To bolo or not to bolo that is the question
Virginia Tadrzynski
before 4/12 PM for a committee meeting.
A MC has proposed that all boys be allowed to wear bolos as part of their
uniform. My understanding was that adults and boys who earned the
distinction of OA or NJLIC could wear the bolos indicating this honor, but
all the other boys were to wear neckerchiefs. My hubby thinks this was in a
uniform code somewhere but cannot locate this. If it is a code of the BSA,
where can I find it? If the BSA has a ruling on it, this vote will be a
moot point.
Thanks,
Virginia Tadrzynski
--
"Never put off until tomorrow what can be delegated to a committee for
action and delayed indefinitely."
John Holladay
I do believe neckerchiefs are optional.
MC ?
John "Doc" Holladay
SM T1000
Plano, Tx
mikal
"Virginia Tadrzynski" <ta...@early.com> wrote:
>I defer to your collective knowledge on this issue. I need to
know this
>before 4/12 PM for a committee meeting.
>
>A MC has proposed that all boys be allowed to wear bolos as part
of their
>uniform. My understanding was that adults and boys who earned
the
>distinction of OA or NJLIC could wear the bolos indicating this
honor, but
>all the other boys were to wear neckerchiefs. My hubby thinks
this was in a
>uniform code somewhere but cannot locate this. If it is a code
of the BSA,
>where can I find it? If the BSA has a ruling on it, this vote
will be a
>moot point.
>
The Insignia Guide is the best source for such information.
This is no such National code on who can or cannot wear a bolo
tie. Bolo ties are available for a lot of things. There are
generic BS ones. Some events have bolo ties. Anyone can wear
them. If the TROOP wants to set such a rule as you state, that's
up to them, just as the troop decides what the hat and
neckerchief should be. But the PLC is who makes the decision.
Hope this helps
Michael Brown
Venturing Crew #1838
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Paul S. Wolf
>
> I believe it should be a PLC decision. Someone will quote policy,
> but I do believe neckerchiefs are optional.
> >
> > I defer to your collective knowledge on this issue. I need to know
> > this before 4/12 PM for a committee meeting.
> >
> > A MC has proposed that all boys be allowed to wear bolos as part of
> > their uniform. My understanding was that adults and boys who
> > earned the distinction of OA or NJLIC could wear the bolos
> > indicating this honor, but all the other boys were to wear
> > neckerchiefs. My hubby thinks this was in a uniform code somewhere
> > but cannot locate this. If it is a code of the BSA, where can I
> > find it? If the BSA has a ruling on it, this vote will be a moot
> > point.
John is correct. (1) The choice of Neckerchief is a TROOP decision.
The RULES would be in the Insignia Guide.
(2) There are specific OA, Jamboree, Eagle Scout, and NESA, etc. bolo
ties. Those should only be worn by those entitled to wear them by their
rank, attendance at the activity, or membership in those organizations.
Other bolos are available from the BSA catalog, and would be acceptable.
--
Paul S. Wolf, PE mailto:Paul....@alum.wpi.edu
Advancement/Safety Webmaster, USSSP http://www.usscouts.org
Frank Jacobson
neckerchief causes one to lose a very valuable piece of first-aid
equipment. The neckerchief can be used for almost anything in
first-aid!
jake, EMT-P
National Explorer Instructor, Philmont Class of 88
Advisor, Venturing Crew 2909, Seattle
Northwest Venture Drum and Bugle Corps
Tim Hewitt
frank.j...@pss.boeing.com wrote on 4/11/00 2:39 PM:
> Excellent responses from everyone, but remember that not having a
> neckerchief causes one to lose a very valuable piece of first-aid
> equipment. The neckerchief can be used for almost anything in
> first-aid!
This is less true of the modern neckerchief than it was of the old-fashioned
ones. Tried to use yours in an arm sling lately? Mine is so small that it
won't fit on my youngest child comfortably.
-Tim
--
Tim Hewitt, Scoutmaster
Troop 350, Old Orchard Beach, Maine
Eagle '74
TILAD-X
Frank Jacobson <frank.j...@pss.boeing.com> wrote in message
news:38F37159...@pss.boeing.com...
> Excellent responses from everyone, but remember that not having a
> neckerchief causes one to lose a very valuable piece of first-aid
> equipment. The neckerchief can be used for almost anything in
> first-aid!
>
> National Explorer Instructor, Philmont Class of 88
> Advisor, Venturing Crew 2909, Seattle
> Northwest Venture Drum and Bugle Corps
My last two Troops' PLCs voted that neckerchiefs not be worn, but that each
Scout have one with him on all campouts/hikes/etc. When I transferred to my
second (of 3) Troops, I bought an OA bolo, but carried a "neckerchief" at
all times, even to meetings. The bolo is useful for tourniquets (if
necessary), but today's neckerchiefs are smaller than they used to be, which
is why I carried two handmade "neckerchiefs;" one measured 30" square, and
the other was 24" square.
One campout the PLC decided to have several medical "emergencies," to test
the younger Scouts' First Aid skills. However, in order to set everything
up, one member of the PLC had to keep the younger Scouts entertained - I was
that member, and they had "conveniently" forgotten to tell me what they were
doing. Up until the very end, I thought it was real, and it was a real help
that I didn't know, since the young 'uns started panicking. I calmed them
down when I took over and assigned "fire teams" (for lack of a better term)
consisting of 3 or 4 Scouts of various experience ranges. I ran back and
forth from one "victim" to another, assisting when needed. When all was
said-and-done, I had probably run 6 miles, while never going more than 200
yards from the campsite, over the course of 45 minutes, and it seemed as
though 5 of those miles were uphill.
I think I'll end my rambling here. If anyone wants more details, feel free
to email me.
--
YIS - Jeremy Kudlick
Eagle Class of '93
Elangomat Elgigunkhaki, A Friend of All to the World (Vigil Honor '94)
http://tiladx.webjump.com
ANTISPAM IN USE.
jne...@nospam.csd.uwm.edu
: This is no such National code on who can or cannot wear a bolo
: tie. Bolo ties are available for a lot of things. There are
: generic BS ones. Some events have bolo ties. Anyone can wear
: them. If the TROOP wants to set such a rule as you state, that's
: up to them, just as the troop decides what the hat and
: neckerchief should be. But the PLC is who makes the decision.
Several years ago, I was told by a unit commissioner that bolos may only
be worn with the short sleeve shirt and that ties may only be worn with the
long sleeve shirt. He said neckerchiefs could be worn with either. I
checked the insignia guide but didn't see anything like that. Anyone
know if this was true at one time?
--
Jim Nelsen
Hamilton High School
Milwaukee, WI
Visit my web page to look at my "Virtual Teaching Portfolio" and find some
useful sites for social studies teachers. www.uwm.edu/~jnelsen
WA Howland
>be worn with the short sleeve shirt and that ties may only be worn with
>the
>long sleeve shirt. He said neckerchiefs could be worn with either. I
>checked the insignia guide but didn't see anything like that. Anyone
>know if this was true at one time?
Horsepucky <G>.
There are no rules against bolos with the BSA uniform (except maybe the Cubs or
Sea Scouts <G>).
In our troop they let the older boys, first class and above, wear them, but
that';s just the PLC's rule. No particular reason for it, and no older boy is
penalized or ridiculed for wearing a necker.
PS, if you get the ENGLISH Wood Badge necker, you have one big enough for first
aid use <G>.
YiS
Auntie Beans
SA T47 Sandwich MA
Cape Cod & Islands Council
Abake MiSaNaKi Lodge #393
NSJ 1997 Nat'l Health & Safety and going in 01!
I useta be an Eagle...
<waho...@iname.com>
Virginia Tadrzynski
"we'll let the boys THINK it is a boy run troop" (sigh).
-Ginny
TILAD-X
Virginia Tadrzynski <ta...@early.com> wrote in message
news:KjPI4.10586$jZ3.1...@nuq-read.news.verio.net...
> Alas, the committee will then decide, because and I quote
> "we'll let the boys THINK it is a boy run troop" (sigh).
That's when it is time to say, "It is either a boy-run Troop, or it is a
Troop with one less boy to 'run' it."
Bill Nelson
"Virginia Tadrzynski" <ta...@early.com> wrote:
> Alas, the committee will then decide, because and I quote
> "we'll let the boys THINK it is a boy run troop" (sigh).
>
>
>
Then you have a much larger problem than what neck wear your
troop is wearing. Where is your Scoutmaster in all this? It is
his job to run interference between the committee and the PLC. In
other words, keep the committee out of the Scout's affairs. I can't
believe the committee has no better things to do than to do someone
else's job. Someone needs to read the Troop Committee Guidebook and
Scoutmaster's Handbook (maybe outloud to the committee), or just
get them busy doing what they are suppose to be doing. ;-)
YiS,
bill
--
And can the liberties of a nation be thought
secure if we have removed their only firm basis: a
conviction in the minds of men that these
liberties are the gift of God? - Thomas Jefferson
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Wimwingwit
>Alas, the committee will then decide, because and I quote "we'll let the boys
THINK it is a boy run troop" (sigh).
Hey, Ginny. When did you join my Troop?
John Holladay
WA Howland wrote:
>
>
>
> Horsepucky <G>.
>
Frank Jacobson
TILAD-X wrote:
>
> <SNIP> The bolo is useful for tourniquets (if
> necessary), but today's neckerchiefs are smaller than they used to be, which
> is why I carried two handmade "neckerchiefs;" one measured 30" square, and
> the other was 24" square.
