on Thursday of Summer Camp, he got sent home for taking candy from a Scout and getting into a fight. Is this what I envision as the best of the best of the Boy Scouts of America? NO!! Is this Eagle an accurate reflection of the program he came from? Yes. Would you want to send your son to this troop? Only you can answer that question; it wasn't for us. I came out of a troop that demanded a lot of us. Were we pushed beyond the requirements? Probably. Did we mind? No. I would hope all of the adults in our troop know what we are trying to accomplish in our troop, and not just accept the bare minimum. This would go against the strict deinition as outlined by the BSA and Bobwhite, but I would hope our adults would not pass a Scout who will not answer BOR questions articulately. I don't see how they can make any determination about the Scout if he doesn't give them any information. If a Scout failed a BOR and wanted to play legal games with us, I would strongly suggest he find another troop. Let's face it, we are competing with other troops for the boys in our communities. We want our reputation to draw the families that are looking for a challenging program, that want their son to be challenged to do his best. We aren't really interested in attracting those families that are looking for the easiest path to Eagle, or worse, the Baby Sitters of America. They can go elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagledad Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 From Lisabob to Bob White >>Perhaps now, secure in that knowledge, you will be relieved of the terrible burden you apparently feel to bludgeon people left and right with what you think you know.>Perhaps you could share anything in the post that you found inaccuarate. I would be happy to reconsider any point that you can refute with evidence from LisaBob's posts or my own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoutmomma Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 Bob White wrote: Did you not post the reasons for turning the scout away in your second post? No, she did not. What she wrote was: I'd really rather not go into great detail but suffice it to say that for Star, Life, and Eagle, it would be best if a scout could at least try to articulate an answer beyond a shrug and "dunno" when asked basic questions (and prompted for more complete answers). It's really a huge assumption on your part to think that this indicates the BOR turned this scout down solely because he was inarticulate. In hindsight are there ways you think the board could have approached this situation to bring things to...if not a better solution, at least to one that met the policies of the BSA? When Lisabob stated: The procedures were followed and everything was done by the book. ...that says to me that the BOR met BSA policy. Bottom line, we were not there, and Lisabob was. She doesn't wish to share the details, and we should respect that, and not assume she's withholding details that would demonstrate the BOR was incorrect in its decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob White Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 This is a dicussion forum right? Barry My response was NOT to LisaBob or to the comment she made. It was to CA_Scouter. Using those quotes out of context like that is misleading. Using them to support your opinion was deceiving. Here is a point that I think you overlooked. I pointed out I was willing to reconsider my view if anything I wrote in the post that CA commented on was incorrect. I seem to be the only one willing to do that. And yet no one, not CA or LisaBob or you, have even addressed any of those points. I have not called anyone names, or impuned anyone. All I have said was that from what LisaBob shared, it is likely that a youth, who we are supposed to be serving, was denied his advancement for reasons not allowed by the BSA. They may have made a mistake, something that no one else seems to be willing to consider simply because the error may have been made by adults. BUT thye have no problems accepting with out any evidence that the error was made by the Scout. Very sad. While LisaBob chose not to give details, she has given us the reason the board did not advance the scout. And the fact is the things she points out are not requirements. Saying they followed the book and showing how they folowed the book are two different things. To say that she is protecting the confidentiality of the scout is illogical. Granted it's her choice, but she chose to post it on a discussion forum, certainly she cannot be surprised that there is discussion, or that not everyone on the Internet was going to agree with her. But for so many to revert to name calling is whatis unscoutlike not having a different point of view. And you will please note it did not happen in any of my posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kudu Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 I'm with Bob White on this one. It is illogical to believe that revealing that the Scout did not complete requirement #7c would identify him any more clearly than reporting that he was the only Scout in her Troop to be denied advancement on March 11, 2008. Kudu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evmori Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 No reason was ever given by Lisabob. You can assume what the reason was but we all know what happens when we assume! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagledad Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 The quotes are in context. You were asked more then once to back off, you instead continued your post at Lisabob or her personal experience. You could have continued the discussion with hypothetical examples. That would have given you a path to the last word and showing respect to the request. When folks ask you to stop, they want you to stop. Your style is consistent in forums. Barry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob White Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 Barry, Stop, please. Thank you. There is nothing about discussing the BSA advancement policies and procedures that is inconsistent with this forum. I have yet to demand others to stop simply for having a difference of opinion. Nor have I called anyone names. And I have always provided evidence to support my positions. If this was not a topic LisaBob expected there to be discussion on then why in the world post it on an Internet discussion forum? Other topics are discussed with much more 'enthusiasm' and with far greater difference of opinion than this one. Yet I do not see you posting to stop them. There are posts in a thread where truly rude and misogynistic things are being said and yet I do not see you there demanding that poster to stop, only me for my observations here. Again, if you feel what I have posted is innacuarate, then counter it with discussion to support your opinion, show your evidence. I said my opinion cpould be changed if there was someone who could show cause. Can you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts