I don’t think it’s really much of a time issue. I think the reason is that the real answers to a lot of questions that are raised would either be things that most scouters would not want to hear, would portray BSA in a poor light, or would clarify a generic and purposefully vague policy statement in ways that could create further liability for BSA. I suppose we also have to recognize that BSA is fighting for its life and is probably highly sensitized to any postings on a site that is public and appears official even if it is run by volunteers. I have often worried that any intrepid journalist covering the bankruptcy could peruse this site and others like it and come away with a treasure trove of postings that could be concerning. Personally, I think BSA made the move to minimize risk and exposure.
Commissioners have to answer questions like this all of the time, though, it is part of what they do.
As I surmise this will be my last comment here on the Scout Forum topic, I would like to close the loop on my topic of unit-coordinated activities requiring prior council approval with an observation.
Concurrent with posting the topic here I sent an inquiry to the local professional Scouter listed in the Lake Erie Council announcement as the information contact. I included asking what form the approval request would take. The perfunctory answer was “…National Policy Guidance…” with the promise of more information soon.
Three days later LEC sent a broadcast email reciting the April 12th notice adding five examples, and a link to an on line application form. The site is branded Boy Scouts of America but hosted by QualtricsXM (https://www.qualtrics.com/), a purveyor of “experience management” software boasting AI capabilities.
The unit-coordinated activity application requires explanation of the who, what, when, where, how, and why of the activity. Also required are names and email addresses of the involved units’ Scoutmasters and Charter Organization Representatives. It is reported that council’s decision will be sent to all listed individuals.
Will the application be read before or after it goes through some AI algorithm? Will the application be scored against some target criteria with approval based on a minimum numerical result?
In closing I would like to thank you for your informative responses to my posts and comments.
It isn’t clear if this is a LEC approach (the AI app) or a national approach. You may be one of the first, so I would be surprised if anyone her could answer your questions.
Reddit is not a reasonable substitute. Youth members frequent the sub and they downvote opinions they disagree with, effectively censoring others. Rather than allow civil dialogue, they take things personally and bury opposing viewpoints.
I’ve been following the Reddit page that was suggested on this thread and I agree about Youth Members. When I come to this forum I want to discuss with other adults and not the Scouts.
I put that comment up under the theory that forewarned is forearmed. The unit-coordinated activities approval is a national requirement. Even when balkanized to the council level there must be some standard mechanism.
We are moving more and more to the professionals at the council running everything. Forums like this may not be complementary to what they are doing and what is happening. As they drive the volunteers with passion away, so will go the program. This is the type of post they probably would not like.
I’m heading out to Scouter until this issue gets resolved. Well…if this issue gets resolved. Too much experience out here to be pushed aside without any warning or explanation. I’m sure they’ll be posting the annual increase in fees on here though.
Just posted to Roundtable News and Discussion. As I said before: the people with the authority to answer questions do not have the time/staffing to do so.
Due to the constrained staff resources at the national council, it was not possible to monitor the numerous forums to ensure correct information was being communicated. There continued to be incorrect information communicated even by well-meaning volunteers that was creating issues for units and program delivery. Therefore the program centric and health/safety discussion forums were turned off. We encourage individuals to reach out to their local councils (through their commissioners, volunteers, staff etc.) for support and correct information for their specific questions. IT related resource discussion forums continue to be available, as do those created by units for their use.
What are the program folks doing that keeps them so busy? Are the rewriting all the handbooks? Creating new requirements for all MBs and Adventures? I don’t see a lot of work coming out of those offices.
If a small group of volunteers can read every post and still get their paid jobs plus volunteer Scout roles done, I have a hard time believing the program staff cannot read all the posts in a single category.
There continued to be incorrect information communicated even by well-meaning volunteers that was creating issues for units and program delivery.
So some information was (allegedly) incorrect, and there was enough staff review of the forums to notice that information, but not enough motivation to actually correct the alleged misunderstandings? Instead of making official corrections as the issues were noticed, even if the correction rate was incomplete, they simply shuttered the site, effectively sending folks to non-BSA discussion sites in hopes of getting the help that the staff doesn’t seem to have time to provide. Wow.
We encourage individuals to reach out to their local councils (through their commissioners, volunteers, staff etc.) for support and correct information for their specific questions.
Frankly, this means that most units won’t get their questions answered, and won’t even be inconsistent in the same way. So, nationals doesn’t have time to monitor a single BSA-operated site to provide official answers, but each of the various councils is supposed to:
- Field the questions from their respective units
- Address the ones that they already have answers to (which, presumably, means someone at nationals had time to tell them the answer at some point)
- Forward the questions for which they don’t know answers to nationals, and wait for a response.
ETA: To be clear, I realize that you’re just reposting information that BSA posted on FB, @WilliamsburgScouter, so that the rest of us have a chance to see it. It’s just frustrating that the BSA has decided to make such a poor decision.
“Due to the constrained staff resources at the national council, it was not possible to monitor the numerous forums to ensure correct information was being communicated. There continued to be incorrect information communicated even by well-meaning volunteers that was creating issues for units and program delivery. “
No one from national (except for a nice STEM Chair) ever seemed to weigh in. EVER.
Why not have a crew of commissioners do it?
Meet people where they are vs where you wanted them to be. Online forums are the roundtables of today. This was the chance for national to take out the middleman and talk directly to the end users. They are choosing to throw that away.
Not having a voice will not set the record straight.
I still think a lot of this stemmed from the discussion on how expensive the cub books became and how many units don’t use them.
Sticking your head in the sand doesn’t make the problem go away. Today, in one of the Scouting Facebook groups, there is a discussion about YPT with MANY incorrect answers. At least with the discussion in the forums, incorrect answers could be easily addressed or even removed.
Since we can’t see that discussion any more, can anyone speak to alternatives to using the Cub Scout handbooks? I’ve got 50 something brand new Scouting families whom I’m trying to convince to stick with the program, and need to ship all our materials from the US or Okinawa to Hong Kong… so shipping 50*books at 24 USD a pop could be an impediment to running the program…
I would say get for Webelos, and make sure Den Leaders have one - younger ones will not use them @GregoryStevenson
I agree with that. I have them start using it at the Webelos level so they can get in the habit of getting their book signed so that’s one less thing they have to worry about “learning” when they get to the Troop level.
Doing searches on line I have found complete handbooks uploaded, usually by volunteers for their pack families but there they are and I suppose anyone can access and download the pdf files.
Of course, that’s a violation of copyright law, and A Scout is Honest
I suppose that the legality of people ‘sharing’ materials on line is there but would just reading the material on line without downloading it also be ‘illegal’? Of course worksheets and tracking sheets are on line too and technically a family could get by just using those materials and I suspect all of that would be perfectly legal. A conundrum…
