Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question

Expand Messages
  • apatschin75
    Excellent thought. I tend to lurk and not say a lot, but training is not intended to be a punishment or impediment to Scouting activities. Sometimes folks
    Message 1 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
      Excellent thought. I tend to lurk and not say a lot, but training is not
      intended to be a punishment or impediment to Scouting activities.
      Sometimes folks lose sight of that.


      In a message dated 4/22/2013 1:43:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
      artdukovic@... writes:




      Look all, the bottom line is you really need somebody "trained" when you're
      exposing new parents and Cub Scouts to perhaps, their first camping
      experience?? It's the real purpose behind the training??

      A "bad experience" can literally turn-off parents and future Boy Scouts to
      the program and do any of you want that, really?? How many times have you
      been on camping experiences where the "know-it-alls" have made your life
      miserable and again, this is what this training is designed to help with;
      "required" or not folks, common sense would dictate to have somebody there
      that's really "trained" to give the boys the very best program we can offer
      them.

      Bottom line is a "great experience" encourages the boys AND parents who'll
      want to volunteer maybe ... food for thought?? We already know what a "bad
      experience" can do as well??

      - Art
      --- On Sun, 4/21/13, Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) > wrote:

      From: Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) >
      Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
      To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
      Date: Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:18 PM



      The Tour and Activity Plan appears to require a BALOO trained adult for
      any cub scout camping outing.

      The best person to ask is the person who approves the Tour and Activity
      Plans you submit. If they will not approve without a BALOO trained adult then
      you have your answer, or at least your answer until you convince them
      otherwise.

      If you're in the central Texas area I can make you a deal on getting both
      BALOO and the Outdoor Webelos Leader class next weekend (Friday evening to
      end of day Saturday).

      Chip.
      On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:09 PM, frank wrote:

      > Sure, it's probably spot on. The trouble comes when folks start relying
      on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training.
      There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that
      the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that". Most of what
      folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How
      many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to
      be baloney? After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the
      book and ignore the talk. If it's true, the new version of the book will
      reflect it.
      > Frank
      >
      > >________________________________
      > > From: Connie Knie <_cknie23100@..._ (mailto:cknie23100@...)
      >
      > >To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
      > >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
      > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable
      source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not
      true?
      > >
      > >Connie
      > >
      > >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
      > >
      > >The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000
      persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message.
      The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change
      things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
      > >Frank
      > >
      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • A. Dukovic
      Thanks, some of the conversations made required sound like a sentence rather than what it is, help with the program ??     This is allegedly a
      Message 2 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
        Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
         
        This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
         
        Keep the faith folks please; we all know "bad" but we want the boy's experience to be the very best it can be and training can help that!!


        - Art
        --- On Mon, 4/22/13, tttrack@... <tttrack@...> wrote:

        From: tttrack@... <tttrack@...>
        Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
        To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, April 22, 2013, 5:24 PM



         



        Excellent thought. I tend to lurk and not say a lot, but training is not
        intended to be a punishment or impediment to Scouting activities.
        Sometimes folks lose sight of that.


        In a message dated 4/22/2013 1:43:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
        artdukovic@... writes:

        Look all, the bottom line is you really need somebody "trained" when you're
        exposing new parents and Cub Scouts to perhaps, their first camping
        experience?? It's the real purpose behind the training??

        A "bad experience" can literally turn-off parents and future Boy Scouts to
        the program and do any of you want that, really?? How many times have you
        been on camping experiences where the "know-it-alls" have made your life
        miserable and again, this is what this training is designed to help with;
        "required" or not folks, common sense would dictate to have somebody there
        that's really "trained" to give the boys the very best program we can offer
        them.

        Bottom line is a "great experience" encourages the boys AND parents who'll
        want to volunteer maybe ... food for thought?? We already know what a "bad
        experience" can do as well??

        - Art
        --- On Sun, 4/21/13, Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) > wrote:

        From: Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) >
        Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
        To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
        Date: Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:18 PM

        The Tour and Activity Plan appears to require a BALOO trained adult for
        any cub scout camping outing.

        The best person to ask is the person who approves the Tour and Activity
        Plans you submit. If they will not approve without a BALOO trained adult then
        you have your answer, or at least your answer until you convince them
        otherwise.

        If you're in the central Texas area I can make you a deal on getting both
        BALOO and the Outdoor Webelos Leader class next weekend (Friday evening to
        end of day Saturday).

