RE: [Philmont] - Stoves and Uniforms

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view	Attachment view

From: Norwood, Anthony (Anthony.Norwood@usdoj.gov)
Date: Mon Nov 04 2002 - 08:56:55 CST

Next message: Trekrdon@aol.com: "Re: Re: [Philmont]: stoves"
Previous message: Dewey Hemphill: "[Philmont]: Moving on...."

Wow.

If you are just looking for a recommendation, I recommend the Coleman stoves that use the PowerMax fuel. They are easy to operate, simmer well and have no "spurting" liquids. We used PowerMax stoves last August and loved them. We had a liquid fuel stove as a backup and it was messy and more difficult to operate.

I also recommend that your crew not wear the Class A uniform on the trail. Remember "cotton kills." The epaulets would not sit well under a pack and someone worked hard to sew on all those patches. Those shirts are not suited for the trail and don't need that kind of wear and tear. Of course, I am from the unusual kind of troop where I as scoutmaster have a challenge to get the SPL and the ASPL to even tuck in their shirts and button them up. I know there are more typical troops out there where everyone has a backup, freshly laundered uniform shirt.

SM Tony

-----Original Message-----
From: philmont-request@troop47.com [mailto:philmont-request@troop47.com]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 1:02 AM
To: Philmont
Subject: [Philmont] - philmont Digest - V01 #410

philmont Digest Mon, 04 Nov 2002 00:02:10 -0600 V01 #410

Today's topics:
     'Call for submissions, photos, and free backpack'
     'Re: [Philmont]: stoves'
     'Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling'
     'Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling'
     'Re: [Philmont]: stoves'
     'Re: [Philmont]: stoves'
     'RE: [Philmont]: stoves'
     'Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling'
     'Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling'
     'Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling'

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 09:51:32 -0500
From: Lorie McGraw <lmcgraw@sc.rr.com>
Subject: Call for submissions, photos, and free backpack

--=======2B48422E=======
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-333A39BB; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi, all
sorry for the cross-post

Go to www.scoutingdigest.com/sc and register for a free Alps Mountaineering
Internal Frame Backpack being given away by American Scouting Digest. This
is a very nice pack. The first drawing is this Wednesday (Nov. 6). They
will be giving away one per week for the next 5 weeks. No purchase
necessary.There is a free Dutch Oven recipe there, too.

American Scouting Digest is also interested in photos (with releases),
stories, and articles about your Scouting (Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts)
Experiences. If you do any professional photography, cartooning, or
artwork, the magazine is looking for freelancers for that as well. The
magazine says they would prefer to use Scouters in those positions and they
asked me to pass this on to you all. Contact
mailto:editor@scoutingdigest.com if you think you can help fill the bill.

This is a brand new magazine and the first issue will be coming out in January.
Check back as they add more to the site.
Please pass this on to your Scouting Friends.

Cheers
Lorie McGraw
Columbia SC
Troop 91
www.troop91bsa.org
Etowah Creek District
www.etowahcreek.com
I know God will not give me anything I can't handle.
I just wish that He didn't trust me so much. - Mother Teresa

--=======2B48422E=======--

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 10:45:47 -0700
From: Mike Bingley <mbingley@telusplanet.net>
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: stoves

99%
> of the people in the world, including myself, use and take apart the MSR
> stoves incorrectly. This spurts fuel either in your face or on the ground
> when you are disassembling the stove. Neither is good for you or the
> environment.

Okay, now I'm curious - how do you get an msr to not do that? I've been
trying with my dragonfly for the past 4 years and it just doesn't seem to
happen.

Mike

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 13:53:29 -0500
From: "Dr. Bob Klein" <drbob@troop111.org>
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling

Nothing like coming home from a campout to a personal attack.

Abstracting comments out of context in an effort to twist their meaning
and score points off them is an intellectually dishonest form of
discourse that is better suited to political advertisements and the
editorial pages of the Washington Post - not here.

I stand by my remarks, taken as a whole. I believe the spirit and
intent of those comments - which addressed an ongoing debate about the
merits of uniforming for travelling to and from Philmont - are both
quite clear and internally consistent.

