When to seek help on short-timer

[OldGreyBear]

I have been around scouting for about 10 years now and nothing has caused near as much consternation as defining "active". Now, I was always told, by people I respected that being registered equaled being active. Now, people can react and say thats horrible, you mean a scout can be considered active and advance and he doesnt have to show up at meetings or go on outings? The reality is, if the boy doesnt show up at meetings or go on outings, then there is very little chance he will be doing anything in the advancement portion of the program. I remember seeing on various internet postings that "active" had to be defined and couldnt National just publish what was considered "active" and so National did. Now, the fact it's not in the place some consider the most expedient, its OK to ignore, fine go ahead and ignore. I see the same thing with uniforming, its moer of an attitude of, I dont care what national says about the uniform, in this troop the uniform is xxxxxxxx.

I do have a question for those who don't like National definition of "active", in the Sea Scout program to advance to the Ordinary, Able and Quartermaster levels the requirements are to attend 75% of meetings and Ship Special Events. Since this is spelled out in the Sea Scout advancement program, why isn't it spelled out in the Boy Scout Program? perhaps because its not supposed to be

[smtroop168]

Interesting observation about Sea Scouts. Being an old Navy guy, we needed all hands to get the ship underway.

[WeeWillie]

One of the characteristics of merit badge mills is low active participation. Another characteristic is PORs are honorary positions. You will get the same lame "adding to the requirements" excuse about PORs that you get for active participation. That is how you get SPL, Eagle Scouts who can't tie a square knot.

As to why Sea Scouts have mandatory attendance rules:

1. Sea Scouts is a small contigent within BSA. Elitism - A good thing
2. Sea Scout advancement does not carry the same national recognition of Eagle Scout. The push to low ball requirements is not a great.
3. Safety.
4. I don't think Sea Scout advisors would put up with it.

Someone mentioned belt loops. I was off at college when BSA adopted belt loop advancement so I don't know all the requirements. What I do know is that Scout and Leader enrollment suffered. The Don't take the outing out of Scouting slogan was the response.

[milominderbinder2]

The belt loop "Skill Awards" are from 1972.

It failed there but a similar program has been a big hit as the Cub Scout Academics and Sports Program.

- Craig

[VenturingL]

Haven't logged in for a while - was trying to get info requested by DE + annual Scout Show was last weekend & took a lot of prep.
DE raised an eyebrow when I told him last requirement prior to SM conference took 3 months to get signed off- requirement was the one about living Scout Oath & Law in daily life. He said that's one of the easiest, since by the time one is going for Life, it should be ingrained. He suspected there was a discipline problem & asked if my son was on probation. He most definitely was not! All I know was that after each meeting when I picked my son up & asked if everything was signed off yet & SM conference scheduled/done, I was told "they're working on it, don't worry". His troop actually has co-SM's. The one whose signature he needed for this last requirement (since this SM is also my son'sPatrol Counselor) travels with work a lot. I checked my son's book - the requirement was finally signed off by the other SM (who had signed everything else back in Nov.) & his SM conference was with the previous SM (still on committee). I have asked my son, as has his Eagle Advisor, what happened. He changes the subject or says he can't remember. My suspicious self thinks SM who was expected to sign off delayed it because my son had not been at meetings because of Marching band schedule (see much earlier posts)., but I cannot get confirmed. It may also be that my son "failed" an SMC - I know-don't get started on that one - & yes, I have a copy of Advancement Committee Responsibilities. I think my son just doesn't to hear me rant again & wants to move past all this.
Oh my, another long post.
I emailed CC about the forms, added requirements, etc. The answer I got FROM THE SM was that this form is NOT adding to the requirements, it's for DISTRICT, and that they have used it since 1995. They had a scout go for EBOR & since the troop is dark over the summer, he couldn't answer the question "How did you demonstrate leadership duirng that time?" & therefore did not actually have "6 months". I was also told the National website (has been quoted in previous posts by others) is just a GUIDE & not a RULE. Well, it's the GUIDE to Safe Scouting, isn't it? Think we can ignore that one? We have Troop GUIDES; does this mean TFC scouts can ignore the GUIDance given to them?
I have been "invited" to bring my opinions to a committee meeting. I want my son to get his Eagle project approved & underway & then I will.