Chapter 11 announced

[yknot]

Eagle 1993, I completely agree with the idea to sell artwork before camps. Artwork sold to a collector or museum isn't lost; it will be cared for and cherished and there is nothing to prevent a future exhibition of loaned paintings being brought back together. Camp properties sold, on the other hand, will likely be developed and forever lost.

[RememberSchiff]

Judge Silverstein has scheduled Omnibus hearings for April 15, May 18 , and June 8.

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/802829_111.pdf

https://casedocs.omniagentsolutions.com/cmsvol2/pub_47373/802850_112.pdf

"An omnibus hearing is a Court hearing at which the Court may hear a variety of different matters relating to one particular case."

https://www.bankruptcydata.com/glossary-of-bankruptcy-terms

[hiker67]

"All the while, pay for Boy Scouts’ top brass jumped more than 14 percent, with then-top Scout Michael B. Surbaugh paid $873,927 in total compensation in 2017, according to the national council’s most recent tax returns."

"Boy Scout Director Mark Logemann received total compensation of $625,016, while Bradley Farmer got $602,874. Eight other executives earned more than $400,000, and another four made more than $335,000."

"First-class travel — necessary so employees can discuss business during flights, according to its filings — cost $382,490 over the six years examined by the Southern California News Group. Travel for spouses — “critical” to furthering the family-oriented organization’s mission and business purpose — cost $187,696 over those years, while membership in airline clubs cost $20,667."

Boy Scouts of America weighed down by red ink, high pay for execs before bankruptcy
https://www.ocregister.com/2020/02/28/boy-scouts-of-america-weighed-down-by-red-ink-high-pay-for-execs-before-bankruptcy/

[skeptic]

Let's look at a few of the comments and negatively weighted parts of this article.

First:  Any of us that have been around for any length of time likely agree with the statement about inflated pay.  It has been a thorn in our sides for years.  But, it has gotten far better in the last decade or so.  Also, it seems to me that most of the statements about pay do include the pension benefits and medical, so the total figure is skewed a bit.  Still, in this area, it seems to be legitimate to challenge the system even more going forward.  The comment about people standing in line likely refers to pension benefits I would think, and that is why they are there.

2nd:  Isn't it time for the BSA and others that do not feel misleading journalism is right or fair challenge the terminology that the press has labeled the "Ineligible volunteer fils" with?  They were never called the perversion files except by the yellow journalists.  Similar to the "Obama Care" and "Affordable Care Act".  By calling them perversion files, and intimating that BSA called them that as well, they put the worst meaning on them.  But, many of the files had nothing to do with child abuse, but other things that would make someone not acceptible.  Of course, I have no idea how to fight that, as that is what the sensationalist journalists (?) count on.

3rd:  Why are these stories never complete with all the details.  For example, how is BSA overall over say the past 3-4 decades in comparison to YMCA, Schools, Sports programs.  I think the figures indicate that BSA percentage wise is the lowest, or almost the lowest, even though they are the largest group.  Also, why do the stories seldom mention that the perpetrator was also in other positions that allowed them to be in youth contact, such as teaching, sports, church, or even law enforcement?  Why is only the BSA being sued if the perpetrator also was part of these organizations?

4th:  Explain to me, all you experts and finger pointers and so on how destroying BSA serves anybody's best interests, when the overall good over the past century plus of such magnitude, and continues to overall fulfill its aims?  And why do the "ambulance chasers" think they should be able to bend the norm and drag parts of the organization into the melee?  I truly have no idea what it is about destroying one of the better parts of our society that serves any positive purpose, other than more money in the lawyer's pocket.  Our legal system truly needs some serious overhauling, not just because of this, but as see constantly in absolutely insane sawsuits and weird judgements that do not take actual personal responsibility into play.

