Woodbadge for Me

[yknot]

3 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

Disagreeing with what?

Your only only disagreeing argument is that a 110 year old program doesn’t fit in today’s culture.

You are offended by post that you take out of context and you pretend your experience is equivalently to everyone on the list.

You don’t give details, just generalizations. Your generalizations come off as personal, not structural to any weakness. You don’t have a youth scouting experience and pass it off as irrelevant, which is condescending to those who believe the BSA made a difference in the lives.

if you truly want to have have a discussion, ask a question. I don’t think your bias will allow the humble approach.

Barry 

I sense we are not communicating effectively here on some very basic level and you're descending once again into questionable territory with comments that sound more like insults than discussion. I am not insulting you. I am merely disagreeing with you. You somehow interpret that as being offensive. I've given reams of facts and research. I can't help it if you don't want hear what I have to say. 

[CynicalScouter]

20 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

All this time of BSA membership decline,  public Interest in the outdoors skyrocketed, based on recorded visits to parks and state and federal forests, but not at BSA, based on behavior.  A positive effect of the crowds in the back country was the "buy in" by BSA on LNT, although they seem to think it's a set of rules to be memorized.

Yes, because BSA became identified as being socially out of touch and beholden to a bygone era in terms of homosexuality and girls-as-scouts. Even if some form of "pure" scouting from some bygone era returned (or never left), BSA's practices and policies up to and including the Supreme Court fight in Dale would have hobbled it. People can get the outdoor experience without having to be associated with practices and policies they view as "intolerance".

And oh yeah, the abuse cases. Talk about "based on behavior".

So BSA could have the most amazing, dynamic outdoor program on earth, and there's a large portion of the population who won't touch it with a 10 foot pole because of the 2-3 decades of bad PR.

You've lost a generation. Maybe two. If I am a Gen X or Millennial parent and if I want my kids to have the outdoor experience, I can take them to the "parks and state and federal forests." I don't need to associate them with a group that is perceived of as being intolerant bigots with a pedophile problem.

So, as my old boss use to say, what is the "value proposition" that BSA is offering? For a parent (and as much as we want scout/youth led it is the parent driving them places) what are you offering that I cannot get somewhere else?

[ParkMan]

Where I struggle with these kind of discussions is the lack of specifics.  I've got no idea whether we are talking about uniform colors, removing religion, getting rid of advancement, or turning Scouting into a badminton club.  

I found this helpful to understanding perspectives here:

53 minutes ago, yknot said:

I have advocated in multiple places for BSA to reposition itself as the premiere outdoors resource for the nation's youth. It's something we've moved away from while increasing emphasis on advancement and religion and adding an awful lot of things that feel more like school homework than the game with a purpose. 

Yet, in a comment like this one:

23 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

My own objection is to the notion that taking a program from 1920, developed for a different populace and a VERY different nation and a different social and economic conditions, with different expectations and different family dynamics and superimposing that 1920 plan on to 2020 is simply asking for failure.

I get the very high level concept that yes, change is desired.  But I have no idea what change is desired.  It's impossible for me to think about what is being advocated for here because I simply do not know what change is wanted.  If it's a badminton club you seek, just let me know and we can discuss it.

Tongue in cheek aside - I would really welcome more specifics like those in the first passage I quoted.

[Eagledad]

33 minutes ago, yknot said:

I sense we are not communicating effectively here on some very basic level and you're descending once again into questionable territory with comments that sound more like insults than discussion. I am not insulting you. I am merely disagreeing with you. You somehow interpret that as being offensive. I've given reams of facts and research. I can't help it if you don't want hear what I have to say. 

Well, as usual, another condescending generalization.

The steep slope you struggle to climb here is that your among experienced scouters, so you are lacking leverage.

I’m trying to help you, but you aren’t listening. Many believe scouting made a difference in their lives. What is the part of the program that made a difference and why do you think it’s irrelevant today?

You don’t have that experience, so you have no integrity even attempting to address the question. If you want anyone to take you seriously, you have to humble yourself to their knowledge. 

Barry

Edited October 18, 2020 by Eagledad

[Eagledad]

16 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Yes, because BSA became identified as being socially out of touch and beholden to a bygone era in terms of homosexuality and girls-as-scouts. Even if some form of "pure" scouting from some bygone era returned (or never left), BSA's practices and policies up to and including the Supreme Court fight in Dale would have hobbled it. 

There is no data for this assumption.

First of all, there is ZERO data to even suggest that the girls membership policy had any more negative influence on membership than the GSUSA boys membership policy had a negative effect on their membership. Even National admits they only changed the membership policy to increase numbers (money).