> YIS - Jeremy Kudlick
> Eagle Class of '93
> Elangomat Elgigunkhaki, A Friend of All to the World (Vigil Honor '94)
> http://tiladx.webjump.com
>
> ANTISPAM IN USE.
YOU WOULD USE A BOLO FOR A TOURNIQUET?????? Back to basic first aid
training for you. A tourniquet is NOT supposed to be any narrower than
1.5 inches in width as a tight constricting band can cause necrosis
(death)of the underlyinr tissues!!! Better re-read that first-aid
manual...or even better, take a red cross first aid course!!! Required
of all my adult leaders!!
Jake
National Exploring Instructor
Advisor, Venturing Crew 2909, Seattle
NorthwestVenture Drum and Bugler Corps
John Holladay
wilderness first aid books say bring one?, (2) why isn't it a required
piece of gear at Philmont?
My bandanas do the job fine.
JNH
TILAD-X wrote:
>
> Frank Jacobson <frank.j...@pss.boeing.com> wrote in message
> news:38F37159...@pss.boeing.com...
> > Excellent responses from everyone, but remember that not having a
> > neckerchief causes one to lose a very valuable piece of first-aid
> > equipment. The neckerchief can be used for almost anything in
> > first-aid!
> >
> > jake, EMT-P
> > National Explorer Instructor, Philmont Class of 88
> > Advisor, Venturing Crew 2909, Seattle
> > Northwest Venture Drum and Bugle Corps
>
> My last two Troops' PLCs voted that neckerchiefs not be worn, but that each
> Scout have one with him on all campouts/hikes/etc. When I transferred to my
> second (of 3) Troops, I bought an OA bolo, but carried a "neckerchief" at
> all times, even to meetings. The bolo is useful for tourniquets (if
> necessary), but today's neckerchiefs are smaller than they used to be, which
> is why I carried two handmade "neckerchiefs;" one measured 30" square, and
> the other was 24" square.
>
> One campout the PLC decided to have several medical "emergencies," to test
> the younger Scouts' First Aid skills. However, in order to set everything
> up, one member of the PLC had to keep the younger Scouts entertained - I was
> that member, and they had "conveniently" forgotten to tell me what they were
> doing. Up until the very end, I thought it was real, and it was a real help
> that I didn't know, since the young 'uns started panicking. I calmed them
> down when I took over and assigned "fire teams" (for lack of a better term)
> consisting of 3 or 4 Scouts of various experience ranges. I ran back and
> forth from one "victim" to another, assisting when needed. When all was
> said-and-done, I had probably run 6 miles, while never going more than 200
> yards from the campsite, over the course of 45 minutes, and it seemed as
> though 5 of those miles were uphill.
>
> I think I'll end my rambling here. If anyone wants more details, feel free
> to email me.
> --
Hobdbcgv
>uniform.
As I read the regulations listed below, the only neckgear permitted as part
of the uniform is the triangular neckerchief
(BTW you can wear bolos with the jac-shirt - a jac-shirt is not a uniform -
with bolo slides and yellow socks if you want)
Official uniforms, clause 5 -
"The official uniforms and parts thereof shall be issued only as authorized
by the Executive Board of the Boy Scouts of America and sold either directly by
the national office through responsible local merchants designated as local
scout distributors - or through local councils."
(now, if the bolo in question is sold by an authorized Scout distributor and
is listed there as official uniform and it also has the BSA logo on it with the
words "official" or on its sales tag, then you probably can make a case for
THAT bolo as part of the uniform.)
Insignia guide, 1997-1999 p 6
[following a discussion of the mandatory cub scout/webelos neckerchiefs, it
says ]
"Boy Scout neckerchiefs are optional. The troop decides by vote, and all
members abide by the decision."
[I take that to mean neckie or no neckie, not "can we wear club ties or cans or
strings or love beads or bolos"]
"Troops choose their own neckerchief."
which now leads to just what is a neckerchief ---
p 6
"Offical neckerchiefs are triangular in shape."
"Special neckerchiefs, the same size as the official ones, may be authorized by
the local councils. Such neckerchiefs may include identification of the
chartered organization...."
page 7 - many pictures of neckies as triangular in shape...
no bolos found in official oa insignia, or anywhere in the insignia guide in
picture or in word
wood badge beads string, not a bolo, is worn with the wood badge neckie
that's all I find in the official documents ...
^sig^
-please remove the spam block "nono" to reply
Hobdbcgv
>"we'll let the boys THINK it is a boy run troop" (sigh).
Excellent point - not the committees call -
and, in the bigger picture, a tiny bit of editorial -
I have had to change the mantra around here to "boyS run" troop - some SPLs
took "boy run" too literally....
:-)
always need to remind the junior leaders that just exactly whom they may direct
in their leadership position is spelled out in the JL handbook - keeps the
boys-who-would-be-God syndrome in check....
Lyle & Denise McDonald & family
it may prompt others to add suggestions.
Sorry about that Bill, I hit the wrong button. Here is the question and
Bill's answer:
What is a volunteer to do when no one holds the boys responsible for not
running the Troop? I have tried everything I know of to get the boys to do
their jobs correctly. Our scribe for the last 3 years claims he didn't know
he was supposed to record all of the boys' attendance. To the best of my
knowledge he still isn't recording it. On our last campout, I asked our SPL
where was the schedule for the campout because several boys were sitting
around doing nothing. He said the scoutmaster gave him an outline but he
didn't bring it. I explained that it is not the scoutmaster's job and that
it was the SPL's job to plan out all the time during the meetings and
campouts with the help of the PLC during the PLC meeting. I also told him
that now that he knew, he had no excuse for the next time. I explained where
he could find planning sheets for each in our Scout room. I conduct BORs at
the same time that our PLC meets, so I do not attend them (most all of the
ASMs do). At the last PLC meeting I walked in for a few minutes while my son
was getting his BOR. I was greeted to the following sight: SPL kicked back
in his chair with his feet propped up in the air, at least six men and maybe
10 boys, I'm not sure if anyone was running the meeting but if there was it
must have been the scoutmaster, you get the idea. I got frustrated rather
quickly and left the room. At the last meeting (which was held at the city
park so the boys could ride bikes on the trails), our SPL was at least 30
min late and during the last few minutes of the meeting when he was supposed
to be making announcements, he was swinging a bat around while an ASM talked
about summer camp. One of the other ASMs finally got irritated and walked
over and took it from him. Is it just me or should I be frustrated?
D. McD
Adv Chair T303
What you describe is very common. The bat swinging is very typical of what
a boy does when he is bored because the adults are running the show (why
should he set the example?). Here are some ideas that might help:
- It is the Scoutmaster's primary job to train the SPL. Not to write
outlines for campouts (that's the PLC's job). You and the
Scoutmaster (and possibly the SPL) should review the Scout Leader's
Fast Start Tape and the Scoutmaster's handbook. If you two have
not been to Scout Leader Fundamental's, go. If the Scoutmaster
has, then he should go to Woodbadge. The SPL and potential
SPLs should go to the week long council Junior Leader Training.
- It is the SPL's job to train the other junior leaders (like
Scribes). The SPL appoints an ASPL to make sure the Scribes
do their jobs.
- The SPL must know his responsibility, and know the consequences
of unexcused absences, tardiness, etc. If he can't do the job
then you should have new elections. But give him a chance first.
He may need to get more than 1 ASPL to help fill in when he
can't be there.
- Have a short PLC after each meeting that goes over:
- What went right with the meeting (praise the junior
leadership)
- What went wrong with the meeting (don't berate them
just have them point it out)
- What we need to do to improve
- Agenda for next meeting, and confirm who does what
- Make sure they have a 'plan B' if 'plan A' doesn't
happen.
- This is the SPL's meeting, but will need a lot of
coaching and nurturing by the Scoutmaster
- At the monthly PLCs make sure they write down the outlines of all the
meetings until the next PLCs.
- If an outline is critical for an event, at the parking
lot, check to see if the SPL has the outline. If not,
no one goes anywhere until he goes home and gets it.
- LET THEM FAIL A COUPLE OF TIMES
- Let a campout be cancelled because the SPL didn't make the
announcement, or get the troop organized
- Remember, it is more important to teach the Scouts to take
control of the troop than it is to go on a campout.
- The Scoutmaster should make sure the Scouts are running the show,
not ASMs.
- If the Scoutmaster is not willing to do this, maybe you should
seriously look for another Scoutmaster.
By the way, there are way too many adults at the PLC. It should be the
SPL's meeting. The Scoutmaster should give the SPL a list of deliverables
for the meeting, give them resources and then leave them to it (unless
requested for assistance). The other adults need to go somewhere else.
Your next PLC may be a good time to get the adults into another room and
show a training film.
Yours in Scouting,
Bill Nelson, Scoutmaster, Troop 14, ADC Salt River District
Grand Canyon Council, AZ
"Bill Nelson" <bnel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8d0lpb$40m$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <KjPI4.10586$jZ3.1...@nuq-read.news.verio.net>,
> "Virginia Tadrzynski" <ta...@early.com> wrote:
> > Alas, the committee will then decide, because and I quote
> > "we'll let the boys THINK it is a boy run troop" (sigh).
> >
Frank Jacobson
John Holladay wrote:
>
> So, if neckerchiefs are so great for 1st Aid (1) why don't he
> wilderness first aid books say bring one?,
Probably because the wilderness first aid books say to bring a first aid
kit and usually tell you what to bring....usually a triangular bandage
is included (Ohmygoodness....a triangular bandage is the same as a
neckercheif!!)
