Re: Quality Unit (opinions are nice,
Stephen M. Hoar (shoar@INFINET.COM)
Wed, 27 Nov 1996 20:20:54 -0500
On Wed, 27 Nov 1996, Geary Morrill wrote:
> If everyone who has posted to this thread would simply apply the same
> creative thought processes shown in arguing their positions to meeting
> existing QU objectives as written, we'd soon have to find another topic.
> Considering none of us would have ever been in Scouting if our leadership
> hadn't been receptive to some growth, we seem to now be strangely myopic
> about encouraging growth.
> I've never seen so many arguments against growth. What's really being
It might be useful to go back and reread the comments that folks
posted. I have noticed few if any against growth. Our troop of
45 meets your criteria for being a good troop and is without
question the best in our district. The way I see folks commenting
is on the unilateral change of organizational goals and objectives
without any apparent input from the members of the organization.
The other inference is that by their change in definition they
now consider quantity to equal quality.
Other than seeing the change show up on the paperwork to our
surprise and to the surprise of paid BSA staff members has anyone
seen any sort of official justification or explanation for this
major change in criteria?? Official explanations other than
'we say so' would be nice.
Steve in Newark
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City