Scouts-L Mail Archive for April of 1999: Re: Annoyed at National
Re: Annoyed at National
Thu, 22 Apr 1999 12:34:52 -0400
Paul Thompson wrote:
> As long as I can recall, I have never seen anybody
> explain exactly who it is that runs the BSA. I have
> seen obscure references to "National", but no real
> explanation as to who that is.
> I want to know who the people are setting the rules.
To greatly oversimplify, "National" is autocratic because the people
who should be running it delegate their responsibility, to be
charitable about it, or abdicate it to be less so.
Every Council has at least three votes at the "National" level (I
think), and every Chartered Organization has a vote at the Council
level. Of the Chartered Organizations with which I am familiar, I
could count on the fingers of one hand those who take that vote
Of course the day-to-day operation has to be delegeted, but if BSA
is completely out of synch with the Chartered Organizations, which I
doubt, the mechanism is in place to change it. The catch is that it
would require getting off the couch.
Setting good policy is hard. Complaining about bad policy is easy.
(A generality, not a specific remark about the comments of Paul or
anyone else on the list.)
As I understand it, some of our Chartering partners feel strongly enough
about certain aspects of Scouting that they have "influenced" BSA.
Others could, too, as long as their wishes were shared by enough people
willing to act on them.
John Conley <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Ganeodiyo Lodge Adviser
Finger Lakes Council (NY)
*Better to build boys than mend men*