Re: Which MB Requirements to believe?
Bruce E. Cobern (bec@PIPELINE.COM)
Sun, 27 Jul 1997 11:58:15 -0400
At 11:52 AM 7/24/97 -0400, Bruce Harper (VT Webmaster) wrote:
>We've discussed Boy Scout publications in the past and gone over various
>ways to improve their updates and distributions, from downloadable web
>pages to CD-ROM. Perhaps it would be better for those who are paper-based
>to issue more publications in a loose-leaf format. The _Cub Scout Leader
>Handbook_ is already in this format, although full advantage of this has
>not been taken. Instead of issuing _for everyone_ complete new publications
>of various handbooks, why not put out change pages? Those who have
>already purchased, for example, the _Boy Scout Requirements Book_ would
>only have to purchase a packet of 6 or 7 pages to add or replace in
>their notebook (and at a lower cost -- A Scout is Thrifty). Those who so
>desire would still be able to purchase an entire book, also.
While, in theory, this is a good idea, there are certain publications where
this might not be appropriate, and I believe the Requirements book to be one
Loose-leaf publications are inherently more "fragile" than their bound
counterparts. Since this publication is very often carried about in the
field or frequently borrowed from a troop library I'm not sure that it would
stand up to its use and abuse in a loose-leaf format. Besides, it only
costs about $2 so it is not one of the more expensive publications. To ask
national to produce it in both bound AND loose-leaf format would be to
significantly increase production costs.
There are other publications where I would certainly agree with you, and
some of them are already released in loose-leaf format although, as you say,
they don't fully take advantage of this.
Bruce E. Cobern
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City