- Dr. Bob Klein, SM-111, Arlington, VA

Dan Kurtenbach wrote:

> Bob Klein wrote:
>
>
>>I may start a firestorm on this next comment, but I personally would
>>urge you in the stongest possible terms to NOT take or use your Scout
>>Uniforms on the trail. Although they were once the standard for trail
>>use at Philmont, that was pre-1970 with the uniforms of that time. The
>>modern version is very poorly suited for wilderness outdoor use (despite
>>the pretty pictures in the various official literature, or the
>>ridiculous testimonials that were common in Boy's Life or Scouting
>>Magazine a few years back - thankfully now rarely seen
>>
>
> Then Bob wrote:
>
>
>>Units that wear full Class A's all
>>the time have no difficulties doing so while on travel to Philmont or
>>elsewhere. Units that have sunk to some lower standard . . . I think
>>Scouts in mufti look like crap.
>>
>
> So, Bob, why is "some lower standard" not only okay, but strongly
> recommended on the trail, where Scouting really happens? After all, you
> wrote:
>
>
>>Personally, I DO believe that the
>>uniform is an inherent character building facet of modern Scouting (and
>>check that 10th point of the Scout Law too), and that is one of the
>>primary reasons why Troop 111 is a fully uniformed outfit.
>>
>
> Does character building stop at the trailhead? If you can actually come up
> with some rationale for looking "like crap" on the trail, particularly when
> BSA shows Scouts doing *everything* in Class A uniforms in so much of their
> literature, and BSA and many experienced Scouters swear that the full
> uniform works well for *all* Scouting activities, should not that rationale
> apply across the board? Even if you believe that the current Scout uniform
> is not well-suited for the wilderness, wouldn't it build character in your
> Scouts, and particularly promote the 10th *and* 11th points of the Scout
> Law, to wear full Class A uniforms in the wilderness anyway? Wouldn't that
> be a good tool for building Eagle Scouts?
>
> When you refer to "mufti," are you including the official BSA activity
> uniform (Scout shorts or pants with a Troop or camp T-shirt)? Is the
> official activity uniform "some lower standard"?
>
> I guess I'm just confused by your thinking here. And, oh yes, by something
> else you said:
>
>
>>I like my Unit to look sharp
>>
>
> What does what *you* like have to do with it? Aren't Scoutmasters giving in
> to their personal uniforming preferences exactly what you so sharply
> criticized?
>
> Dan Kurtenbach
> Fairfax, VA

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 13:58:18 -0500
From: "Dr. Bob Klein" <drbob@troop111.org>
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling

Sorry I didn't read this first. You are quite correct - and I had
intended to "move on" in any case.

Del Wilson wrote:

> Before a firestorm starts, I would just like to say this: Each person
> on this list has a right to their opinion and should feel free to post
> it. However, I don't think that the best way to to this is to go
> through and personally attack specific things that have been said. "so
> Bob..." Teenage boys today are facing the toughest battles ever and
> they don't need leaders that act like this. Most of you guys are scout
> leaders and you need to act like it. Why don't we just leave the whole
> "uniform traveling" topic and go on to better issues- it has had it's
> time. Read that last line carefully and let me repeat. Why don't we
> just leave the whole "uniform traveling" topic and go on to better
> issues-it has had it's time.
>
> -Del Wilson

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 12:43:04 -0700
From: "Jim Moss" <BSARecLaw@Earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: stoves

Option 1: Buy the Nova.

Option 2: There is a complicated system of lift the stove off the ground and
turning it upside down, flame still going until no more fuel comes through
the fuel tube. Then you have to bleed off the pressure then take apart.

It's easier just to spurt fuel.

Jim

PO Box 2656
Silverthorne, CO 80498-2656
303-807-2275
JHMoss@Earthlink.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Bingley" <mbingley@telusplanet.net>
To: "Multiple recipients of list philmont" <philmont@troop47.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: stoves

