scouts-l Mail Archive for May of 2000: Re: "Active" Definition
Tim Hewitt (thewitt@FAIRCHILDSEMI.COM
Mon May 22 2000 - 07:01:53 CDT
Mark Arend <mwarend@INTERNETWIS.COM> rwote:
> At 10:01 PM 5/21/00 -0400, Joseph A. Alessi wrote:
>> This is correct. The kcker is that, by including a member on your roster as
>> "active", you are certifying that they do, in fact, meet these requirements.
>> In other words, it's not that National takes the position that dues-paid -
>> active, they take that position that the unit said he was active when they
>> included him on the roster, so you can't change your mind after the fact.
> Of course you can--or you should be able to--because circumstances change.
> Or is mine the only Troop that has had kids recharter and then disappear a
> couple of months later?
The proper way to deal with a boy who is registered but not active is to
change his status with the proper paperwork. We are supposed to change the
boy to registered but inactive - and this is the way we "change our minds"
on a boy.
How many people actually do that? I suspect very few. I know we don't, and
when the time comes that a boy who has attended 2 meetings in six months
comes up to me and asks me to sign off his advancement in rank, I will not
sign it, but it will be Scout Spirit, not "active" that gets him cut.
The subjective advancement requirements are much harder to challenge. My
opinion on how a scout is doing in the troop is very different than
Nationals interpretation of the active requirement. If you want to be sure
to avoid a challenge on active vs inactive, you will need to change the
boy's status to registered and inactive at some point in that 6 month
Tim Hewitt, Scoutmaster
Troop 350, Old Orchard Beach, Maine