5th:  Is there really anyone making all the accusations and demands for compensation who actually thinks that that will solve the problem of evil people that prey on the weak and helpless, or will somehow make up for mistakes from decades ago?  A few of the actual lawyers have suggested they and their clients only want the BSA to do better.  Well, in the past twenty years BSA has developed the model YP plan, one that is a template for other groups.  They have already been offering counseling and other help to past victims, before the lawsuits.  And they continue to search for ways to improve that.  Also, note that decades ago, the IEV files were something nobody else even had, nor made a broad effort to combat the bad actors.  Some of the files note that family members and authorities chose to NOT do anything, for whatever reason.  We are dragging problems of society from decades before, ones that were met with different methods then, into today's society and trying to somehow turn back the clock.  

Finally:  If you have read the report by the Doctor of psychology that investigate the IEV files in depth, you know that she notes that there is NO absolute way to stop these actions by sick, misguided individuals other than vigilance and tight rules.  But the psychologists cannot absolutely determine who might perpetuate these crimes.  

 

 

 

[TAHAWK]

1 hour ago, skeptic said:

Let's look at a few of the comments and negatively weighted parts of this article.

First:  Any of us that have been around for any length of time likely agree with the statement about inflated pay.  It has been a thorn in our sides for years.  But, it has gotten far better in the last decade or so.  Also, it seems to me that most of the statements about pay do include the pension benefits and medical, so the total figure is skewed a bit.  Still, in this area, it seems to be legitimate to challenge the system even more going forward.  The comment about people standing in line likely refers to pension benefits I would think, and that is why they are there.

2nd:  Isn't it time for the BSA and others that do not feel misleading journalism is right or fair challenge the terminology that the press has labeled the "Ineligible volunteer fils" with?  They were never called the perversion files except by the yellow journalists.  Similar to the "Obama Care" and "Affordable Care Act".  By calling them perversion files, and intimating that BSA called them that as well, they put the worst meaning on them.  But, many of the files had nothing to do with child abuse, but other things that would make someone not acceptible.  Of course, I have no idea how to fight that, as that is what the sensationalist journalists (?) count on.

3rd:  Why are these stories never complete with all the details.  For example, how is BSA overall over say the past 3-4 decades in comparison to YMCA, Schools, Sports programs.  I think the figures indicate that BSA percentage wise is the lowest, or almost the lowest, even though they are the largest group.  Also, why do the stories seldom mention that the perpetrator was also in other positions that allowed them to be in youth contact, such as teaching, sports, church, or even law enforcement?  Why is only the BSA being sued if the perpetrator also was part of these organizations?

4th:  Explain to me, all you experts and finger pointers and so on how destroying BSA serves anybody's best interests, when the overall good over the past century plus of such magnitude, and continues to overall fulfill its aims?  And why do the "ambulance chasers" think they should be able to bend the norm and drag parts of the organization into the melee?  I truly have no idea what it is about destroying one of the better parts of our society that serves any positive purpose, other than more money in the lawyer's pocket.  Our legal system truly needs some serious overhauling, not just because of this, but as see constantly in absolutely insane sawsuits and weird judgements that do not take actual personal responsibility into play.

5th:  Is there really anyone making all the accusations and demands for compensation who actually thinks that that will solve the problem of evil people that prey on the weak and helpless, or will somehow make up for mistakes from decades ago?  A few of the actual lawyers have suggested they and their clients only want the BSA to do better.  Well, in the past twenty years BSA has developed the model YP plan, one that is a template for other groups.  They have already been offering counseling and other help to past victims, before the lawsuits.  And they continue to search for ways to improve that.  Also, note that decades ago, the IEV files were something nobody else even had, nor made a broad effort to combat the bad actors.  Some of the files note that family members and authorities chose to NOT do anything, for whatever reason.  We are dragging problems of society from decades before, ones that were met with different methods then, into today's society and trying to somehow turn back the clock.  

Finally:  If you have read the report by the Doctor of psychology that investigate the IEV files in depth, you know that she notes that there is NO absolute way to stop these actions by sick, misguided individuals other than vigilance and tight rules.  But the psychologists cannot absolutely determine who might perpetuate these crimes.  