> 99%
> > of the people in the world, including myself, use and take apart the MSR
> > stoves incorrectly. This spurts fuel either in your face or on the
ground
> > when you are disassembling the stove. Neither is good for you or the
> > environment.
>
> Okay, now I'm curious - how do you get an msr to not do that? I've been
> trying with my dragonfly for the past 4 years and it just doesn't seem to
> happen.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Scouting E-mail Discussion Lists @ usscouts.org
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe at http://usscouts.org/lists/
> Listserv Commands at http://usscouts.org/lists/lc.asp
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Send listserv commands to: listserv@troop47.com
> Send postings to: philmont@troop47.com
> List FAQ found at: http://usscouts.org/lists/faq.asp
> List Administrator: philmont_owner@troop47.com
> -------------------------------------------------------
> As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow
> Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy,
> loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient,
> cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 16:49:54 EST
From: Johnlebl@aol.com
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: stoves

--part1_113.1a0bb236.2af6f402_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 11/03/2002 1:49:56 PM Central Standard Time,
BSARecLaw@Earthlink.net writes:

> Option 2: There is a complicated system of lift the stove off the ground and
> turning it upside down, flame still going until no more fuel comes through
> the fuel tube. Then you have to bleed off the pressure then take apart.
>
> It's easier just to spurt fuel.
>
> Jim
>

I'll have to add a little jab here.

Since my SVEA123 and Coleman 533 have built in tanks, when I turn off the
valve, it's off. I don't have to disconnect anything, therefore there is no
spurting of fuel from the disconnected parts.

The ideal stove for Philmont would be somewhere inbetween the weight and heat
output of the above stoves. The Coleman 400 fits in there, but the choice is
yours.

The SVEA123 and Coleman 533 fill my needs quite well.

I looked up the Brunton Optimus Nova stove. What I like the most about it is
the price, $129.00. Staijnless steel you say? Hmmmmmmm!

Right next to it is the Brunton Optimus SVEA 123. What I like most about it
is it's dependability.

If only a manufacturer would make a SVEA 456 or even a 789, meaning a larger
model which put out more BTU's, then that my friends would be a STOVE!

John LeBlanc

--part1_113.1a0bb236.2af6f402_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>In a message dated 11/03/2002 1:49:56 PM Central Standard Time, BSARecLaw@Earthlink.net writes: 
 
 
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Option 2: There is a complicated system of lift the stove off the ground and 
turning it upside down, flame still going until no more fuel comes through 
the fuel tube.  Then you have to bleed off the pressure then take apart. 
 
It's easier just to spurt fuel. 
 
Jim 
</BLOCKQUOTE> 
 
I'll have to add a little jab here. 
 
Since my SVEA123 and Coleman 533 have built in tanks, when I turn off the valve, it's off.  I don't have to disconnect anything, therefore there is no spurting of fuel from the disconnected parts. 
 
The ideal stove for Philmont would be somewhere inbetween the weight and heat output of the above stoves.  The Coleman 400 fits in there, but the choice is yours. 
 
The SVEA123 and Coleman 533 fill my needs quite well. 
 
I looked up the Brunton Optimus Nova stove.  What I like the most about it is the price, $129.00.  Staijnless steel you say?  Hmmmmmmm! 
 
Right next to it is the Brunton Optimus SVEA 123.  What I like most about it is it's dependability. 
 
If only a manufacturer would make a SVEA 456 or even a 789, meaning a larger model which put out more BTU's, then that my friends would be a STOVE! 
 
John LeBlanc</HTML>

--part1_113.1a0bb236.2af6f402_boundary--

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:06:58 -0500
From: "Dave Edelman" <dedelman@iname.com>
Subject: RE: [Philmont]: stoves

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00A0_01C2836C.2F5C25F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

John,

As you probably remember from one of my previous postings, I'm a true
believer in the 123. This past summer we used a pair of them on our trek.
They are simple, hot and easy to overhaul if the need arises. But I did post
that previously so why am I chiming in now? (Okay, please don't point out
the obvious :-) ) Because I've actually seen the stove that you yearn for.
In my time in the middle east, I was introduced to something called a
"Primus" These were left over British Army field stoves that had the head of
a 123 (just double the size) brazed onto a 14" diameter spherical brass
container. The container had a fill spout with an overpressure relief valve
just like the 123 and the whole thing sat inside a metal wind shield that
also served as the support for the pot that sat on a grate above. The thing
was a blast furnace!

My cousin used the thing on a regular basis for camping (jeep not
backpacking) and the Bedouins used them extensively. The burned naphtha and
just about anything else short of camel dung. The also had this habit of
occasionally blowing up and when that happened, it was no joke. We treated a
pretty good number of these types of injuries at our burn center.

