How much "compliance", "respect", "abiding", or "consistent" must you be for a BSA program?

[fred8033]

3 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

... AT&T broke itself up ...

LOL ... colorful intrepresentation of history.     ... based on settlement of a massive anti-trust lawsuit.  

One of my final undergraduate courses was an independent research project for credit based on the AT&T breakup.  80 typed pages of research ... before Google, before search engines and largely before the modern internet.  Libraries.  Copy machines.  Phone calls.  A retired AT&T employee sent me a book they had called Heritage & Destiny by Alvin von Auw.  I still have the book.  I was about to donate it to Goodwill.  https://www.amazon.com/Heritage-destiny-Reflections-System-transition/dp/0030696070

AT&T is a fascinating case  The problem understanding the breakup is it's so absolutely huge, painfully detailed, drawn out over years and the implications go every direction.

Edited October 11, 2020 by fred8033

[qwazse]

My SM was a Journeyman Lineman, and that sense of rigor certainly trickled down. There was no scenario where adults would cook for boys (that included pancake fundraisers), no scenario where we would “camp” in a cabin, no scenario where an adult would issue gear, no scenario where anyone besides boy (once trained) would be putting up drywall in their own scout house.

[ParkMan]

Despite breaking up AT&T, the remnants of what was once have themselves evolved into a few very large companies.  It strikes me that we're better off today with having Verizon & AT&T both exist in the space that was one AT&T.  This forced competition with each other is a good thing. 

Competition is almost always good for business and it makes the companies involved stronger.  Products get better, their service gets better, and prices drop.  This is a good thing because is most areas there is always another choice - "do nothing".  Competition between the primary companies leads to the companies also doing a better job competing against that always present third choice of "do nothing."  I suspect that this is because companies that compete must relentlessly focus on knowing their market and their consumers.

If the bell system had not been broken up and these companies forced to compete, I suspect that we would not see the communications options we have today - lower cost long distance, cell phones, smart phones, data over mobile, etc...  When I was a kid you rarely called your family in a different city because each call was so expensive.  Today we call them without even thinking about it.  This competition has greatly expanded the impact of communications on our lives.  There are few people today who choose "do nothing" because of how impactful communication is.

[ParkMan]

Regardless of which mindset a leader is, I find that almost all of them follow the safety and youth protection rules.  For the most part the safety rules are reasonable.  For the most part the youth protection rules are reasonable as well.  I find that there are less than 5% of the rules that are the challenge.  These rules are frustrating because most unit leaders will follow them, but know well that their programs and not materially safer or stronger because of them.

I think @JoeBob's comment accurately captures the conversation that occurs in many troop committees:

23 hours ago, JoeBob said:

Use your common sense.   And remember that the bureaucrats/lawyers who wrote the fine print don't have any common sense.

Those 5% of the rules that are frustrating to them.  They look at those rules and say "ugh, I now cannot do this because some leaders with no common sense messed up."  Most leaders will follow these rules because they have to - it's the price of entry to being able to use the BSA programming.  But, it is not because they have some desire to comply with BSA rules.  It is simply something that they have to do.

The danger in all of these is that they tick off the BSA's primary customer - CO's and unit leaders.  Scouts are not the customer of the BSA, parents are not the customer of the BSA, councils are not the customer of the BSA - CO's and unit leaders are.  Unit leaders put on the program & unit leaders do the recruiting.   Unit leaders become the district and council volunteers that make the next layer go.  There is no Scouting without CO's & unit leaders.

So in short - rules are fine, scrutinize every new rule to make sure it is absolutely necessary, look for alternatives to simply adding another rule, & understand that unit leaders are the heart of what makes Scouting work.

[InquisitiveScouter]

12 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

including rules on how toilet paper would be installed in the holders (over, not under)

 

Edited October 11, 2020 by InquisitiveScouter

[JoeBob]

8 hours ago, ParkMan said:

Those 5% of the rules that are frustrating to them.  They look at those rules and say "ugh, I now cannot do this

The stupid rules undermine the necessary rules. 

Once you get used to fudging: using a wheel barrow, picking up your nephew on the way to scouts, tossing water balloons, playing laser tag, and ringing the kettle bell; it's easier to let: chainsaws, one on one contact, alcohol, range safety violations, and political campaigning in uniform, leak into your program.

For those who reflexively advocate obeying every rule; how many years have you wasted driving the speed limit while impeding the flow of traffic and being a general hazard on the highway?