(2) why isn't it a required piece of gear at Philmont?
See the answer to #1!!!
BBoxwell
picture or in word<
Actually, it's in BOLD: Bolo tie, No. 00618, Boy Scout and Boy Scout leader,
worn with open-collar shirt.
1997-1999 Insignia guide, page 17 (Boy Scout Insignia/Boy Scout Program
Identification)
YIS,
Blaine
WA Howland
different).
Samuel Jahaza Howard
> > wilderness first aid books say bring one?,
>
> Probably because the wilderness first aid books say to bring a first aid
> kit and usually tell you what to bring....usually a triangular bandage
> is included (Ohmygoodness....a triangular bandage is the same as a
> neckercheif!!)
A neckerchief is way to small to make a good triangular bandage. If you
want a triangular bandage get a triangular bandage, if you want a
neckerchief get a neckerchief. On outings, you can use an unofficial
neckerchief that is big enough to be a triangular bandage, but the
official ones are too small.
Sam Howard
Alan Houser
: A MC has proposed that all boys be allowed to wear bolos as part of their
: uniform. My understanding was that adults and boys who earned the
: distinction of OA or NJLIC could wear the bolos indicating this honor, but
: all the other boys were to wear neckerchiefs....
Unless the adult has made his proposal to the SPL for consideration at
the next PLC meeting, I would suggest that it has no merit.
That issue now disposed of, there is another one here that irks me.
By making multiple rules for what is considered proper uniform, this
proposal pushes my elitism button. I believe that a troop, if it
chooses to have a neckerchief (or bolo), should have all members wear
the same neck wear for troop functions.
There are some local troops here who have one neckerchief for new
Scouts, another for Scouts who have made First Class. Add to that this
suggestion that Arrowmen should be able to wear another neckerchief or
bolo, and perhaps Eagle Scouts should be able to wear the NESA bolo or
neckerchief, and perhaps Pioneers (a local summer camp honor camping
organization) yet another.
What happened to the _UNIFORM_?
How do you tell at a glance that these four or five different variations
all represent the same troop? What are these troops telling their New
Scouts? You haven't really arrived until you earn one of these special
neckerchiefs?
Now, don't get me wrong. I wear my OA flap proudly. One of my uniform
shirts has my Pioneers patch on the right pocket. When I attend OA
functions, I might wear an OA neckerchief, and for Pioneer functions,
I'll wear my Pioneer neckerchief. On the rare occasion I can actually
help out on an adult leader course, I'll wear a special neckerchief that
a course director made for her staff a number of years ago. For Roundtable,
I usually wear just my beads.
But at all troop functions, I wear the same red and white neckerchief as
the newest Scout and the Senior Patrol Leader. Because the neckerchief
says we are a troop!
YiS,
Alan R. Houser ** tro...@emf.net
** Scoutmaster, Troop 24, Berkeley, California **
** Committee Member, Crew 24, Berkeley, California **
** Boy Scout Roundtable Commissioner, Herms District **
** WWW page ** http://www.emf.net/~troop24/t24.html **
TILAD-X
Alan Houser <tro...@emf.net> wrote in message
news:sf9v6r...@corp.supernews.com...
> There are some local troops here who have one neckerchief for new
> Scouts, another for Scouts who have made First Class. Add to that this
> suggestion that Arrowmen should be able to wear another neckerchief or
> bolo, and perhaps Eagle Scouts should be able to wear the NESA bolo or
> neckerchief, and perhaps Pioneers (a local summer camp honor camping
> organization) yet another.
>
> What happened to the _UNIFORM_?
Etymological definition of "uniform" - "one type; of the same design"
Different neckerchiefs for different achievements within the Troop does seem
to create elitism. My second Troop's PLC made neckwear optional by Patrol,
which meant each PL could decide whether to make their Patrol wear any
neckwear, and most PL's decided that they didn't want to wear neckwear. The
SM soon stepped in and said that the Troop all had to wear the same
neckwear; the next PLC meeting voted not to wear neckwear at all with a
unanimous vote.
> How do you tell at a glance that these four or five different variations
> all represent the same troop? What are these troops telling their New
> Scouts? You haven't really arrived until you earn one of these special
> neckerchiefs?
Re: point one in this paragraph - you can't tell they are in the same unit
based on the neckwear when there are different neckwears within the Troop.
Re: point two in this paragraph - unfortunately, you seem to be right. It
can tell the new Scouts that they aren't really part of the Troop until they
have made First Class (which is BS, in my very unhumble opinion), or it can
give them something to work toward. It does seem, however, that using the
neckerchief for the First Class level may push the new Scouts to work too
fast and not really learn anything.
> Now, don't get me wrong. I wear my OA flap proudly. One of my uniform
> shirts has my Pioneers patch on the right pocket. When I attend OA
> functions, I might wear an OA neckerchief, and for Pioneer functions,
> I'll wear my Pioneer neckerchief. On the rare occasion I can actually
> help out on an adult leader course, I'll wear a special neckerchief that
> a course director made for her staff a number of years ago. For
Roundtable,
> I usually wear just my beads
At OA functions - I will wear my OA bolo and sash. At Eagle functions, such
as Courts of Honor (never been invited to sit on a BoR), I will wear either
my Eagle bolo or neckerchief. Which reminds me - I need to make sure my
uniform is completely up-to-date (all the proper knots and such).
TILAD-X
>
> YOU WOULD USE A BOLO FOR A TOURNIQUET?????? Back to basic first aid
> training for you. A tourniquet is NOT supposed to be any narrower than
> 1.5 inches in width as a tight constricting band can cause necrosis
> (death)of the underlyinr tissues!!! Better re-read that first-aid
> manual...or even better, take a red cross first aid course!!! Required
> of all my adult leaders!!
ACK! You're right. I messed up. It's been waaaaayyyyy too long since I
took even a basic first-aid course.
But I question why you require all your adult leaders to take a Red Cross
first aid course? Is that not also adding requirements to membership, just
as adding requirements for advancement/achievements is against BSA policy?
I would STRONGLY recommend it for all leaders, and require that at least
half of all adults on overnight or longer outings have taken that course,
but not all adults in the unit.
Not looking to pick a fight, just voicing a question/opinion.
J. Hugh Sullivan
<jkud...@prodigynospam.net> wrote:
>
>Alan Houser <tro...@emf.net> wrote in message
>news:sf9v6r...@corp.supernews.com...
>> What happened to the _UNIFORM_?
>
>Etymological definition of "uniform" - "one type; of the same design"
>
>Different neckerchiefs for different achievements within the Troop does seem
>to create elitism.
I have to apologize for not following this thread before - which may
help to explain my comment and questions below.
1. I basically agree with "uniformity".
2. OTOH what's wrong with elitism? Doesn't everyone aspire to be the
bell cow instead of just a member of the herd?
Hugh
Hobdbcgv
>picture or in word<
>
>Actually, it's in BOLD: Bolo tie, No. 00618, Boy Scout and Boy Scout leader,
>worn with open-collar shirt.
Oops - thanks for the correction - the aging and computer screen burnt eyes
missed it -- thank heaven for attentive contributors to the NG --
- Anyhoo, now the person inquiring has something definitive that states a bolo
is indeed Boy Scout insignia listed --
BTW - I have not seen any bolos at BSA events around here - maybe they're a
regional thing?
Frank Jacobson
We also practice '3-deep' leadership versus '2-deep' leadership. We
are probably going to tour over 10,000 miles this summer in chartered
busses competing across the United States. Many of these miles are
across very remote highways. The Board of Directors of my sponsoring
organization and Drum Corps International require adults to have
FA/CPR. It's only 8 hours of class and I'm an instructor. While the
youths practice, I take two hours to teach the course over 4
rehearsals. No problem! (We also have 5 red cross lifeguards on board
for when we break at motels along thr route!
jake
Frank Jacobson
experimented with his neckerchief. Hmmm...worked to make an arm sling
(hand at the appropriate level above the heart). Worked as a cravat
bandage on a pressure dressing. Worked as a palm bandage. Didnt work
as a head bandage...NUTZ! Damn! Only a 75% success rate!! (Insert
sarcasm here)I guess I can only treat 75% of the injuries I may come
upon using a neckerchief! You must be so very right on this one!!!
(End sarcasm here)
Jake
John Holladay
JNH
John Holladay
CPR would be required (or at least close) for BSA outings.
BSA should spend one heck of a lot more time making sure their
volunteers are prepared. Our council is finally beginning to offer
classes at a reasonable rate, but not enough and not 'convient' enough
(our volunteers have full time jobs and other things in their lives).
John "Doc" Holladay
SM T1000
Plano, Tx
lcorwin
"bell cow" is one that was left in the field after the other cows were
in for milking because the belled cow was pregnant.
Larry Corwin
Samuel Jahaza Howard
> experimented with his neckerchief. Hmmm...worked to make an arm sling
> (hand at the appropriate level above the heart). Worked as a cravat
> bandage on a pressure dressing. Worked as a palm bandage. Didnt work
> as a head bandage...NUTZ! Damn! Only a 75% success rate!! (Insert
> sarcasm here)I guess I can only treat 75% of the injuries I may come
> upon using a neckerchief! You must be so very right on this one!!!
> (End sarcasm here)
How about as a splint tie, that's another thing that you're supposed to be
able to do with your triangular bandage. Also, could you make a knot in
the back of the sling by the elbow, to keep the arm from slidding out,
that was part of what you were supposed to be able to with the triangular
bandage. Also, remember that your first aid supplies need to be useful for
all of your scouts and leaders from the largest to the smallest. Around
here, some of those scouts and leaders are pretty big guys.