Which leads me to my last point. I have seen mishaps with both liquid fuel
and with cylinders (gas over liquid) they are not a lot of fun. Your crews
need to learn not just how to use a stove but also what to do when things go
wrong.

--Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-philmont@troop47.com [mailto:owner-philmont@troop47.com]On
Behalf Of Johnlebl@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 4:50 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list philmont
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: stoves

In a message dated 11/03/2002 1:49:56 PM Central Standard Time,
BSARecLaw@Earthlink.net writes:

It's easier just to spurt fuel.

Jim

I'll have to add a little jab here.

Since my SVEA123 and Coleman 533 have built in tanks, when I turn off the
valve, it's off. I don't have to disconnect anything, therefore there is no
spurting of fuel from the disconnected parts.

The ideal stove for Philmont would be somewhere inbetween the weight and
heat output of the above stoves. The Coleman 400 fits in there, but the
choice is yours.

The SVEA123 and Coleman 533 fill my needs quite well.

I looked up the Brunton Optimus Nova stove. What I like the most about it
is the price, $129.00. Staijnless steel you say? Hmmmmmmm!

Right next to it is the Brunton Optimus SVEA 123. What I like most about it
is it's dependability.

If only a manufacturer would make a SVEA 456 or even a 789, meaning a larger
model which put out more BTU's, then that my friends would be a STOVE!

John LeBlanc

------=_NextPart_000_00A0_01C2836C.2F5C25F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

John,<o:p></o:p></fon=
t>

As you probably remember from one of my =
previous
postings, I’m a true believer in the 123. This past summer we used =
a pair of
them on our trek. They are simple, hot and easy to overhaul if the need =
arises.
But I did post that previously so why am I chiming in now? (Okay, please =
don’t
point out the obvious J<=
/span> ) Because =
I’ve actually
seen the stove that you yearn for. In my time in the middle east, I was
introduced to something called a “Primus” These were left =
over British Army
field stoves that had the head of a 123 (just double the size) brazed =
onto a 14”
diameter spherical brass container. The container had a fill spout with =
an
overpressure relief valve just like the 123 and the whole thing sat =
inside a
metal wind shield that also served as the support for the pot that sat =
on a
grate above. The thing was a blast =
furnace!<o:p></o:p>

My cousin used the thing on a regular basis =
for
camping (jeep not backpacking) and the Bedouins used them extensively. =
The
burned naphtha and just about anything else short of camel dung. The =
also had
this habit of occasionally blowing up and when that happened, it was no =
joke.
We treated a pretty good number of these types of injuries at our burn =
center.<o:p></o:p>

Which leads me to my last point. I have seen =
mishaps
with both liquid fuel and with cylinders (gas over liquid) they are not =
a lot
of fun. Your crews need to learn not just how to use a stove but also =
what to
do when things go wrong. <o:p></o:p>

<!=
[if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

-----Original
Message----- 
From: =
owner-philmont@troop47.com
[mailto:owner-philmont@troop47.com]On Behalf
Of Johnlebl@aol.com 
Sent: Sunday, November =
03, 2002
4:50 PM 
To: Multiple recipients =
of list
philmont 
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: =
stoves

<![if =
!supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>

In a
message dated 11/03/2002 1:49:56 PM Central Standard Time,
BSARecLaw@Earthlink.net writes: 
 
 
<![if !supportLineBreakNewLine]> 
<![endif]><o:p></o:p>

Option
2: There is a complicated system of lift the stove off the ground =
and 
turning it upside down, flame still going until no more fuel comes =
through 
the fuel tube.  Then you have to bleed off the pressure then take =
apart. 
 
It's easier just to spurt fuel. 
 
Jim<o:p></o:p=
>

</div>

I'll have to add a little jab here. 
 
Since my SVEA123 and Coleman 533 have built in tanks, when I turn off =
the
valve, it's off.  I don't have to disconnect anything, therefore =
there is
no spurting of fuel from the disconnected parts. 
 
The ideal stove for Philmont would be somewhere inbetween the weight and =
heat
output of the above stoves.  The Coleman 400 fits in there, but the =
choice
is yours. 
 