        Chip.
        On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:09 PM, frank wrote:

        > Sure, it's probably spot on. The trouble comes when folks start relying
        on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training.
        There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that
        the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that". Most of what
        folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How
        many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to
        be baloney? After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the
        book and ignore the talk. If it's true, the new version of the book will
        reflect it.
        > Frank
        >
        > >________________________________
        > > From: Connie Knie <_cknie23100@..._ (mailto:cknie23100@...)
        >
        > >To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
        > >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
        > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable
        source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not
        true?
        > >
        > >Connie
        > >
        > >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
        > >
        > >The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000
        persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message.
        The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change
        things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
        > >Frank
        > >
        > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Connie Knie
        Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.   First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I
        Message 3 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
          Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
           
          First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
           
           The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
           
          Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
           
          And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......

          Connie

          --- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...> wrote:







          Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
           
          This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
           


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • A. Dukovic
          I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we ve got to know just what the heck we re doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who
          Message 4 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
            I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
             
            Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
             
            Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    


            - Art
            --- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <cknie23100@...> wrote:

            From: Connie Knie <cknie23100@...>
            Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
            To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Monday, April 22, 2013, 10:00 PM



             



            Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
             
            First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
             
             The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
             
            Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
             
            And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......

            Connie

            --- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...> wrote:

            Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
             
            This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
             

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • frank
            The difference between required/must and best practice  is decidedly different when the unit is forced to cancel their outing due to a leader not having
            Message 5 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
              The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.

              Frank


              >________________________________
              > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
              >  
              >

              >
              >I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??

              >Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.

              >Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
              >
              >- Art
              >
              >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:

              >
              >Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.

              >First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.

              > The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........

              >Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........

              >And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
              >
              >Connie
              >
              >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
              >
              >Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  

              >This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  

              .
              >

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • A. Dukovic
              Very true Frank but the reason we re following BSAs rules is so we re covered by their insurance I m thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best  program possible
              Message 6 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
                Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents?? 
                 
                The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??

                "Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!


                - Art
                --- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:

                From: frank <ftooth@...>
                Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                To: "scouter_t@yahoogroups.com" <scouter_t@yahoogroups.com>
                Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM



                 



                The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.

                Frank

                >________________________________
                > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                >  
                >

                >
                >I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??

                >Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.

                >Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
                >
                >- Art
                >
                >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:

                >
                >Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.

                >First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.

                > The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........

                >Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........

                >And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                >
                >Connie
                >
                >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                >
                >Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  

                >This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  

                .
                >

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • frank
                ...the reason we re following BSAs rules is so we re covered by their insurance... What does that mean? Sounds like the ol insurance boogeyman ploy that has
                Message 7 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
                  "...the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance..."
                  What does that mean? Sounds like the ol' insurance boogeyman ploy that has been repeated over and over for years and years, yet never in print, never in G2SS, never in a syllabus.
                   
                  "The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they 'require' some training..."
                  Mandate? So is it two or some other number?  It is disingenuous and confusing to tell folks "two", and in the same breath say it's more.   When the trainer hems and haws about a rule or a policy, folks taking the training tend to dismiss it and wind up doing what they want for lack of clear direction.
                   
                  And look at this discussion.  38+ posts between training people and no agreement to a simple question:  is or is not BALOO required? 
                   
                  This is why I NEVER pay any attention to talk that cannot be backed up in writing. Tell me the rule, and then tell me where I can read more about it.
                   
                  Frank


                  >________________________________
                  > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                  >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                  >Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 1:24 PM
                  >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                  >
                  >

                  >
                  >Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents?? 

                  >The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??
                  >
                  >"Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!
                  >
                  >- Art
                  >--- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                  >
                  >From: frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com>
                  >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                  >To: "mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com>
                  >Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM
                  >

                  >
                  >The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.
                  >
                  >Frank
                  >
                  >>________________________________
                  >> From: A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com>
                  >>  
                  >>
                  >> 
                  >>
                  >>I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
                  >> 
                  >>Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
                  >> 
                  >>Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
                  >>
                  >>- Art
                  >>
                  >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                  >> 
                  >>
                  >>Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                  >> 
                  >>First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                  >> 
                  >> The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                  >> 
                  >>Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                  >> 
                  >>And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                  >>
                  >>Connie
                  >>
                  >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                  >>
                  >>Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
                  >> 
                  >>This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  
                  >
                  >.
                  >>
                  >
                  >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • A. Dukovic
                  Ok, ya got me there??  The 2 thinnest books in Scouting are their Rules & Regulations and Charter & Bylaws which leaves the rest kinda to us; instead of
                  Message 8 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
                    Ok, ya got me there??  The 2 thinnest books in Scouting are their "Rules & Regulations" and "Charter & Bylaws" which leaves the rest kinda to us; instead of "volumes" of rules and requirements that only the friggin lawyers can figure out, I like it this way myself.
                     
                    And yeah, sorry about the "insurance boogeyman" but I've found most adults need an "attention getter" for them to listen at times but I never want to have the need to test the rumor myself??
                     