Sam Howard
J. Hugh Sullivan
>Having never lived on a farm I can only relay what was told to me: a
>"bell cow" is one that was left in the field after the other cows were
>in for milking because the belled cow was pregnant.
When it comes to getting milked or getting exposed to pregnancy, which
would you choose? 8-)
I'm 72 and I know the answer to that one!
Hugh
Hobdbcgv
was that of the standard US Army wig-wag signal flag - copied in size, as it
were.
That was bigger then today's neckie. It then was adequate in size for first
aid, straining water, bear bags, cooling "waves", headgear, and all those other
creative things ----
Not saying it actually is, just got the impression from somewhere...
eddunn
size. And they wer'nt thin either! In 1984 we held a Bicenntial
camporee in Marietta Ohio and we gave the old style neckerchief with the
patch on it.
Dan Moe
" Our council is finally beginning to offer classes at a reasonable
rate, but not enough and not 'convient' enough
John, my question is this, how offten should classes be scheduled,
(and then cancled because no body signs up for them) and at what rate
are you having problems with?
Is $8.00 US too much for Red Cross Community First Aid and Safety
along with When Help is Delayed? Is one all day(Sat) session, and
three evening sessions per month too little?
So we cut it back to 1 Saturday per month and 1 three evening classes
per quarter. Check out Miami Valley Councel, Dayton Ohio.
-- http://www.ameritech.net/users/danmoe/ARC-BSA.html
Dan Moe
dan...@ameritech.net
AIM danm0e
ICQ 64510816
http://www.ameritech.net/users/danmoe/danmoe.html
http://www.ameritech.net/users/danmoe/ARC-BSA.html
The First Geer family
> John, my question is this, how offten should classes be scheduled,
> (and then cancled because no body signs up for them) and at what rate
> are you having problems with?
> Is $8.00 US too much for Red Cross Community First Aid and Safety
> along with When Help is Delayed? Is one all day(Sat) session, and
> three evening sessions per month too little?
Can't answer this for John. However, out here in Missouri, the council does
not offer any classes for first aid certification. But, if you go to Red
Cross, the Community First Aid with CPR class costs $40.00 and the course is
5 to 6 hours long
Ed Geer
-Mayo,H.H.
Frank Jacobson <frank.j...@pss.boeing.com> wrote:
>Excellent responses from everyone, but remember that not having a
>neckerchief causes one to lose a very valuable piece of first-aid
>equipment. The neckerchief can be used for almost anything in
>first-aid!
All these questions could be easily fixed if the National would
get rid of all options for neck wear, and make the neckerchief
a requirement for ALL boys uniforms at ALL times as it once was.
The appearence of most troops is shabby in the extreme. And this
Too many of the kids today are going to be in for a shock when
they choose careers where their dress standards will not be flexible,
or of their own choosing. Uniform standards were once part of the
life training that scouts was all about. When I see a group of boys
with no neckerchiefs, no hats and shirt tails out, I wonder why we
should bother if our standards are no higher than those of least
resistence. Sad to say, most leaders seem to think that "boy lead"
means they can set their own standards, and those standards are
usually pretty low. Again, what's the point, then. If kids could
raise themselves, they wouldn't need adults.
Larry
Larry
eddunn
that said that it was wrong to have a pro decide who was "good enough"
for Scouting? That is why we have less Scouts than we used to
have..alot less. I dedicated my life to the notion that all it took was
sombody showing that Qaulity counts, but have been driven out. It seems
that the profession would rather die slowly than have the courage to
change. Its a shame really, but its what happens when you have too much
money and not enough brains.
Mrs. Fricker
Love your humility Ed. It will take you far.
eddunn
does'nt matter, something has got to matter! Think about it, thirteen,
and nobody cares!
Steven G. Tyler, Esq.
> Too many of the kids today are going to be in for a shock when
> they choose careers where their dress standards will not be flexible,
> or of their own choosing.
You should get out more, Larry. ;-) There are very few professions left
that adhere to strict 'uniform' requirements, and those few are losing
ground (or employees!) fast.
> Uniform standards were once part of the
> life training that scouts was all about. When I see a group of boys
> with no neckerchiefs, no hats and shirt tails out, I wonder why we
> should bother if our standards are no higher than those of least
> resistence.
Uhh . . . perhaps the enjoyment and education of the boys (and adults)
involved?
> Sad to say, most leaders seem to think that "boy lead"
> means they can set their own standards, and those standards are
> usually pretty low. Again, what's the point, then.
See above.
> If kids could raise themselves, they wouldn't need adults.
True . . . but boy lead doesn't necessarily mean "anything goes, no
adult input allowed."
Larry, I fully agree that uniforming (and a well-turned-out unit) can be
an aid in delivering the promise -- but uniforming is neither the
promise nor a major point of the exercise. Railing against the
degeneration of the standards of youth today is at least as old an
exercise for the curmugeonly as the ancient Greeks . . . and about as
misguided now as then, IMHO. After all, progress is judged by movement
in the right direction, and not just by arrival at a preset goal.
--
Steve on Cattail Creek (Steven G. Tyler, Esq.) <sgt...@erols.com>
The Computer Counselor - Technology Consulting for the Law Office
Steven G. Tyler, Esq.
Right in one, Ed -- life ain't fair.
So, get over it, do something productive about it, or find a forum that
will appreciate your endless boasting and whining.
--
YIS, Steve on Cattail Creek (Steven G. Tyler, Esq.) <sgt...@erols.com>
eddunn
recall a Scout promise being told to me about being fair and honest! I
remember adults telling me that they would be fair, really. So if they
are'nt, you say "so what"? That makes all the rest of the BS stuff just
bs does'nt it? I mean, if you can't be fair to your own people, what
can you expect? Don't worry, I have concluded that nothing is going to
change, but I stand with a lifetime of experience proving that Scouting
is not being utilized top it's potential, and never will be. It is a
bueracracy, simple as that, and it can't be changed. Now I feel the
same defeat as you do, how sad.
WA Howland
>eddunn wrote:
>
>> You can't help it when I've got thirteen years of growth in a row and
>it
>> does'nt matter, something has got to matter! Think about it, thirteen,
>> and nobody cares!
And this has to do with bolo ties exactly how....?
Ahhhh, Ed.
eddunn
your talking about. I'm not going to repeat the last 15 or more bolo
posts for your private benefit. I am already sadly aware that you
don't give a f^^k about my situation, so whats the point? I mean it
only makes a difference in millions of youth's involvement, so why
should you care? BTW, If somebody shows up with a gun at your march,
it would put all the bs in place, would'nt it? Ha, ha.
-Mayo,H.H.
strict dress codes, the military, law enforcement, commercial aviation,
and business, sales, etc. The point of scouting is to give kids what
they don't get anywhere else, mainly some experience in maintaining a
standard of personal appearence. All things being equal, sharp dress
always gets the job, like it or not. Most of us who were scouts went
to seed in our college years, but the disciplines we learned in scouting
were remembered again years later, and served us well.
The uniform has been a tradition of scouting since the beginning, and
Baden-Powell must have thought that it had some benefit. Scouting has
gone the way of least resistence. Once the neckerchief was optional, it
was gone. The uniform will soon follow, make no mistake. I've already
heard. "I don't know why we have to have these. They should just give us
a pin to wear." Yep, I have, just last week.
As I've already said, If scouting does not insist on goals higher than
than the lowest common denominator, then what's the point? There are
lots of streetgang members who would argue that robbing and fighting
are more fun than camping and hiking. So should we work those into
the scout program? Every time scouting trys to accomodate the line
of least resistence, scouting loses. When I see scouts that are allowed
to treat the uniform like a rag, I wonder what message is being con-
veyed, "Camping and hiking are fun.", or "If I don't want to, I'm not
going to."?
And if the latter is what scouting is all about, then it might as well
just throw in the towel now because we are cheating it's members of the
very thing we promised them. Something like "On my honor I will do
my best......"
Larry
eddunn
manage it. The profession has become so goal oriented that they have
forgotten the basics, the post from the pro scouter about a month back
is typical of the view taken by professionals today-accept all for
leaders. The membership shows the lack of respect we recieve with that
attitude. Good post.
Steven G. Tyler, Esq.
> Sorry, steve, but there are plenty of professions that still require
> strict dress codes, the military, law enforcement, commercial aviation,
> and business, sales, etc.
The key word here is "some,". To be completely accurate, you'd need to
add "and fewer every year," which was the point I was making.
> The point of scouting is to give kids what
> they don't get anywhere else, mainly some experience in maintaining a
> standard of personal appearence. All things being equal, sharp dress
> always gets the job, like it or not.
Shades of Willie Loman, with his shoeshine and a smile. Thanks, but I'd
take competence any day over a sharp dresser.
> The uniform has been a tradition of scouting since the beginning, and
> Baden-Powell must have thought that it had some benefit.
Oh, no doubt, as I acknowledged in my post. However, there's a tendency
amongst Scouters of a certain age to get all wrung around the axle about
uniforming trivia, and overlook the need to make the program fun and
*substantively* beneficial to the Scouts. In the greater scheme of
things, neckerchief vs. no neckerchief vs. bolo is of trivial importance
to the unit's Scouting program, compared to the need to provide a fun,
engaging program with valuable life experiences for the Scouts.