 

 

 

Plaintiffs' lawyers are after money.  That is their only objective for the most part.  If the BSA gets "destroyed," they could not care less.  The more they say, "It's not about money," the more it's about the money.  For the victims, money can be secondary.

[walk in the woods]

10 hours ago, skeptic said:

4th:  Explain to me, all you experts and finger pointers and so on how destroying BSA serves anybody's best interests, when the overall good over the past century plus of such magnitude, and continues to overall fulfill its aims?  

The post-modernists that run our Universities and public schools believe that any organization like the BSA is a remnant of the patriarchical hierarchy oppression machine.  There is no good that can be done in service to the hierarchy and therefore the organization  must be destroyed to free society.  BSA is a paragon of toxic masculinity.

Public schools, their extra curricular programs, and GSUSA get a pass because they are on the team.

Nobody benefits except the people who believe everything is relative, there are no truths, and that any structure/hierarchy/value system is racist, sexist, or *-phobic.

[David CO]

20 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

The post-modernists that run our Universities and public schools believe that any organization like the BSA is a remnant of the patriarchal hierarchy oppression machine.  There is no good that can be done in service to the hierarchy and therefore the organization  must be destroyed to free society.  BSA is a paragon of toxic masculinity.

Toxic masculinity?   If only that were true.  Most kids today think the boy scouts are a bunch of wimps.  

Edited February 29, 2020 by David CO

[walk in the woods]

46 minutes ago, David CO said:

Toxic masculinity?   If only that were true.  Most kids today think the boy scouts are a bunch of wimps.  

But the organization supposedly promotes self-reliance, personal responsibility, and leadership until recently in boys exclusively.   Knives, fire building, shooting sports, skill mastery,  all hallmarks of toxic masculinity. 

[DuctTape]

2 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

But the organization supposedly promotes self-reliance, personal responsibility, and leadership until recently in boys exclusively.   Knives, fire building, shooting sports, skill mastery,  all hallmarks of toxic masculinity. 

no. those are not hallmarks of "toxic masculinity". 

Hallmarks of toxic masculinity are: denying young men the opportunity to express emotion except for anger. Promoting violence as the only acceptable means for conflict resolution. Treating women as objects. And defending all of these as the way to define "manliness". 

 

[fred8033]

On 2/29/2020 at 9:37 AM, walk in the woods said:

Knives, fire building, shooting sports, skill mastery,  all hallmarks of toxic masculinity. 

That statement invalidates toxic masculinity.  The boys I know were naturally inclined toward fire, knives, shooting sports, skills mastery, etc.  Boys have a natural tendancy toward agression.  I've always connected it with testosterone and hormones.  

I place toxic masculinity with emphasizing destructive hormonal behaviors.  For example, the old days of fighting it out to solve your differences.  Or when the boss was the toughest guy who could keep people in line.  Think of the old westerns with John Wayne pounding heads until everyone agrees.   Or John Wayne fighting Maureen O'hara's brother for her hand in marriage.  

[walk in the woods]

On 2/29/2020 at 9:46 AM, DuctTape said:

no. those are not hallmarks of "toxic masculinity". 

Hallmarks of toxic masculinity are: denying young men the opportunity to express emotion except for anger. Promoting violence as the only acceptable means for conflict resolution. Treating women as objects. And defending all of these as the way to define "manliness". 

 

Yes, this is the gender studies textbook definition, but has little to do with how the true believers interpret toxic masculinity.

44 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

That statement invalidates toxic masculinity.  The boys I know were naturally inclined toward fire, knives, shooting sports, skills mastery, etc.  Boys have a natural tendancy toward agression.  I've always connected it with testosterone and hormones.  

I place toxic masculinity with emphasizing destructive hormonal behaviors.  For example, the old days of fighting it out to solve your differences.  Or when the boss was the toughest guy who could keep people in line.  Think of the old westerns with John Wayne pounding heads until everyone agrees.   Or John Wayne fighting Maureen O'hara's brother for her hand in marriage.  