The SVEA123 and Coleman 533 fill my needs quite well. 
 
I looked up the Brunton Optimus Nova stove.  What I like the most =
about it
is the price, $129.00.  Staijnless steel you say?  =
Hmmmmmmm! 
 
Right next to it is the Brunton Optimus SVEA 123.  What I like most =
about
it is it's dependability. 
 
If only a manufacturer would make a SVEA 456 or even a 789, meaning a =
larger
model which put out more BTU's, then that my friends would be a =
STOVE! 
 
John LeBlanc<o:p></o:p>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------=_NextPart_000_00A0_01C2836C.2F5C25F0--

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:37:07 -0500
From: "Dan Kurtenbach" <danielkurtenbach@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling

Hmmm. I guess I missed the definition of "personal attack." I thought it
had something to do with going after the physical or mental characteristics
of a person, or especially questioning an individual's character -- you
know, something like stating that someone has sunk to lower standards, or is
doing something un-Scoutlike. I didn't realize that, on this list at least,
"personal attack" refers to disagreement with the logic, reasonableness, or
consistency of an opinion stated in a public forum. For not realizing the
breadth of the definition here, I sincerely apologize.

However, I stand by my statements, and my questions. I don't know how
anyone can reconcile the view that full Class A uniform is the only way to
go (including on trips to and from Philmont) *because it is an important
tool to build character*, with the view that you should never wear it on the
trail. I don't understand how you can be a huge advocate of the full
uniform as an important piece of what BSA is doing, but apparently discount
the official BSA "activity" uniform as belonging to a "lower standard," and
also discount what BSA itself says about the usefulness of the full uniform.
I don't understand how someone who says the full uniform is not suitable for
the trail can nevertheless maintain a high standard, while someone who says
the full uniform is not suitable for the trail *or* for certain other
activities has "sunk to some lower standard." I don't understand how it is
commendable for a Scoutmaster to say that he likes his Scouts dressed in
full uniform and looking "sharp," but a Scoutmaster who says he likes his
Scouts to wear a comfortable, practical uniform is making excuses, is timid,
or is worn down. There's nothing here taken out of context. It's all in
the postings.

As for what to wear when traveling to Philmont, certainly it should be the
BSA uniform. The uniform is a fundamental, important component of our
program. It is one of the Eight Methods. But I see no reason why the trips
to and from Philmont have to be *all* full field uniform, *all* the time. I
see no reason why the official BSA outdoor/activity uniform would not be
appropriate attire for much of the trip. Perhaps it will not be as
recognizable to the public as the field uniform; perhaps it will not open as
many doors as the field uniform -- those are factors that the Crew will have
to weigh when making their decision. Just as a Scout doesn't do things for
the purpose of getting tips or rewards, he doesn't do something for the
purpose of favorable publicity.

Dan Kurtenbach
Fairfax, VA
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BSA-Uniforms

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 20:29:08 -0500
From: "kevin shanahan" <kevinshanahan@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling

This list is for us to discuss ideas and make suggestions for each of us
to consider in our trek at Philmont. I see no reason to defend this already
over discussed topic. If you have nothing further to add I would like to ask
you to stop making postings in a effort to prove ourselves right and someone
else wrong. Personal attacks are not necessary nor are implied challenges to
someones integrity. Some perfer the uniform and understand its purpose in
scouting and others disagree that is their perogotive no matter how much you
agree or disagree Units will do what their leaders deem appropriate. If you
don't like it, try a different organization and quit wasting the time of the
discussion list arguing about whats already been discussed. A Scout is
Courteous.
Yours In Scouting,