[InquisitiveScouter]

On 10/11/2020 at 8:04 PM, JoeBob said:

how many years have you wasted driving the speed limit while impeding the flow of traffic and being a general hazard on the highway?

Not years...perhaps a few hours, maybe even days...

But your thinking, and behavior, is wrong, friend. The facts (stubborn things) and statistics don't support you.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/speeding

Plan ahead, far right lane, cruise control on the speed limit...let the real hazardous drivers pass you on the left.

 

 

Edited October 14, 2020 by InquisitiveScouter

[JoeBob]

4 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Not years...perhaps a few hours, maybe even days...

Nah.  When you have lived as long as I have and driven those miles, 10 mph over the limit equals years.  InquisitiveScouter: "The facts (stubborn things) and statistics don't support you."  Oh yeah?

You quote me the official government website with a safety bias.  I'll refer you to a religious website: "Seven out of ten motorists disobey the traffic speed limits. Further, less than 10 percent of highway sections had more than 50 percent compliance with the law! "  So on 90% of the road at least half of the drivers are speeding.      https://truediscipleship.com/speed-limits-people-comply/

and Wired: https://www.wired.com/2008/11/the-boy-who-cri/  "The study of 988 drivers in that county, where Purdue is located, found few people have any respect for speed limits, which they consider nothing more than vague guidelines they can ignore. Civil engineering and economics professor Fred Mannering says that means highway officials set artificially low speed limits because they know people will ignore it."  Which directly supports my premise that stupid nitpicking BSA rules undermine respect for and compliance with needed regulations.

On a personal note; if you are one of those few people driving the speed limit on I-285, causing everyone to slam on their brakes and weave dangerously to get around you, move over!  I have places to be and a life to live!  Grrrr.

[InquisitiveScouter]

4 hours ago, JoeBob said:

  https://truediscipleship.com/speed-limits-people-comply/

Did you actually read the article you cited?

[JoeBob]

7 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Did you actually read the article you cited?

Ad hominem already?

[fred8033]

On 10/14/2020 at 3:53 PM, JoeBob said:

On a personal note; if you are one of those few people driving the speed limit on I-285, causing everyone to slam on their brakes and weave dangerously to get around you, move over!  I have places to be and a life to live!  Grrrr.

Slow cars move to the right lane ... Agree, but the reasoning never makes sense.  It's an oxymoron ... How can drivers expect slow drivers to move right as a rule while at the same time ignoring the speed limit rule?  It's hypocritical.  I still agree on the rule, but it is hypocritical.  ... Plus, police will penalize even low level speeders, but you have to be blatantly or dangerously slow in the left lane to get a ticket. 

Speeding ... In my city, there is a grace of up to 4 or 5 MPH above the limit before police stop you.  After that, our city does ticket for 7 MPH over the limit.  Ticketing for rolling stops.  Car stops for not signaling.  I've gotten caught a few times.  BUT, generally our city is pretty good.  So, I need to smile and say thank you.

The article you quoted uses the term "ignore" to inflame and drive thought.  It misrepresents how society treats speed limits.  Virtually everyone I know will NOT drive 75mph in a 30mph even when no one is around at 4am.  No one will drive 95mph in a 70mph.   I'd say there gets to be fairly good observence at 10mph above and very good observence at 15mph above.  ...  Speed limits include a societal grace that we all generally agree.  Most of us are fairly comfortable at 35mph in a 30.  BUT, I know many home owners who will yell and pursue neighbors who drive 45mph past their house in a 30mph zone.    ... "Ignore" is a poorly chosen term.  There are societal norms applied to most rules.  

Even with the speeding societal grace, liability starts much earlier.  When things go bad (accidents, damage, death), if you are violating that speed limit at the time, you will be summarily judged at fault.  Driving 45mph in a 30mph neighborhood and you hit a kid ... even if you stop and call an ambulance ... I'm betting you will be arrested and charged.  I'm not sure the level, but there would be a charge.  

I'd argue that's similar to G2SS.  BSA makes the limits clear.  BSA scouter community is pretty clear too on any grace on the boundaries.  BUT, if you choose to ignore those, I'd expect you are exposing yourself, your family and your assets to personal liability too.  ... AND moral guilt too.