You know those things are natural and so do I.  That does change the belief system of the true believers arrayed against the BSA.  A "natural tendency toward aggression" is exactly what the true believers think can be eliminated because it is a social construct not a natural truth.  Remember for the post modernist there are no natural tendencies just social constructs.  Because those tendencies are a social construct, in their world view those tendencies can be eliminated by eliminating groups like the BSA that acknowledge them.

Edited March 1, 2020 by walk in the woods
Additional thought

[PACAN]

Sent to me by someone  from this area.

https://www.abc27.com/news/former-harrisburg-boy-scout-leader-accused-of-making-sexual-advances-on-minor/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_abc27_News

Another example that maybe councils may not be immune from being added to the bankruptcy???

[Jameson76]

9 minutes ago, PACAN said:

Sent to me by someone  from this area.

https://www.abc27.com/news/former-harrisburg-boy-scout-leader-accused-of-making-sexual-advances-on-minor/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_abc27_News

Another example that maybe councils may not be immune from being added to the bankruptcy???

Not sure the Council is liable in this case.  I would say unless they (The Council) had some prior knowledge to possible leaders past issues, and did nothing, then they are doing what needs be done.  When they were made aware they removed him from Scouting, turned the investigation over to police, and advised the unit.

Main issue with the past cases was (that by 2020 standards) they were not handled correctly.  Also there were serial abusers and with the patchwork of notifications, they moved on to other councils and units.

[ParkMan]

21 hours ago, walk in the woods said:

You know those things are natural and so do I.  That does change the belief system of the true believers arrayed against the BSA.  A "natural tendency toward aggression" is exactly what the true believers think can be eliminated because it is a social construct not a natural truth.  Remember for the post modernist there are no natural tendencies just social constructs.  Because those tendencies are a social construct, in their world view those tendencies can be eliminated by eliminating groups like the BSA that acknowledge them.

I don't agree that aggression and violence and natural and cannot be contained. 

What I do think is natural is a desire to compete and succeed.  That's largely in our genetics.  In order to eat, we need to be able to win the food gathering game.  To win the food gathering game we need to be able to best nature and we need to be able to best any adversaries.  In nature the rules allow for physical violence to succeed.  

In people, this is really guided by where we are competing.  On the school playground, it's what can you get away with - including violence.  In a bar fight, same thing.   As adults the rules often change.  At work, I win by being a stronger leader and more competent.  And so on.

In a Scouting context, it's important that we recognize our desire of youth to compete and succeed.  Yes, part of that is leadership as some kids will see success in being the leader of others.   The trick for us a leaders is to establish the rules of Scouting - i.e., no violence and intimidation.  But, we have to be very careful to forget that many kids want to compete and succeed.  

In this process, you can certainly remove some of the more toxic elements that the movement is highlighting - physical violence, bullying, hazing, derogatory comments toward others.  You can have lots of competition, success, and leadership without it turning into a "Lord of the Flies" kind of environment.

 

[walk in the woods]

22 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

In this process, you can certainly remove some of the more toxic elements that the movement is highlighting - physical violence, bullying, hazing, derogatory comments toward others.  You can have lots of competition, success, and leadership without it turning into a "Lord of the Flies" kind of environment.

We could argue about how broad and meaningless the terms bullying and hazing have become but that's for another thread.

My responses started to some hand-wringing about people involved in the chapter 11 process attempting to destroy the boy scouts, the impact that will have on current members of scouting, and how unfair it all seems.  My point is simple.  There are people outside of scouting, beyond the lawyers, who want to see scouting destroyed, for reasons other than money.  It doesn't matter who we let into the movement or who is excluded or how much we change the program, the BSA will always be on the outside of the post-modernist construct of the good simply because we pre-date the philosophy.  As such, we will always have enemies that seek our destruction in pursuit of their view of the greater good.  If this hit doesn't kill us there is a long line of attacks coming.