> As I've already said, If scouting does not insist on goals higher than
> than the lowest common denominator, then what's the point?
Goals are fine. Making early-century uniforming practices the be-all,
end-all of the program is misguided, IMHO.
> And if the latter is what scouting is all about, then it might as well
> just throw in the towel now because we are cheating it's members of the
> very thing we promised them. Something like "On my honor I will do
> my best......"
Larry, in the real world there are few if any units without at least
some redeeming Scout-like qualities, and none that couldn't be faulted
for failing in *some* aspects of the program. For each Scout, Scouter
and unit, the daily and weekly decisions are to pick the battles that
can be won, or at least honorably fought, to advance the program. For
any given unit, I'm not willing to prejudge whether the lack of
by-the-book uniforming is a sign of moral decay, or just an area for
later progress. Let me reitereate: uniforming *is* a valuable part of
the programming, but not one I'd pick as the ultimate test of the
effectiveness of Scouting in general, or any particular unit.
Oh, and BTW/FWIW, the fact that you've picked up the enthusiastic
endorsement of eddunn should give you some pause.
Mark Gillis
Waaay back, in the deep dark past, I tried to encourage you to get on with
things, to quit holding a grudge, to move on. Alas, you were more
interested in regurgitating repeatedly how awful Scouting is, and how badly
you were treated, ad nauseum, ad infinitum. Nothing changes in your life,
does it?
Knock it off. Post this type of stuff on news:eddunnwasscrewedbyscouting
At least there it will be topical.
Oh, and never threaten anybody, Ed. The thing about showing up with a gun
is in very, and I mean very, poor taste. Rather than let us wonder if you
were going to be a jerk,you took the mystery right out of the equation.
Mark Gillis
eddunn <edd...@Bellsouth.net> drooled on himself in message
news:3903BF68...@Bellsouth.net...
-Mayo,H.H.
>> Sorry, steve, but there are plenty of professions that still require
>> strict dress codes, the military, law enforcement, commercial aviation,
>> and business, sales, etc.
>
>The key word here is "some,". To be completely accurate, you'd need to
>add "and fewer every year," which was the point I was making.
So scouts should look sloppy, too? Or what?
>Shades of Willie Loman, with his shoeshine and a smile. Thanks, but I'd
>take competence any day over a sharp dresser.
I said "all things being the same" and it's still true as much as
people claim to be uninfluenced by the matter.
>> The uniform has been a tradition of scouting since the beginning, and
>> Baden-Powell must have thought that it had some benefit.
>
>Oh, no doubt, as I acknowledged in my post. However, there's a tendency
>amongst Scouters of a certain age to get all wrung around the axle about
>uniforming trivia, and overlook the need to make the program fun and
>*substantively* beneficial to the Scouts. In the greater scheme of
>things, neckerchief vs. no neckerchief vs. bolo is of trivial importance
>to the unit's Scouting program, compared to the need to provide a fun,
>engaging program with valuable life experiences for the Scouts.
Probably because it requires being a "certain age" before you see
enough examples of the results of caving in to the "values" of
society, and the attending results. You fail to understand, or
acknowledge that the point of a uniform is mental discipline, not
simply wearing it. It is simply a physical representation of "a
standard" that scouting is supposed to be promoting.
>> As I've already said, If scouting does not insist on goals higher than
>> than the lowest common denominator, then what's the point?
>
>Goals are fine. Making early-century uniforming practices the be-all,
>end-all of the program is misguided, IMHO.
Requiring a minimum dress code of some kind is hardly limited to
the "early century". Teaching kids that it's optional only signals
that everything else you are supposed to be as a scout is optional.
>Larry, in the real world there are few if any units without at least
>some redeeming Scout-like qualities, and none that couldn't be faulted
>for failing in *some* aspects of the program.
There are street gangs that show "scout-like" qualities, and do a
better job of enforcing them, too.
For each Scout, Scouter
>and unit, the daily and weekly decisions are to pick the battles that
>can be won, or at least honorably fought, to advance the program. For
>any given unit, I'm not willing to prejudge whether the lack of
>by-the-book uniforming is a sign of moral decay, or just an area for
>later progress. Let me reitereate: uniforming *is* a valuable part of
>the programming, but not one I'd pick as the ultimate test of the
>effectiveness of Scouting in general, or any particular unit.
Neither would I, and I didn't say that. I have seen units that are
prospering, and ones that aren't. This seems to be directly related
to the Scoutmaster's willingness to make the kids tow the line, SOME
line. If you decide to start letting the little things go, you can be
sure that you are going to be challenged on the big things, sooner
or later. And that is happening to scouting. It's only a matter of
a long retreat from one thing to the next, losing all the way. Scouting
tried to chuck the major traditions back in the 70s in the name of
becoming more socially "with it." THe results was a disaster, in
loss of both boys and leaders.
>Oh, and BTW/FWIW, the fact that you've picked up the enthusiastic
>endorsement of eddunn should give you some pause.
>--
>
>YIS, Steve on Cattail Creek (Steven G. Tyler, Esq.) <sgt...@erols.com>
>
> The Computer Counselor - Technology Consulting for the Law Office
Funny, last time I was in court, both attorneys were wearing suits
and ties.
Larry
Samuel Jahaza Howard
> is in very, and I mean very, poor taste. Rather than let us wonder if you
> were going to be a jerk,you took the mystery right out of the equation.
It can also make the police (and a potential employer) take a long hard
look.
Sam Howard
Steven G. Tyler, Esq.
> >> Sorry, steve, but there are plenty of professions that still require
> >> strict dress codes, the military, law enforcement, commercial aviation,
> >> and business, sales, etc.
> >
> >The key word here is "some,". To be completely accurate, you'd need to
> >add "and fewer every year," which was the point I was making.
>
> So scouts should look sloppy, too? Or what?
No . . . just don't equate snappy dressing with personal worth.
> >Shades of Willie Loman, with his shoeshine and a smile. Thanks, but I'd
> >take competence any day over a sharp dresser.
>
> I said "all things being the same" and it's still true as much as
> people claim to be uninfluenced by the matter.
FWIW, "things" are never really the same, and the trap is that if you
weigh heavily such things as snappy dressing, confusing that with true
worthiness, it's unlikely you'll even bother to look beneath the
surface.
> >> The uniform has been a tradition of scouting since the beginning, and
> >> Baden-Powell must have thought that it had some benefit.
> >
> >Oh, no doubt, as I acknowledged in my post. However, there's a tendency
> >amongst Scouters of a certain age to get all wrung around the axle about
> >uniforming trivia, and overlook the need to make the program fun and
> >*substantively* beneficial to the Scouts. In the greater scheme of
> >things, neckerchief vs. no neckerchief vs. bolo is of trivial importance
> >to the unit's Scouting program, compared to the need to provide a fun,
> >engaging program with valuable life experiences for the Scouts.
>
> Probably because it requires being a "certain age" before you see
> enough examples of the results of caving in to the "values" of
> society, and the attending results.
Well, by almost any standard, I've reached that "certain age," and I
find many compatriots who seem to confuse congruity with *their* customs
with having value, which is why I'm always sceptical when someone seems
to put too much weight on conformity to a 'standard' that has little
inherent worth.
> You fail to understand, or
> acknowledge that the point of a uniform is mental discipline, not
> simply wearing it. It is simply a physical representation of "a
> standard" that scouting is supposed to be promoting.
Oh, there's unquestioned value in the discipline of uniforming . . .
which becomes entirely a moot point if the boys don't show up at all, in
part because of the Scouter uniform police.
> >> As I've already said, If scouting does not insist on goals higher than
> >> than the lowest common denominator, then what's the point?
> >
> >Goals are fine. Making early-century uniforming practices the be-all,
> >end-all of the program is misguided, IMHO.
>
> Requiring a minimum dress code of some kind is hardly limited to
> the "early century". Teaching kids that it's optional only signals
> that everything else you are supposed to be as a scout is optional.
Another red flag: whenever someone starts talking about what something
"stands for" or is a "physical representation" of something else, or
"signals" a different state, I get a bit suspicious about the baggage
that's being piled on top of a simple physical issue. Call me simple if
you will, but if a particular activity has value not because of
*inherent* qualities (like SCUBA gear to a diver, for instance) but
rather because of the *effects* (pride, mental discipline, etc. from
being in uniform), there's always another way to achieve the goal
*without* all the bells and whistles. That's why I maintain that you
shouldn't confuse the *method* (uniforming) with the *goal* (development
of the boys).
> >Larry, in the real world there are few if any units without at least
> >some redeeming Scout-like qualities, and none that couldn't be faulted
> >for failing in *some* aspects of the program.
>
> There are street gangs that show "scout-like" qualities, and do a
> better job of enforcing them, too.
<shrug> Whether Scouts, street gangs, or the Hitler Youth, all such
groups dealing with adolescent males will, if they work at all, share
certain characteristics. FWIW, street gangs have just as rigorous a
"dress code" as Scouting (albiet without a published manual!), and as
you note, the consequences of a gang member being "out of uniform" are
stern indeed. I'd suggest you'd do better to focus more on the goals and
less on the methods, if you want to distinguish Scouting from street
gangs! ;-)
> For each Scout, Scouter
> >and unit, the daily and weekly decisions are to pick the battles that
> >can be won, or at least honorably fought, to advance the program. For
> >any given unit, I'm not willing to prejudge whether the lack of
> >by-the-book uniforming is a sign of moral decay, or just an area for
> >later progress. Let me reitereate: uniforming *is* a valuable part of
> >the programming, but not one I'd pick as the ultimate test of the
> >effectiveness of Scouting in general, or any particular unit.