I can't say I'm 100% clean .. .ummm laser tag ... but we are hard line on most of the limits.  For example, even before G2SS, we tried to keep test sharing to kids of similar age.  It's just common sense.  ... Hard lines on safe swim defense and safety afloat.  Pretty good observence on weather dangers too.  YPT pretty absoute.

 

Edited October 16, 2020 by fred8033

[RememberSchiff]

Scout Myers, 12, has been participating in the walk since he was 4, becoming the star fundraiser of the Littleton (CO) chapter — now called the Foothills CROP Walk.

This year, he brought along some friends: his fellow Boy Scouts of Troop 36, who trudged five miles up Waterton Canyon on Oct. 24 to recognize struggles faced by people far less fortunate — with several of the boys carrying gallon water jugs to symbolize how far people in the developing world must walk for clean water.

“So many people in the world face hardships and hunger, and it's easy for people who have food to forget,” Myers said. “I'm just trying to do what I can for them.”

...

The CROP walk, which stands for Community Response to Overcome Poverty, dates to 1947, when it started as an effort to send seeds and farming supplies to war-ravaged Europe. Managed by the Church World Service, the annual walk-a-thon raises money for local, national and international food relief efforts.

https://highlandsranchherald.net/stories/boy-scouts-take-strides-for-those-less-fortunate,315727

https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=7685

Well done Scouts.

Edited October 26, 2020 by RememberSchiff

[John-in-KC]

Just a reminder,

our bankruptcy is because BSA waited way too long to install hearty youth protection from abuse.  Many of us (myself included) used to laugh at that … then a co worker of mine, an Eagle Scout and Vigil Honor member, got to visit Club Fed for child pedophilia.  I remember calling the Council Director of Support Services as the word of the arrest (it was at work and public) filtered through our workforce.  When I got him, he had been tipped off by the US Attorney, and was already preparing the severance letter.

I've never laughed about YP since.

Edited October 28, 2020 by John-in-KC

[TAHAWK]

On 10/11/2020 at 4:04 AM, fred8033 said:

LOL ... colorful intrepresentation of history.     ... based on settlement of a massive anti-trust lawsuit.  

One of my final undergraduate courses was an independent research project for credit based on the AT&T breakup.  80 typed pages of research ... before Google, before search engines and largely before the modern internet.  Libraries.  Copy machines.  Phone calls.  A retired AT&T employee sent me a book they had called Heritage & Destiny by Alvin von Auw.  I still have the book.  I was about to donate it to Goodwill.  https://www.amazon.com/Heritage-destiny-Reflections-System-transition/dp/0030696070

AT&T is a fascinating case  The problem understanding the breakup is it's so absolutely huge, painfully detailed, drawn out over years and the implications go every direction.

Part of my job as a Senior Attorney, General Attorney, and Council at Bell and its successor entities involved ensuring compliance with the consent decree by which the System ceased to exist.   I was, for a time, the  Corporate Secretary for the Bell entity in Ohio, The Ohio Bell Telephone Company, and officially reviewed hundreds of pages  of the documents involved in the breakup and signed and sealed the company's acknowledgements of receipt.  I then helped draft "how to" memos to management to help them comply.  The anti-trust case had gone on since 1974  and  had been before three successive federal judges, and the decree judge, Judge Greene, retained jurisdiction for years more.   I am not guessing or "interpresenting" even slightly.  It's all in the court record should you wish to look.   The myths had not been invented then.

I also drafted hundreds of pages of legal memoranda and court briefs on post-breakup legal issues from 1984 to 1999., such as some of those those considering the issue of the circumstance under which an operating company, restricted to "supplying telephone service" by the consent decree, could build a cable television system for an independent entity. (as it turned our, by retaining "bare legal title" to the facilities,.  Thus, Cleveland got cable TV at long last.)

AT&T had been barred from "general trades computing" for almost three decades under a 1956 consent decree in a 1949 case and literally expected to replace IBM if freed from that decree.  After all, AT&T was BIG!  Bell Labs largely invented AT&T Unix programming language and Bell was the largest manufacturer of super computers in the World.   We all had to view a film whose message was that IBM was trembling over the prospect of AT&T as a competitor. Strange that, given that the vast majority of the viewers already knew that we were not part of the minority who would stay on the mother ship post-break-up.  Instead, we would be working for the "regional bell operating companies, groups of the twenty-two Bell operating Companies who, post break-up, would be AT&T's competition for several markets, such as long distance service (for those old enough to recall "long distances charges [revenue"]).  The assumption of automatic triumph seemed arrogant. and it was in hindsight.