Kevin Shanahan
kevinshanahan@hotmail.com
919 460 8606

>From: "Dan Kurtenbach" <danielkurtenbach@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: philmont@troop47.com
>To: Multiple recipients of list philmont <philmont@troop47.com>
>Subject: Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling
>Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 19:37:07 -0500
>
>Hmmm. I guess I missed the definition of "personal attack." I thought it
>had something to do with going after the physical or mental characteristics
>of a person, or especially questioning an individual's character -- you
>know, something like stating that someone has sunk to lower standards, or
>is
>doing something un-Scoutlike. I didn't realize that, on this list at
>least,
>"personal attack" refers to disagreement with the logic, reasonableness,
>or
>consistency of an opinion stated in a public forum. For not realizing the
>breadth of the definition here, I sincerely apologize.
>
>However, I stand by my statements, and my questions. I don't know how
>anyone can reconcile the view that full Class A uniform is the only way to
>go (including on trips to and from Philmont) *because it is an important
>tool to build character*, with the view that you should never wear it on
>the
>trail. I don't understand how you can be a huge advocate of the full
>uniform as an important piece of what BSA is doing, but apparently discount
>the official BSA "activity" uniform as belonging to a "lower standard," and
>also discount what BSA itself says about the usefulness of the full
>uniform.
>I don't understand how someone who says the full uniform is not suitable
>for
>the trail can nevertheless maintain a high standard, while someone who says
>the full uniform is not suitable for the trail *or* for certain other
>activities has "sunk to some lower standard." I don't understand how it is
>commendable for a Scoutmaster to say that he likes his Scouts dressed in
>full uniform and looking "sharp," but a Scoutmaster who says he likes his
>Scouts to wear a comfortable, practical uniform is making excuses, is
>timid,
>or is worn down. There's nothing here taken out of context. It's all in
>the postings.
>
>As for what to wear when traveling to Philmont, certainly it should be the
>BSA uniform. The uniform is a fundamental, important component of our
>program. It is one of the Eight Methods. But I see no reason why the
>trips
>to and from Philmont have to be *all* full field uniform, *all* the time.
>I
>see no reason why the official BSA outdoor/activity uniform would not be
>appropriate attire for much of the trip. Perhaps it will not be as
>recognizable to the public as the field uniform; perhaps it will not open
>as
>many doors as the field uniform -- those are factors that the Crew will
>have
>to weigh when making their decision. Just as a Scout doesn't do things for
>the purpose of getting tips or rewards, he doesn't do something for the
>purpose of favorable publicity.
>
>Dan Kurtenbach
>Fairfax, VA
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BSA-Uniforms
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>Scouting E-mail Discussion Lists @ usscouts.org
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe at http://usscouts.org/lists/
>Listserv Commands at http://usscouts.org/lists/lc.asp
>-------------------------------------------------------
>Send listserv commands to: listserv@troop47.com
>Send postings to: philmont@troop47.com
>List FAQ found at: http://usscouts.org/lists/faq.asp
>List Administrator: philmont_owner@troop47.com
>-------------------------------------------------------
>As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow
>Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy,
>loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient,
>cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
>-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Unlimited Internet access -- and 2 months free! Try MSN.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/2monthsfree.asp

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 22:16:28 EST
From: KKoloff@aol.com
Subject: Re: [Philmont]: uniform traveling

--part1_b4.147c1caf.2af7408c_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow
> Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy,
> loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient,
> cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent

This is at the end of every listservermailing, lets all try to adhere
to it, keep it civil, and thanks.

Kevin Koloff
good ole Oklahoma!

--part1_b4.147c1caf.2af7408c_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML> 
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow 
Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy, 
loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, 
cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent</BLOCKQUOTE> 
 
       This is at the end of every listservermailing, lets all try to adhere to it, keep it civil, and thanks. 
 
Kevin Koloff 
good ole Oklahoma! 
</HTML>
--part1_b4.147c1caf.2af7408c_boundary--

------------------------------

End of philmont Digest V01 #410
*******************************

-------------------------------------------------------
Scouting E-mail Discussion Lists @ usscouts.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe at http://usscouts.org/lists/
Listserv Commands at http://usscouts.org/lists/lc.asp
-------------------------------------------------------
Send listserv commands to: listserv@troop47.com
Send postings to: philmont@troop47.com
List FAQ found at: http://usscouts.org/lists/faq.asp
List Administrator: philmont_owner@troop47.com
-------------------------------------------------------
As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow
Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy,
loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient,
cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent.
-------------------------------------------------------

Next message: Trekrdon@aol.com: "Re: Re: [Philmont]: stoves"
Previous message: Dewey Hemphill: "[Philmont]: Moving on...."

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view	Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Thu Mar 13 2003 - 10:38:38 CST