>
> Neither would I, and I didn't say that.
Well, that seemed to be the exclusive thrust of your statement, and all
follow-ups so far.
> If you decide to start letting the little things go, you can be
> sure that you are going to be challenged on the big things, sooner
> or later. And that is happening to scouting. It's only a matter of
> a long retreat from one thing to the next, losing all the way.
Ah, the old domino theory, updated. ;-)
In general terms, I don't disagree with you. However, an excessive focus
on the "little things" can lead to neglect of the "big things" that
you're really trying to achieve. Don't lose the forest in the
toothpicks!
> Scouting
> tried to chuck the major traditions back in the 70s in the name of
> becoming more socially "with it." THe results was a disaster, in
> loss of both boys and leaders.
Larry, IMHO it was not so the effort to be "with it" that was most to
blame, just the flat-footed and tin-eared manner in which it was
attempted. Like it or not, to prosper Scouting has to attract kids
who've been exposed to MTV, and Playstation, and Asheron's Call, and
[fill in the blank]. That may involve a back-to-the-basics movement, or
it may require some degree of translation of the Scouting program into
the modern reality the kids live in. *That's* the true challenge, IMHO,
and that challenge cannot be met merely by trying to shoehorn the Scouts
into uniforms.
Mark Gillis
> Larry, IMHO it was not so the effort to be "with it" that was most to
> blame, just the flat-footed and tin-eared manner in which it was
> attempted. Like it or not, to prosper Scouting has to attract kids
> who've been exposed to MTV, and Playstation, and Asheron's Call, and
> [fill in the blank]. That may involve a back-to-the-basics movement, or
> it may require some degree of translation of the Scouting program into
> the modern reality the kids live in. *That's* the true challenge, IMHO,
> and that challenge cannot be met merely by trying to shoehorn the Scouts
> into uniforms.
imHo, the back-to-the-basics program of the Movement is the key factor --
without *it*, nothing else matters. To define *it*: Go Camping At Least
Once A Month. Pitch Tents. Build Fires. Teach Knots.
My troop has grown 100% this year. Not because I changed deodorant, not
because I went to Scout Night at school (I didn't), not because the memebr
of the troop are all snazzy dressers (come on, they're teenagers, 99% of the
time indistinguishable from a dirty laundry hamper). Nope, by word of
mouth, boy-to-boy.
Our uniform policy? Voted upon by the boys, who *run* the troop, with
guidelines from me and the committee. I wear my uniform at ALL events, to
set an example. The boys wear shirts, pants, and hats. They voted to wear
a standard neckerchief at formal occasions only.
The results? As I said, 100% growth so far this year, 3 Eagles, and I don't
throw a kid out or send him home for being "out of uniform". The boys
handle that for me, via the wonderful tool of positive peer pressure.
The boys like the program, therefore they wear the uniform. The parents
like the program, therefore they support their boys and the troop.
Uniforms are important, no doubt about it. Maybe I've been extremely lucky,
but who does and does not wear a uniform is close to the bottom of my worry
pile. Finding new and exciting places to go, advancement, merit badges, and
always pushing the 12, those are my worries.
Mark Gillis
SM, Troop 857
Conway SC
~Above opinions are just that, and any similarity between them and reality
may be coincidental.~
Committee Chairman
aforementioned thread because I was interested in seeing others opinions of
the bolo tie vs. neckerchief. Boy was that a mistake. Mr. Ed Dunn has a
lot to learn about scouting. He obviously doesn't live by the Scout Oath or
Law himself judging from his choice of vocabulary in his last post.
Vulgarity and Obcenities have no place in Scouting or this NG.
YIS,
George Shaw
Troop 10, Hampton, VA
Committee Chairman
http://troop10.webhop.net
"Mark Gillis" <troo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:39049...@news3.prserv.net...
> Ed, ed, ed.
>
> Waaay back, in the deep dark past, I tried to encourage you to get on with
> things, to quit holding a grudge, to move on. Alas, you were more
> interested in regurgitating repeatedly how awful Scouting is, and how
badly
> you were treated, ad nauseum, ad infinitum. Nothing changes in your life,
> does it?
>
> Knock it off. Post this type of stuff on news:eddunnwasscrewedbyscouting
> At least there it will be topical.
>
> Oh, and never threaten anybody, Ed. The thing about showing up with a gun
> is in very, and I mean very, poor taste. Rather than let us wonder if you
> were going to be a jerk,you took the mystery right out of the equation.
>
eddunn
know, it also makes a valuable point, like it or not. I will not adjust
or change for your all's benefit. Scouting does not have the respect and
value of the public anymore, that is a fact, sorry. The fact that I am
the only one who will face the issue is a real disappointment to me, I
believe that Scouting does work, no I have PROVEN that Scouting does
work, when "Good" people are selected and chosen for leaders. The
profession (appparently in total!) has shown its willingness to accept
anyone on leadership roles, unbelievable but true. We've all seen it!
That is the reason for the constant loss of respect and membership,
none other. My success was total-believe it or not because I am
obviously a genius (not!) but because I believed in the program and it
worked in the field. The fact that the Scouting profession did not and
does not recognise that fact is a dismal state and has caused the
decline of the overall program. Letting losers like Mike Creagh and
Barry Norris go there way with no critisism is rediculous in the
extreme. The problems facing Scouting are professionally caused and not
volunteer, that has been my case from the beginnning, and I will not
shut up for some assholes benefit. By the way, to clear up a few
misnomers sent by others: 1) I was very critical of the leaders in one
unit, but I never did anything to them! I Could'nt with the SE behind
them 100%! Since my leaving the Troop has been busted for pot smoking!
And they was one of the better examples! I had the CEO of the
corperation to a board meeting, but Mike Creagh did not have the time or
inclination to meet with him!
And he blames me! There is no avenue for appeal within the Scouting
profession, and that is why I have chosen this forum, it is an unfair
system and I am damned for dedicating my life to it. Sorry, but I did
and I do not regret the choice. Scouting is a good idea that has been
warped into a trivia pursuit subject by bueracrats, and I am certain it
is no accident, but a planned affair. My standing out here is adequate
proof and I was active for many more years than anybody else, and I
won't shut up to be pleasant. I've tried that, it does'nt work On the
coment about Guns and protesting, I do apologize. It was taken off key.
eddunn
for awhile and you will see the frustration that comes from stupid
idiots not willing to read or think about the facts. By the way, I do
have a few years in Scouting.
Mark Gillis
eddunn <edd...@Bellsouth.net> prattled:
> Sorry about that comment, it was a bad joke, in poor taste. But you
> know, it also makes a valuable point, like it or not.
Good Lord, Ed, how in the blue blazes can you justify that?!? Poor taste,
yes. Valuable point? How???? And no, I don't like it.
>I will not adjust or change for your all's benefit.
Somehow, I didn't think you would. But could you at least listen?
> Scouting does not have the respect and
> value of the public anymore, that is a fact, sorry.
Again, Ed, you are somewhat less than correct. As in, butt-wrong. Scouting
DOES have respect from the public. Get out, go talk to people (and by that
I mean people other than here or alt.disasters.aviation or
alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater. Real people, you know, average
Americans.).
> That is the reason for the constant loss of respect and membership,
Err, sorry. My troop is up 100% so far this year. People smile and wave at
my Scouts when we're out doing something. Respect and membership, Ed.
> none other. My success was total-believe it or not because I am
> obviously a genius (not!)
I'll leave that one alone, I think.
From here on, Ed, you launched into personal attacks on people I do not
know, so I will not copy your text. I will say that you sound quite the
hypocrite -- you have blathered on and on about how 'they' have attacked
you, denigrated you, dragged you through the mud, ruined your good name.
Then you proceed to call names and use language which is not in keeping with
the standards you profess to have acheived so well. In other words, you are
doing the things to others that you accuse others of doing to you.
As to the remainder, we've heard it all for years, Ed. Please go get help.
By the way, help is not to be found in the suicide newsgroups, nor other
groups of more questionable content, nor is it to be found in the
pseudo-intellectual stylings of Bob Dylan, as if anyone could ever
understand him. I mean professional help. Go to a doctor, a
priest/minister/bishop/chaplain/pastor/rabbi/imam/guru, somewhere. Unburden
your soul from the heavy weight of hatred and guilt, let it go. Your issue
is not with Scouting, your issue, methinks, is with life.
> and I was active for many more years than anybody else, and I
> won't shut up to be pleasant. I've tried that, it does'nt work
Sure it does, Ed. You don't have to shut up, just be pleasant. They are
not the same thing at all.
> On the coment about Guns and protesting, I do apologize. It was taken off
key.
Thank you. No, it wasn't, it was taken as it was meant, which is
threatening. Do not be surprised if somebody takes that statement very
seriously -- you might get a visit from your friendly neighborhood peace
officer.
In conclusion, Ed, please get healed. Scouting ain't perfect, because there
are imperfect people in it. Scouting is also chock-full of people who mean
well, try hard, and try to live the Oath and Law. Let's all pay more
attention to that, rather than dwelling on the few who may not.
Just my humble opinion.
Mark Gillis
SM, Troop 857
Conway, SC
-Mayo,H.H.
>No . . . just don't equate snappy dressing with personal worth.
Plenty of other people do. Get used to it.
