Talk:Order of the Arrow/Archive 2007

Archive 2000

←

Archive 2005

Archive 2006

Archive 2007

"Controversies"?

Guys,

I'd like to suggest that this sub-section be deleted from the O/A page, based on Wikipedia guidelines regarding controversies.

In the first place, the statements made are unsourced.

Secondly, while undoubtedly individual troops may have unfortunately elected unworthy scouts based on personal popularity and not scoutlike cheerful service, does this rise to the level of a major national debate? I think not, O/A election guidelines are quite clear and widely accepted. It is not the policy which is "controversial", but rather its supposed non-observance in some (unquantified) cases.

Likewise, regarding "secrecy", again it is settled policy that the O/A is not (and never has been) a secret society. Where is the raging "controversy" over this? Who disputes it? (Sources, please).

I'd propose that this sub-section be deleted if no one objects.

JGHowes 20:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I am not objecting to it being removed, but would like to know where the Wikipedia policy on this is. meamemg 03:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:NPOV#Undue weight JGHowes 20:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Sigh.....CQJ 02:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the secrecy part should stay (a quick Google will bear this out), but the popularity issue does not seem notable or prevalent. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've somewhat edited and relocated the texts regarding elections and secrecy to the relevant paragraphs dealing with those topics JGHowes 20:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Unami

Someone might want to put some info on here about Lodge 1, Unami. I'm not in it but i know of it.

Personally, I don't think it would be appropriate to include as it is covered on other pages, but I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on this. EightBall1989 21:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Organization Section

I found the article while searching for some history information, and in the process of reading the Organization section, some things popped out at me... since there seems to be a group already maintaining the page, I thought I'd make sure there was a consensus before changing anything.

• The claim "Most lodges also have other youth officers such as Vice Chiefs of service and inductions, to lead certain activities of the lodge." isn't citied/sourced, and while it is true for several lodges that I am familiar with, Most might be going a bit too far (not to mention that it isn't wonderful grammar)... perhaps it would be better worded along the lines of "Most lodges also have other youth officers with more specific duties. Examples of this might include a Vice Chief of Inductions responsible for overseeing the induction process, or a Vice Chief of Service responsible for coordinating Lodge service days"
• "OA activities, primarily meetings and service projects, are usually organized by the chapters." implies to me that the Chapters plan the events. In my experience, they often organize activities, but it might be better to explicitly state that they are in addition to those organized by National, the Region, the Section, and the Lodge.
• The section talking about conclaves is also strangely worded. I'm not sure how to fix it without completely re-writing the paragraph...
• I may be mistaken, but I believe that the statement "The sections are subdivisions of areas" is incorrect... I know that the Area is used in the naming scheme, but I don't believe the Area is recognized as being part of the OA organization...
• The statement "The Section Chiefs in turn elect from their number the Region Chiefs and Vice-Chiefs, and the National Chief and National Vice-Chief, who serve two-year terms." is almost entirely incorrect; there is no region vice chief position, and all three real positions (RC, NC, NVC) are all one-year terms.
• As part of the adults section, should the person responsible for appointing each adult be listed? (I believe it's Area Director -> Section Advisers, Scout Executive -> Lodge Adviser, Lodge Adviser -> Other Advisers)
• Side note - in the OA, any position containing the word Adviser spells it with an e

If anyone has any feedback, please let me know. If there isn't any negative feedback in the next little while, I'll make the above changes (if it slips my mind, could someone please make the changes?). I should be able to provide citation for any of the above from the FOG. --EightBall1989 19:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Note that the positions are lower case unless referring to some specific person. Region, area, lodge and chapter are also lower case unless referring to a specific one. National is uppercase since it always refers to the National Council or National Lodge, so it would be National vice-chief for example. You are correct on the spelling of adviser- again it is lower case unless specific (on the other hand Advisor for Venturing is always upper case). See the Language of Scouting for more help. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 20:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info on upper/lower case... I guess I've been doing that incorrectly that for a while now. I'll wait for another little bit just in case anyone has any issues with the updates. If not, I'll go ahead and make them. --EightBall1989 21:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

If you look in that guide under "C" there is a section on capitalization. I'm not sure whay we have adviser and Advisor, but that's the way it works.--Gadget850 ( Ed) 22:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I missed that section, thanks for pointing it out. As to the whole adviser/Advisor thing, I've heard a several different rationalizations, each as unlikely as the rest... like you said, it's just the way it works. --EightBall1989 23:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

All great ideas, except for the one about sections being subdivision's of the area. Page 15 of FOG mages this pretty clear to me. All sections are made up of lodges from one given area, making them subdivisions of areas. meamemg 21:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I took a look at the FOG and see what you mean. I'll see if I can come up with a better wording, but if not, I'll leave it as is. --EightBall1989 23:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like JGHowes made the changes discussed above. Thanks! A few more thoughts for this section:

• Should more information be added about the planing meeting election process? (I'd be happy to expand it if people think it would be worth including...)
• Would a diagram be appropriate? It seems like it might be reasonable to include given the nature of the section, but I'm not sure what the guidelines are when it comes to diagrams...
• What needs citation in there (I'd be happy to go through and add it if someone were to put the 'citation needed' tags in the right spots)? I'm really terrible when it comes to figuring out what needs a source and what doesn't...

