Scouting Magazine - betting the farm on girls

[gblotter]

Just now, FireStone said:

What data says that either opinion was the minority opinion? 

Yes - we would all like to see the data. But even if released, the survey was crafted to be so manipulative, designed to elicit only one response - any data from a survey like that would be pointless, in all reality. Can you at least give me room for rage over such an insulting process?

[gblotter]

1 minute ago, HelpfulTracks said:

My experience is like that of FireStone's, most people I see are supporting it.

What you see depends on where you sit. I see exactly the opposite from my vantage point. I know of many Scouting families adopting a "get done and get out" strategy.

[malraux]

Just now, gblotter said:

Yes - we would all like to see the data. But even if released, the survey was crafted to be so manipulative, designed to elicit only one response - any data from a survey like that would be pointless, in all reality. Can you at least give me room for rage over such an insulting process?

can you handle it when not everyone joins in your rage?

[FireStone]

Just now, gblotter said:

Yes - we would all like to see the data. But even if released, the survey was crafted to be so manipulative, designed to elicit only one response - any data from a survey like that would be pointless, in all reality. Can you at least give me room for rage over such an insulting process?

Certainly. I'm not happy with the survey and how it was conducted either. 

But a bad survey doesn't mean there's no support for girls in Scouting. The idea that it's "all lies" is simply not true. 

[gblotter]

2 minutes ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Calling it a minority does not make it so.

Claiming popular support does not make it so.

Five years should be enough time for the dust to setting on the LDS exit and judge whether Surbaugh was the savior or the executioner of BSA. I am not optimistic. BSA's current membership is not robust enough to survive another disaster like the Improved Scouting Program of the 1970s.

[gblotter]

3 minutes ago, FireStone said:

The idea that it's "all lies" is simply not true. 

I never said "all lies". Surbaugh is lying when he claims popular support drove the girl decision while conveniently ignoring huge resistance.

6 minutes ago, malraux said:

can you handle it when not everyone joins in your rage?

Sure. What's your point?

[ianwilkins]

19 minutes ago, malraux said:

there are times when I feel like the point of this forum is for people to complain.

Bingo!

[FireStone]

1 minute ago, gblotter said:

I never said "all lies". Surbaugh is lying when he claims popular support drove the girl decision while conveniently ignoring huge resistance.

Again, where's the data to support that? You're calling someone a liar based on what? Your gut feeling that the numbers aren't there?

[gblotter]

Just now, FireStone said:

You're calling someone a liar based on what?

Surbaugh lies by claiming popular support while completely ignoring huge resistance. It's no more complicated than that.

[malraux]

2 minutes ago, ianwilkins said:

Bingo!

Its weird when the reddit community is the reasonable and uplifting one...

[FireStone]

Just now, gblotter said:

Surbaugh lies by claiming popular support while completely ignoring huge resistance. It's no more complicated than that.

That's just not true. It's a popular opinion that girls should be in Scouting. How popular? I don't know. But it's not some small fringe group.

[malraux]

Just now, FireStone said:

That's just not true. It's a popular opinion that girls should be in Scouting. How popular? I don't know. But it's not some small fringe group.

Its also likely fairly regional in the different opinions, so hard for anyone to estimate its exact popularity.

I'm also appreciative of the idea that sometimes organizations have to change even its not what a majority of its current members want.

[gblotter]

2 minutes ago, FireStone said:

That's just not true. It's a popular opinion that girls should be in Scouting. How popular? I don't know. But it's not some small fringe group.

If Surbaugh wanted to be honest (not lie), he could at least acknowledge that this was a divisive decision driven by declining membership rather than hiding behind an insulting and manipulative survey. Wouldn't some honest discussion coming from the top be refreshing for a change?

[gblotter]

1 minute ago, malraux said:

Its also likely fairly regional in the different opinions, so hard for anyone to estimate its exact popularity.

Yep. Like I said, what you see depends on where you sit.

1 minute ago, malraux said:

I'm also appreciative of the idea that sometimes organizations have to change even its not what a majority of its current members want.

I have no problem with that concept. Can't Surbaugh then at least be honest about the reality of BSA's situation driving this decision? That would be a position I could respect. I cannot respect the insulting manipulations.

[HelpfulTracks]

3 minutes ago, gblotter said:

Surbaugh lies by claiming popular support while completely ignoring huge resistance. It's no more complicated than that.

Popular support does not mean unanimous or even majority, but that said, even on this board it is the same few that are opposed.

Just curious, if my experience tells me that there is popular support for this program, am I justified in calling you a liar because your experience is different? Am I justified if the my district and council's internal data shows popular support, am I justified in calling you a liar if yours doesn't?

I disagree with National on a many issues, and at times I think they could screw just about anything up, but as a Scouter, I am beyond frustrated with Scouters calling people liars based off supposition, personal bias and no evidence.