                    - Art
                    --- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:

                    From: frank <ftooth@...>
                    Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                    To: "scouter_t@yahoogroups.com" <scouter_t@yahoogroups.com>
                    Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 7:38 PM



                     



                    "...the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance..."
                    What does that mean? Sounds like the ol' insurance boogeyman ploy that has been repeated over and over for years and years, yet never in print, never in G2SS, never in a syllabus.
                     
                    "The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they 'require' some training..."
                    Mandate? So is it two or some other number?  It is disingenuous and confusing to tell folks "two", and in the same breath say it's more.   When the trainer hems and haws about a rule or a policy, folks taking the training tend to dismiss it and wind up doing what they want for lack of clear direction.
                     
                    And look at this discussion.  38+ posts between training people and no agreement to a simple question:  is or is not BALOO required? 
                     
                    This is why I NEVER pay any attention to talk that cannot be backed up in writing. Tell me the rule, and then tell me where I can read more about it.
                     
                    Frank

                    >________________________________
                    > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                    >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                    >Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 1:24 PM
                    >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                    >
                    >

                    >
                    >Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents?? 

                    >The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??
                    >
                    >"Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!
                    >
                    >- Art
                    >--- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                    >
                    >From: frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com>
                    >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                    >To: "mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com>
                    >Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM
                    >

                    >
                    >The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.
                    >
                    >Frank
                    >
                    >>________________________________
                    >> From: A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com>
                    >>  
                    >>
                    >> 
                    >>
                    >>I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
                    >> 
                    >>Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
                    >> 
                    >>Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
                    >>
                    >>- Art
                    >>
                    >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                    >> 
                    >>
                    >>Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                    >> 
                    >>First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                    >> 
                    >> The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                    >> 
                    >>Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                    >> 
                    >>And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                    >>
                    >>Connie
                    >>
                    >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                    >>
                    >>Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
                    >> 
                    >>This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  
                    >
                    >.
                    >>
                    >
                    >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • jlshannon
                    Has anyone consulted their commissioner about their concerns? Commissioners are there to help get the answers that you need to run your programs. Sent from my
                    Message 9 of 17 , Apr 24, 2013
                      Has anyone consulted their commissioner about their concerns? Commissioners are there to help get the answers that you need to run your programs.

                      Sent from my iPhone

                      On Apr 23, 2013, at 8:34 PM, "A. Dukovic" <artdukovic@...> wrote:

                      > Ok, ya got me there?? The 2 thinnest books in Scouting are their "Rules & Regulations" and "Charter & Bylaws" which leaves the rest kinda to us; instead of "volumes" of rules and requirements that only the friggin lawyers can figure out, I like it this way myself.
                      >
                      > And yeah, sorry about the "insurance boogeyman" but I've found most adults need an "attention getter" for them to listen at times but I never want to have the need to test the rumor myself??
                      >
                      >
                      > - Art
                      > --- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > From: frank <ftooth@...>
                      > Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                      > To: "scouter_t@yahoogroups.com" <scouter_t@yahoogroups.com>
                      > Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 7:38 PM
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > "...the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance..."
                      > What does that mean? Sounds like the ol' insurance boogeyman ploy that has been repeated over and over for years and years, yet never in print, never in G2SS, never in a syllabus.
                      >
                      > "The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they 'require' some training..."
                      > Mandate? So is it two or some other number? It is disingenuous and confusing to tell folks "two", and in the same breath say it's more. When the trainer hems and haws about a rule or a policy, folks taking the training tend to dismiss it and wind up doing what they want for lack of clear direction.
                      >
                      > And look at this discussion. 38+ posts between training people and no agreement to a simple question: is or is not BALOO required?
                      >
                      > This is why I NEVER pay any attention to talk that cannot be backed up in writing. Tell me the rule, and then tell me where I can read more about it.
                      >
                      > Frank
                      >
                      > >________________________________
                      > > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                      > >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                      > >Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 1:24 PM
                      > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin?? Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents??
                      > >
                      > >The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??
                      > >
                      > >"Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!
                      > >
                      > >- Art
                      > >--- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                      > >
                      > >From: frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com>
                      > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                      > >To: "mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com>
                      > >Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.
                      > >
                      > >Frank
                      > >
                      > >>________________________________
                      > >> From: A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com>
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares?? If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
                      > >>
                      > >>Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance?? I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
                      > >>
                      > >>Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??
                      > >>
                      > >>- Art
                      > >>
                      > >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                      > >>
                      > >>First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                      > >>
                      > >> The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                      > >>
                      > >>Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                      > >>
                      > >>And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                      > >>
                      > >>Connie
                      > >>
                      > >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                      > >>
                      > >>Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??
                      > >>
                      > >>This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
                      > >
                      > >.
                      > >>
                      > >
                      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > >
                      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.