>Well, by almost any standard, I've reached that "certain age," and I
>find many compatriots who seem to confuse congruity with *their* customs
>with having value, which is why I'm always sceptical when someone seems
>to put too much weight on conformity to a 'standard' that has little
>inherent worth.
That's exactly the problem, and it's you. That you failed to see the
worth in in it is the exact failure of scouting. I presume you were
one?
>Oh, there's unquestioned value in the discipline of uniforming . . .
>which becomes entirely a moot point if the boys don't show up at all, in
>part because of the Scouter uniform police.
I've seen no evidence at all of that, and neither do you. Sloppy
looking troops in my area are faltering. The MOST popular ones
are all the best looking. And again, there is your implication
that scouts have to look sloppy to get members? Please.
>Another red flag: whenever someone starts talking about what something
>"stands for" or is a "physical representation" of something else, or
>"signals" a different state, I get a bit suspicious about the baggage
>that's being piled on top of a simple physical issue.
What fails you is the concept of standing for anything.
>being in uniform), there's always another way to achieve the goal
>*without* all the bells and whistles. That's why I maintain that you
>shouldn't confuse the *method* (uniforming) with the *goal* (development
>of the boys).
What you need to remember is that the they need to develope something.
>"dress code" as Scouting (albiet without a published manual!), and as
>you note, the consequences of a gang member being "out of uniform" are
>stern indeed. I'd suggest you'd do better to focus more on the goals and
>less on the methods, if you want to distinguish Scouting from street
>gangs! ;-)
Scouting had no problem with that long before you were around. Even
street gangs know the worth of uniforms, but you evidently don't.
Seems like an obvious concept(-;
>> If you decide to start letting the little things go, you can be
>> sure that you are going to be challenged on the big things, sooner
>> or later. And that is happening to scouting. It's only a matter of
>> a long retreat from one thing to the next, losing all the way.
>
>Ah, the old domino theory, updated. ;-)
Don't have any kids, do you?
+S>
>In general terms, I don't disagree with you. However, an excessive focus
>on the "little things" can lead to neglect of the "big things" that
>you're really trying to achieve. Don't lose the forest in the
>toothpicks!
Well, you know the old adage, "A blanket unravels one thread at a
time." You don't think that's true?
>Larry, IMHO it was not so the effort to be "with it" that was most to
>blame, just the flat-footed and tin-eared manner in which it was
>attempted. Like it or not, to prosper Scouting has to attract kids
>who've been exposed to MTV, and Playstation, and Asheron's Call, and
>[fill in the blank]. That may involve a back-to-the-basics movement, or
>it may require some degree of translation of the Scouting program into
>the modern reality the kids live in. *That's* the true challenge, IMHO,
>and that challenge cannot be met merely by trying to shoehorn the Scouts
>into uniforms.
I don't know what better example I can give you. When the "traditions"
of scouting go by the board, then the unique value of scouting becomes
drown in the ground noise of all the other pop culture grabs that reach
out for kid's time nowadays. Uniforms don't turn kids off. Whether it
be uniforms or one of your pet cows that is slain, when scouting
decides to tear down everything that makes it unlike society, it
loses it's value totally, and becomes nothing but a babysitting
service. If it makes no demands on the kids greater than what they
get at school or home, then it truly serves no further purpose.
Larry
Hobdbcgv
program -
In this thread, especially the eighth ....
The 8 methods are not a menu where we pick what we like or interpret them
to ur personal standard - we are to use all 8 equally, not just those we
prefer..
Number 8 says it's purpose is to have us the same, not different.
page 8-9 SM handbook.
Steven G. Tyler, Esq.
>
> >No . . . just don't equate snappy dressing with personal worth.
>
. . . like racism, sexism, ethnic violence, etc.? Superficial people
make superficial judgments. I thought you were for standards, Larry, not
just what's popular or the lowest common denominatior?
> >Well, by almost any standard, I've reached that "certain age," and I
> >find many compatriots who seem to confuse congruity with *their* customs
> >with having value, which is why I'm always sceptical when someone seems
> >to put too much weight on conformity to a 'standard' that has little
> >inherent worth.
>
> That's exactly the problem, and it's you. That you failed to see the
> worth in in it is the exact failure of scouting. I presume you were
> one?
Thanks for the gratuitous personal insult. Yes, I was a Scout, and have
been a Scouter for a number of years, with no noticable degradation
stemming from my inability to confuse uniforming with the true purpose
of the program.
> >Oh, there's unquestioned value in the discipline of uniforming . . .
> >which becomes entirely a moot point if the boys don't show up at all, in
> >part because of the Scouter uniform police.
>
> I've seen no evidence at all of that, and neither do you. Sloppy
> looking troops in my area are faltering. The MOST popular ones
> are all the best looking. And again, there is your implication
> that scouts have to look sloppy to get members? Please.
You're welcome. Interesting how you're aware of my evidence, without any
factual basis for such awareness. FWIW, I've seen no particular
correlation between uniforming and attendance, and several have posted
here to give examples of non-correlation.
On an individual level, I've seen a number of boys cite the uniform as
one reason they've dropped out of Scouting. I always take that with a
grain of salt, of course, and there's usually more significant reasons,
but I have *yet* to hear a former Scout lament his lost ability to wear
that snappy uniform!
> >Another red flag: whenever someone starts talking about what something
> >"stands for" or is a "physical representation" of something else, or
> >"signals" a different state, I get a bit suspicious about the baggage
> >that's being piled on top of a simple physical issue.
>
> What fails you is the concept of standing for anything.
Thanks -- another gratuitous insult, based on nothing. My suspicion that
you have a tendency to read your personal biases into limited
information has increased, each time you try to tar me with a broad
brush.
> >being in uniform), there's always another way to achieve the goal
> >*without* all the bells and whistles. That's why I maintain that you
> >shouldn't confuse the *method* (uniforming) with the *goal* (development
> >of the boys).
>
> What you need to remember is that the they need to develope something.
Not disputed -- but you seem to feel that "something" *must* include
uniforming, or else is of no worth.
> >"dress code" as Scouting (albiet without a published manual!), and as
> >you note, the consequences of a gang member being "out of uniform" are
> >stern indeed. I'd suggest you'd do better to focus more on the goals and
> >less on the methods, if you want to distinguish Scouting from street
> >gangs! ;-)
>
> Scouting had no problem with that long before you were around. Even
> street gangs know the worth of uniforms, but you evidently don't.
> Seems like an obvious concept(-;
Again, please don't mischaracterize my position. I've *never* said
uniforming is without value -- I'm just unwilling to place it in the
position of the be-all, end-all of the Scouting program you seem to
advance.
> >> If you decide to start letting the little things go, you can be
> >> sure that you are going to be challenged on the big things, sooner
> >> or later. And that is happening to scouting. It's only a matter of
> >> a long retreat from one thing to the next, losing all the way.
> >
> >Ah, the old domino theory, updated. ;-)
>
> Don't have any kids, do you?
Actually, yes I do. Your point (and I'm assuming you *do* have one,
other than gratuitously attacking my personal competence to speak on
these matters) is . . . ?
> >In general terms, I don't disagree with you. However, an excessive focus
> >on the "little things" can lead to neglect of the "big things" that
> >you're really trying to achieve. Don't lose the forest in the
> >toothpicks!
>
> Well, you know the old adage, "A blanket unravels one thread at a
> time." You don't think that's true?
If Scouts were patterned as simply as a blanket, your aphorism might be
more relevant to the discussion. However, let's see: if all you plan to
do is stare at the edges of the blanket and pick threads instead of
'weaving' more of an enjoyable program, someone (sports, girls, other
activities more 'fun') is likely to steal your 'blanket' right out from
under you. Does that work for you? ;-)
> Uniforms don't turn kids off.
Obviously, if you can say that with a straight face, you've only been
talking to the converted, and a rather select group of the converted at
that. When this issue has been discussed in the past, even the
dyed-in-the-wool (see, I'm *trying* to use your 'blanket' metaphor!)
uniforming advocates admit uniforming can be a tough sell with the kids
today.
> Whether it be uniforms or one of your pet cows that is slain,
??? That comment was an, err, udder disaster, methinks. In my current
suburban setting, I try not to keep *any* livestock around, pet, sacred
or otherwise.
> when scouting
> decides to tear down everything that makes it unlike society, it
> loses it's value totally, and becomes nothing but a babysitting
> service. If it makes no demands on the kids greater than what they
> get at school or home, then it truly serves no further purpose.
Put the straw man away, Larry. Uniform or no, the Scouting program has a
lot of value (and challenges) to offer, and to suggest that Scouting is
useless without insistance on rigorous Class A uniforming is just plain
silly, IMHO. YMM(and obviously does)V.
Terry Spitler
will express it nonetheless.
There are way too many political agendas and personal attacks going on here.
We as scouters should practice what we preach and show some "courtesy" .
I would like to use this forum to learn and share information that will
assist the scouts and scouters get the most out of the scouting experience.
Am I wrong?
Terry Spitler
Kemptown, MD
"Steven G. Tyler, Esq." <sgt...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:3905CF6A...@erols.com...
-Mayo,H.H.
Steven G. Tyler, Esq. <sgt...@erols.com> wrote:
>> Plenty of other people do. Get used to it.
>
>. . . like racism, sexism, ethnic violence, etc.? Superficial people
>make superficial judgments. I thought you were for standards, Larry, not
>just what's popular or the lowest common denominatior?
Last I heard, hiring slovenly employees wasn't prohibited by law.
>> That's exactly the problem, and it's you. That you failed to see the
>> worth in in it is the exact failure of scouting. I presume you were
>> one?