--EightBall1989 00:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Election & Membership

As I understand it, in order for a youth to be elected, they have to be a registered member of a troop or team, so they must be under 18 at the time their election. They continue as "youth" member through 21, when they become adult members. Currently, the text suggests that people between 18 and 21 can be elected, but I do not know how that would be possible. Can someone document what the right answer is and fix the text? --NThurston 21:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Committee members and Assistant Scoutmasters under 21 are elected as youth. I don't have a source, but can look around if you'd like one. --EightBall1989 00:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It should be in the Order of the Arrow Handbook. I can't find my current copy. I think the 1986 version id did find is a bit out of date since it limits it to male adults only. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It's in the 'Guide for Officers and Advisers', page 20. Anyone registered with the BSA and under 21 is eligible for election by all others under 21.

 TkopeChief  To clarify, I am a Chapter Adviser and an ex has been Lodge Chief.

Any male adult under 21 must meet all youth requirements, ie, 1st class Scout as well as the camping requirement and preapproval by SM. Ref pgs. 20, 22, 25 in GOA (Guide for Officers and Adivsers)

Twenty-one and over is treated one of several ways (page 21), depending on their position. --EightBall1989 21:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

current lodges

If you need a fact on which two councils don't have OA:

Long Beach Council Pony Express Council —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flyingember (talk • contribs) 02:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

Appropriation of Native American culture

I concerned that there is no mention in the article of the racism that Order of the Arrow employs by using the Native American stereotype of "noble savages" to pursue its own goals. What do other people think? Dkreisst 07:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm part Indian and I'm honored that the BSA/OA chose America's native people to base its honor camper society upon. I've always seen the OA treat the culture with dignity and respect, never anything "savage" about it.Rlevse 10:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

What racism? I've never seen any ceremony or event that denigrates American Indian culture. Many years ago, the OA vetted the ceremony scripts with the elders of several tribes to ensure that we were not misusing any cultural references. Do you have any references that indicate any such misuse? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Rlevse, "noble savage" is what I was refering to. The "noble savage" stereotype is a bit more complicated than simply calling Native American people "savages," which is clearly degrading in a negative sense. As I've witnessed it, Order of the Arrow (and many other institutions) puts Native American identity on a pedestal. This is dehumanizing. It allows people to easily dismiss Native people as lazy, typically drunk (and "savage") when they do not fit the strong, silent, wise-person that they envision when they think of Native identity.

Gadget850, some define racism to be anything that doesn't allow a person full access to being treated as a human when identified by race (see my comment to Rlevse above). There are many other definitions of racism, I'm sure; and not all of them may cover essentializing stereotypes. To your question on references, no, I don't have any references immediately, but I'd be willing to spend some time researching. I didn't know that Order of the Arrow had contacted tribal elders to go over their use of pieces of culture. I'd be curious to know if they have followed up recently, or have a program that checks in with tribal people to make sure that their use of Native American culture is still appropriate. Mostly, I was supprised that it had not come up yet in the article, since I thought it was a common criticism of Order of the Arrow. Dkreisst 01:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard the term "noble savage" since I tried reading a Karl May novel. Randy can correct me if I am wrong, but ceremonies use scripts that cannot be deviated from once they are approved. Our OA lodge here in Virginia once had a dance team that was the only non-Indian team allowed to participate in Pow-wows along the east coast- sadly it is now defunct. I know of one OA member here who is Monacan. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Having performed every ceremony from call-out through Vigil, I can confirm that, with the exception of the call-out ceremony, which is not yet officially recognized, all ceremonies do have specific scripts which, according to National, are not to be deviated from. In regards to the recent follow up, I believe it was at the request of tribal leaders that the term 'regalia' was recently dropped in favor of 'costume'. --EightBall1989 22:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

NLCS, ArrowCorps5

Do we want to include any information about the National Conservation and Leadership Summit (or information from the new Strategic Plan unveiled at the event) held this past week or ArrowCorps5 (the service event being held next year)? If so, what level of detail would be appropriate? --EightBall1989 17:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

ArrowCorps5 actually has its own article ... so it should probably be mentioned here. --B 21:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Correction ... it did have its own article ... but that article was a copy/paste of a BSA press release. It probably should have another one ... just not a copy/paste. --B 21:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)