Meanwhile, Asia increasingly priced Western Electric products, even when not black, out of the market for customer-premises equipment, and retaining Western was no small part of what AT&T had traded for giving up its twenty-two operating companies back when $80,000,000,000 was real money.

Von Auw left AT&T at 65 in 1981 - before "TPC"  decided (in 1982) to offer the settlement that it did.  He wrote in 1983, before the break-up took place  on "the end of history, 01/01/1984.  He therefore missed an event of great relevance to his thesis that service was the great driver that would continue to push AT&T, now long dead, to greatness - the decision  by AT&T shortly after the break-up to slash the budget of the half of Bell Labs that remained with AT&T (The other half became the transient  BellCore - supposedly to equally serve seven competing Regional Bell Operating companies (the "Baby Bells') AND the simultaneous decision to require that all research show a likelihood to generate added revenue in a few years.  These steps would have been unthinkable to the System prior to the new regime.  "Labs" was the premiere "pure research" institution in the World.  The brief of its scientists was to think deep thoughts and let management know if the found anything useful. - such as lasers and semi-conductors. 

I read many books by insiders least I be surprised in court by their supposed disclosures.  I did not read Van Auw's book all those years ago because it was not informed by the decisions during the critical years after he retired, or the changes to AT&T's proposal by Judge Greene, and no one thought he might "spill" anything critical.  Now that I have read it, I see that he pointed out that there was no drive to break-up the System, from Justice or the public.  The drive was to allow competition on supplying "stuff' to the telephone business - largely meaning the System - breaking the culture that almost everything purchased by the operating companies and Long Lines came from Western Electric, "the supply arm of the Bell System."  I note that he died at 95 in 2011.  it would have been interesting to learn what he made of the death of AT&T values of service uber alles and the course of events that led to the death of the original AT&T, but he just wrote the one book

Interpretation: AT&T did not "get" that being a monopoly is one thing and being in a  competitive marketplace is another.  Almost all those with customer contact experience were left behind. and it showed.  Then there was the infamous failure of the AT&T desktop computer.  It was a fraction of the product line but its awfulness was all over  the front page of InfoWorld every week.  AT&T was like the ocean liner - unable to maneuver quickly, partly due to government interference that saw AT&T as a bottomless well to subsidize its emerging competitors, one of whom,  SBC, bought it in the end after buying Bell South, Pacific Bell, Ameritech, and other bits and pieces..

As I taught history at Ohio State from 1965 to 1970, before Law School, I too recall the old days -  copying one page at a time on the new miracle Xerox machine with the big rubber mat and no mechanical feed.  Typing.  Correcting typing mistakes with Wite-Out or Liquid Paper..  Key-punch cards.  Questioning Master's candidates on their dissertations.  When I joined Bell from a few years of private practice,  I assumed it was for my working lifetime.  Instead I experienced constant downsizing ( "resizing" and "rightsizing!) from a department of  twenty-eight of all titles to a mere five souls before I retired.  "But look on the bright side.  There's more work than ever."   😉

 

[fred8033]

7 hours ago, TAHAWK said:

Part of my job as a Senior Attorney, General Attorney, and Council at Bell and its successor entities ...

I meant in no way a slight.  I was responding to the words you wrote.   "... AT&T broke itself up ...".   It was a historic, groundbreaking antitrust.  Larger than standard oil.  It's why I added "... based on settlement of a massive anti-trust lawsuit.  "   ... I can't imagine how this case was managed.  At least BSA's legal case has databases, modern word processors, etc.   AT&T had mimeograph machines and file cabinets. 

I wish we were on the same camp outs.  It would be fascinating to hear the stories and history.  Absolutely fascinating.  I grew up listening and watching these discussions.  Many engineers and lawyers in my family.  Decades watching the news, 60 minutes, Ted Koppel, etc. ...   

"he pointed out that there was no drive to break-up the System, from Justice or the public.  The drive was to allow competition on supplying "stuff' to the telephone business - largely meaning the System - breaking the culture that almost everything purchased by the operating companies and Long Lines came from Western Electric, "the supply arm of the Bell System."  .

That is the understanding I had.  I'm not sure the public really understood except that AT&T was massive.  

I'm too young to remember "AT&T values of service uber alles".   I only remember the other side of no one can fight Ma Bell. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by fred8033