>
>Thanks for the gratuitous personal insult. Yes, I was a Scout, and have
>been a Scouter for a number of years, with no noticable degradation
>stemming from my inability to confuse uniforming with the true purpose
>of the program.
Why did I know that already? Well, if the shoe fits.....
>> I've seen no evidence at all of that, and neither do you. Sloppy
>> looking troops in my area are faltering. The MOST popular ones
>> are all the best looking. And again, there is your implication
>> that scouts have to look sloppy to get members? Please.
>
>You're welcome. Interesting how you're aware of my evidence, without any
>factual basis for such awareness. FWIW, I've seen no particular
>correlation between uniforming and attendance, and several have posted
>here to give examples of non-correlation.
You mean rag-bag troops are the ones parents want their kids to join?
Sorry, but that isn't my experience YMMV.
>On an individual level, I've seen a number of boys cite the uniform as
>one reason they've dropped out of Scouting. I always take that with a
>grain of salt, of course, and there's usually more significant reasons,
>but I have *yet* to hear a former Scout lament his lost ability to wear
>that snappy uniform!
Then you haven't bothered to ask. All of us were proud of our uniforms,
and it was a value instilled by our leaders, not one we would have
voted on given a choice. I'm stil in regular contact with many of
my former scout friends.
>> What fails you is the concept of standing for anything.
>
>Thanks -- another gratuitous insult, based on nothing. My suspicion that
>you have a tendency to read your personal biases into limited
>information has increased, each time you try to tar me with a broad
>brush.
So exactly what value do you stand up for when it becomes unpopular
with the putative majority, and requires some effort on your part?
>Not disputed -- but you seem to feel that "something" *must* include
>uniforming, or else is of no worth.
No, but it is a start.
>> Scouting had no problem with that long before you were around. Even
>> street gangs know the worth of uniforms, but you evidently don't.
>> Seems like an obvious concept(-;
>
>Again, please don't mischaracterize my position. I've *never* said
>uniforming is without value -- I'm just unwilling to place it in the
>position of the be-all, end-all of the Scouting program you seem to
>advance.
As I said, it isn't the be all, it's the start all.
>Actually, yes I do. Your point (and I'm assuming you *do* have one,
>other than gratuitously attacking my personal competence to speak on
>these matters) is . . . ?
It is human nature to resist any discipline and challenge authority.
>If Scouts were patterned as simply as a blanket, your aphorism might be
>more relevant to the discussion. However, let's see: if all you plan to
>do is stare at the edges of the blanket and pick threads instead of
>'weaving' more of an enjoyable program, someone (sports, girls, other
>activities more 'fun') is likely to steal your 'blanket' right out from
>under you. Does that work for you? ;-)
Funny how scouting managed to survive all these years from such
external challenges, but seems to be fraying more from the inside.
>> Uniforms don't turn kids off.
>
>Obviously, if you can say that with a straight face, you've only been
>talking to the converted, and a rather select group of the converted at
>that. When this issue has been discussed in the past, even the
>dyed-in-the-wool (see, I'm *trying* to use your 'blanket' metaphor!)
>uniforming advocates admit uniforming can be a tough sell with the kids
>today.
And why is that? Could it be because too many adults are telling them
that uniforms are some artifact of repressive militarism? Hmmm.
>Put the straw man away, Larry. Uniform or no, the Scouting program has a
>lot of value (and challenges) to offer, and to suggest that Scouting is
>useless without insistance on rigorous Class A uniforming is just plain
>silly, IMHO. YMM(and obviously does)V.
Not useless, but increasingly vague about its purpose.
Larry
Michael Kelley
neckerchiefs?
No, just says that sometimes you get one of these special neckerchiefs by
participating in something special.
Seriously, I think demanding neckerchief uniformity is a bit much, but all
troops are different. While a troop all wearing the same troop neckeerchief
while traveling or in a parade sure looks nice if that's to be the
boy-determined uniform of the day, I certainly don't mind scouts wearing
whatever neckerchief they choose. Why in the world, apart from the obvious
collecting reasons, would a boy purchase a special event neckerchief.
Conclave, jamboree, camporee, JLT, camp, camp staff, special event, even
foreigh country scout organization neckeerchiefs are fair game with me. I
rotate neckerchiefs and slides and I certainly wouldn't begrudge boys doing
the same. Yes, they're special -- to me. A boy wearing different
neckerchiefs from various special events says a lot to me too, like I should
have more problems like this!
>>Because the neckerchief says we are a troop!
I understand what you mean, but there's a lot more saying you're a troop
than a single style of neckerchief. When you see my troop and we're wearing
a mix of troop and special event neckerchiefs, does that say we're not a
troop?
How many opportunities does a boy have to show off some special neckerchief.
Not that many. We adults can hold off for special occasions, but that can
be unrealistic for boys. Personally I want my boys "showing off" things
like this because I want all the boys to strive for as many opportunities as
they can. If this becomes elitism, I think I've got much bigger problems to
deal with...
To each his own. Hmmm, what n/c will I wear to tomorrow night's troop
meeting?
Regards,
Mike Kelley
CM Pack 202, MC Troop 746, Greenbelt, MD
Patuxent District, National Capital Area Council
TILAD-X
This has gone on too long between just the two of you. Please take it to
email, as it seems to have gotten way to personal to be deemed appropriate
for wasting everyone's bandwidth.
Thank you.
--
YIS - Jeremy Kudlick
Eagle Class of '93
Elangomat Elgigunkhaki, A Friend of All to the World (Vigil Honor '94)
http://tiladx.webjump.com
ANTISPAM IN USE.
Alan Houser
: >> You haven't really arrived until you earn one of these special
: neckerchiefs?
: No, just says that sometimes you get one of these special neckerchiefs by
: participating in something special.
Unless you are in one of the troops where you don't get the troop
neckerchief with one of the patches until you make First Class.
YiS,
Alan R. Houser ** tro...@emf.net
** Scoutmaster, Troop 24, Berkeley, California **
** Committee Member, Crew 24, Berkeley, California **
** Boy Scout Roundtable Commissioner, Herms District **
** WWW page ** http://www.emf.net/~troop24/t24.html **
Jim Cornwall
Alan Houser wrote:
>
> Michael Kelley (mke...@clark.net) wrote (in part):
> : >> You haven't really arrived until you earn one of these special
> : neckerchiefs?
> : No, just says that sometimes you get one of these special neckerchiefs by
> : participating in something special.
>
> Unless you are in one of the troops where you don't get the troop
> neckerchief with one of the patches until you make First Class.
>
In our troop, you are given the neckercheif on joining, the patch is
awarded with the young man's Tenderfoot. Never had any complaints
yet...
Jim Cornwall
> YiS,
>
> Alan R. Houser ** tro...@emf.net
> ** Scoutmaster, Troop 24, Berkeley, California **
> ** Committee Member, Crew 24, Berkeley, California **
> ** Boy Scout Roundtable Commissioner, Herms District **
> ** WWW page ** http://www.emf.net/~troop24/t24.html **
--
=================================================================
== James F. Cornwall - Ex-USAF officer, programmer, Geologist ==
== Best Eddress: "jc...@radiks.net" ==
=================================================================
Mark Yaworski
<sgt...@erols.com> wrote:
>"-Mayo,H.H." wrote:
>>
>> >No . . . just don't equate snappy dressing with personal worth.
>>
>> Plenty of other people do. Get used to it.
>
>. . . like racism, sexism, ethnic violence, etc.? Superficial people
>make superficial judgments. I thought you were for standards, Larry, not
>just what's popular or the lowest common denominatior?
We are judged by the attention that we give to our appearance because,
in general, if we don't care about how we look, we won't care about
details elsewhere in life. There are exceptions to this rule but they
are few.
Mark Yaworski, CNA <I speak for myself and nobody else>
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Instructor
NRA Recruiter http://www.yaworski.com/nra
Part time gun dealer
Some time baseball umpire
Other time basketball referee
and a lot of other stuff that no one cares about
If you are in the DC area, check out http://www.erols.com/yaworski/mpc.htm for match info
Michael Kelley
I think every boy should also be able to get a troop n/c when they join.
Mike Kelley
-Mayo,H.H.
TILAD-X <jkud...@prodigynospam.net> wrote:
>
>This has gone on too long between just the two of you. Please take it to
>email, as it seems to have gotten way to personal to be deemed appropriate
>for wasting everyone's bandwidth.
>
>Thank you.
>--
>YIS - Jeremy Kudlick
As someone pointed out, the law of courtesy has been violated by me
in particular. For that, I am contrite. But there are basic differences
of philosopy that need to be aired, and sometimes it isn't without
emotion. I was raised in one of the worst environments possible, and
the uniform was the first encounter I had with true self-esteem. I
belonged for once, and was proud to be one of a group of kids who were
doing something right. The union of that group was stronger than the
derision of those kids around me, including a sibling, who hated
everything it stood for. No uniform I ever wore after that meant as
much. To me scouting is not just a pass-time, it's an experience that
has the power to salvage human beings, and instill values that kids
often will get nowhere else. If we stop taking that responsiblity,
and reduce the purpose of scouting to a social club with no higher
aim, then scouting loses its value. My brother is years dead and gone,
the results of a life of failure and dissipation. I have a family,
a job and home and friendships that have lasted decades. Maybe the
reasons for that are debatable, but not in my mind. Scouting taught
me to take the harder trail, and not give in to that which was easy
or convenient. And that is what scouting is all about, isn't it?
Larry