BSA beacame a target, but no data even suggests homosexuality was a cause for a decrease in membership. Infact, if you look at the numbers, the membership decline didn’t change through or after the Dale period.

Membership did declined, but you’ll have to find the real causes. There is no data to support your assumption. But I know and data supports me. I’ve posted that data many times. Has nothing to do with the changing culture.

Barry

 

[Eagledad]

1 hour ago, CynicalScouter said:

I see. If you weren't a scout as a child, you have no right to speak? Tell that to the parents at your next unit meeting.

I worked with concerning and skeptical parents for years.

You have no integrity because you condemn the organization without intellectual reason. Parents want some kind of intellectual reasoning So they can trust you with their kids out in the wilderness for a weekend.

You are close-minded and resort to flinging emotional spit-wad insinuations. It’s not the same. Experience trumps anger. Parents see it in an instant.

Barry

[David CO]

56 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

If you want anyone to take you seriously, you have to humble yourself to their knowledge. 

Barry

I don't mind that you keep saying that you're better than us.  The thing I do mind is that you describe yourself as humble while you are saying that you're better than us.

 

[yknot]

32 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I worked with concerning and skeptical parents for years.

You have no integrity because you condemn the organization without intellectual reason. Parents want some kind of intellectual reasoning So they can trust you with their kids out in the wilderness for a weekend.

You are close-minded and resort to flinging emotional spit-wad insinuations. It’s not the same. Experience trumps anger. Parents see it in an instant.

Barry

Where's a moderator when you need one, LOL?

[Eagledad]

10 minutes ago, David CO said:

I don't mind that you keep saying that you're better than us.  The thing I do mind is that you describe yourself as humble while you are saying that you're better than us.

 

Better?

Who is “us”?

Several posters lately have been going out of their way to, well to impose an alternate reality. Why? 

There are mature adults here who only want to develop a program where their youth actually grow from their experience. The scouters come here Looking for tidbits of information to help them get closer to their efforts by asking real questions hoping for sensible solutions.

The “us” are noise that pushes those real scouters away, thus keeping them from doing the best they can with the resources within their reach.

Is wanting to be a resource for those asking for help prideful?

Barry

 

[Eagledad]

34 minutes ago, yknot said:

Where's a moderator when you need one, LOL?

Why is taking freedom of speech the go-to weapon for those who can’t sway their ideals on those with experience and knowledge. 

Barry

[walk in the woods]

6 hours ago, ParkMan said:

I get the very high level concept that yes, change is desired.  But I have no idea what change is desired.  It's impossible for me to think about what is being advocated for here because I simply do not know what change is wanted. 

Agreed.  @yknot and @CynicalScouter what changes are you advocating?  Being a premier youth outdoor program is a mission statement not a change.  What are the specifics?

[RememberSchiff]

5 hours ago, yknot said:

Where's a moderator when you need one, LOL?

 

5 hours ago, Eagledad said:

Why is taking freedom of speech the go-to weapon for those who can’t sway their ideals on those with experience and knowledge. 

Barry

Come on,  no ad hominem attacks during our debate exchanges. We are Scouters not politicians.

Sorry working on a furnace problem and an unrelated Windows 10 problem. 

@MattR @John-in-KC

Edited October 18, 2020 by RememberSchiff

[David CO]

7 hours ago, Eagledad said:

 

Several posters lately have been going out of their way to, well to impose an alternate reality. Why? 

 

Our experiences in scouting are so diverse, it sometimes feels that way.  

 

[CynicalScouter]

9 hours ago, Eagledad said:

You don’t have that experience, so you have no integrity even attempting to address the question. If you want anyone to take you seriously, you have to humble yourself to their knowledge.

Those who are newer have no right to speak? No ideas to offer? Really? And we are to "humble" ourselves to you?

No, thank you.

[CynicalScouter]

9 hours ago, Eagledad said:

First of all, there is ZERO data to even suggest that the girls membership policy had any more negative influence on membership than the GSUSA boys membership policy had a negative effect on their membership. Even National admits they only changed the membership policy to increase numbers (money).

Note the contradiction here.

The girls membership policy no negative influence on membership...but was changed to increase membership.

Wha?

8 hours ago, yknot said:

Where's a moderator when you need one, LOL?

I think we need to just realize that some Scouters will never, ever listen a a female and/or anyone who isn't part of their old, antiquated, and dying system.

Edited October 18, 2020 by CynicalScouter