CynicalScouter Posted December 21, 2020 Author Share Posted December 21, 2020 3 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said: Because subversion and deceit go against the Scout Oath and Law, and my own personal code of ethics. Got it. Ok, that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said: This is the video I would share as a MBC: Outstanding video ... You are braver than I am. I would not post such a video because there are too many that are too quick to toss out words such as racist and biggot. I find the video very useful and 100% worthy of discussion. But I don't want to be the target of the stereo typing by people who would use such ugly and hateful words. Edited December 21, 2020 by fred8033 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 (edited) Removed Edited December 21, 2020 by fred8033 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattR Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 I removed the video because it's not helping, it violates the rules, we're running out of moderators, and I'm just tired of watching culture war. Nobody ever changes their mind once we hit this point. I'd suggest looking for a different approach. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeptic Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 In our local paper this morning was an article about changes in the LDS handbook. Much of what is noted in the article seems to follow some of the thinking involved in this discussion. I find it a bit ironic that they leave BSA and then appear to be doing similar things in their review of disciplines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InquisitiveScouter Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 3 minutes ago, MattR said: I removed the video because it's not helping, it violates the rules, we're running out of moderators, and I'm just tired of watching culture war. Nobody ever changes their mind once we hit this point. I'd suggest looking for a different approach. Please help me understand which rule this violated? Permitted and Prohibited Uses You may use the the Website for the sole purpose of sharing and exchanging ideas with other Users. You may not use the the Website to violate any applicable local, state, national, or international law, including without limitation any applicable laws relating to antitrust or other illegal trade or business practices, federal and state securities laws, regulations promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, any rules of any national or other securities exchange, and any U.S. laws, rules, and regulations governing the export and re-export of commodities or technical data. You may not upload or transmit any material that infringes or misappropriates any person's copyright, patent, trademark, or trade secret, or disclose via the the Website any information the disclosure of which would constitute a violation of any confidentiality obligations you may have. You may not upload any viruses, worms, Trojan horses, or other forms of harmful computer code, nor subject the Website's network or servers to unreasonable traffic loads, or otherwise engage in conduct deemed disruptive to the ordinary operation of the Website. You are strictly prohibited from communicating on or through the Website any unlawful, harmful, offensive, threatening, abusive, libelous, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, profane, hateful, fraudulent, sexually explicit, racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable material of any sort, including, but not limited to, any material that encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, national, or international law. You are expressly prohibited from compiling and using other Users' personal information, including addresses, telephone numbers, fax numbers, email addresses or other contact information that may appear on the Website, for the purpose of creating or compiling marketing and/or mailing lists and from sending other Users unsolicited marketing materials, whether by facsimile, email, or other technological means. You also are expressly prohibited from distributing Users' personal information to third-party parties for marketing purposes. The Operators shall deem the compiling of marketing and mailing lists using Users' personal information, the sending of unsolicited marketing materials to Users, or the distribution of Users' personal information to third parties for marketing purposes as a material breach of these Terms and Conditions of Use, and the Operators reserve the right to terminate or suspend your access to and use of the Website and to suspend or revoke your membership in the consortium without refund of any membership dues paid. The Operators note that unauthorized use of Users' personal information in connection with unsolicited marketing correspondence also may constitute violations of various state and federal anti-spam statutes. The Operators reserve the right to report the abuse of Users' personal information to the appropriate law enforcement and government authorities, and the Operators will fully cooperate with any authorities investigating violations of these laws. User Submissions The Operators do not want to receive confidential or proprietary information from you through the Website. Any material, information, or other communication you transmit or post ("Contributions") to the Website will be considered non-confidential. All contributions to this site are licensed by you under the MIT License to anyone who wishes to use them, including the Operators. If you work for a company or at a University, it's likely that you're not the copyright holder of anything you make, even in your free time. Before making contributions to this site, get written permission from your employer. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, MattR said: I removed the video because it's not helping, it violates the rules, we're running out of moderators, and I'm just tired of watching culture war. Nobody ever changes their mind once we hit this point. I'd suggest looking for a different approach. What was violated by that video? The video seemed 100% useful and appropriate for this discussion. Edited December 21, 2020 by fred8033 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CynicalScouter Posted December 21, 2020 Author Share Posted December 21, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said: Please help me understand which rule this violated? I am going to bet this rule. Quote Posted videos, images, and links must pertain to the original post and respectfully move the discussion forward. Failure to do so may result in deletion or editing of the post, and in egregious or repeated instances, may result in a warning to the member. Edited December 21, 2020 by CynicalScouter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattR Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 @CynicalScouter is correct. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said: I am going to bet this rule. The video was 100% on-topic. Many people believe the DE&I badge is propaganda and can't be taught constructively without pulling in individuals personal political beliefs. The video has 100% on-topic discussion topics. Is race real? Is it useful to discuss? Where do the issues start? How to work with police? Removing that video is today's canceling culture and is censorship. If you want this badge, we need the ability to discuss and debate the topics in the badge. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InquisitiveScouter Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 (edited) 22 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said: I am going to bet this rule. "must pertain to the original post and respectfully move the discussion forward." How does this not pertain to DI&E MB requirements? Req 1. The video address facts and opinions of influential people who are members of a perceived disaffected group. Helps to understand what "equity" and "bigotry" are and are not. These people are perfect examples of "upstanders." They witness unjust accusations and asperisons being cast, and they address them publicly with facts and experience. Req 2. Self-evident Req 3. Replete with examples Req 6. Yup Req 8. Yup @MattR , I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Lol, @CynicalScouter I just thought, maybe I should be a Merit Badge Counselor for this! Edited December 21, 2020 by InquisitiveScouter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattR Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 3 minutes ago, fred8033 said: The video was 100% on-topic. Many people believe the DE&I badge is propaganda and can't be taught constructively without pulling in individuals personal political beliefs. The video has 100% on-topic discussion topics. Is race real? Is it useful to discuss? Where do the issues start? How to work with police? Removing that video is today's canceling culture and is censorship. If you want this badge, we need the ability to discuss and debate the topics in the badge. No, censorship would be deleting the posts, locking the thread, and banning those that participated. Go ahead and discuss as much as you want. The reason we put in that rule was that it was too easy for people to create a bunch of content that reflected their anger about something without thinking about all of the content they've posted. That's where threads tend to go bad. What we want is for people to spend the time to pick their words carefully. That's not censorship. That's asking for civil discourse among people that disagree with each other. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred8033 Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, MattR said: No, censorship would be deleting the posts, locking the thread, and banning those that participated. Go ahead and discuss as much as you want. The reason we put in that rule was that it was too easy for people to create a bunch of content that reflected their anger about something without thinking about all of the content they've posted. That's where threads tend to go bad. What we want is for people to spend the time to pick their words carefully. That's not censorship. That's asking for civil discourse among people that disagree with each other. The video was 100% on target and useful to the discussion. The point is the D,E&I badge will pull in politics. Period. The video was 100% on-topic. BSA was the original non-political organization. Hold up and wave the flag. I'm good with that. Pledge of allegiance. Fine. Teaching how government works fine. I've been involved for almost 20 years. Perhaps it's time for me to finish up too. It's not that I don't want to be part of an organization like BSA. I'm not sure I want my kids involved and subject to the whims of political discussions like this, left or right. Teach them fire, knives, camping, tenting, etc. Teach them responsibility and taking care of themselves. Teach them that their choices have results. Don't zip up your tent, you will eventually sleep in a soggy sleeping bag. You want a badge like D,E&I, fine. Prepare for discussion. But let it be real discussion. Edited December 21, 2020 by fred8033 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InquisitiveScouter Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, fred8033 said: The video was 100% on target and useful to the discussion. The point is the D,E&I badge will pull in politics. Period. This is another example of BSA picking a fight that will damage BSA. @fred8033, to your point, and to move the discussion forward with you I respectfully ask you to search for a You Tube video on the interview with Mike Rowe (an Distinguished Eagle Scout, I'm sure you know) titled The Scouts' wounds are 'self-inflicted' To save those whose feelings would be hurt by the content of that video, and not to burden the thinly stretched moderator corps, I will not post the video here. It goes to the heart of the discussion here. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAHAWK Posted December 21, 2020 Share Posted December 21, 2020 1 hour ago, BamBam said: All I can say is just wow. Comments like this is why the merit badge is needed. You choose the views of millionaires to say what is wrong with Black Americans.They are so removed from the plight of everyday Black Americans. Sorry. That doesn't fly. Attitudes like this is... Nevermind let me keep the rest of my thoughts to myself. I woild have liked to see the video to understand your comments.. Which "millionaires"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts