Re: [Philmont]: New Reservation System

A couple of (hopefully) pertinent comments.

As recently as the mid-90's, it was pretty easy to get into Philmont.
It got rapidly tougher in the late 90's. Why? In my opinion, three
reasons: First, the ever-increasing number of Scouts nationwide;
second, the broader realization that a major key to Senior Scout
retention is challenging high adventure activities; and third, the
InterNet, which really put Philmont on the map as never before, with
numerous diaries and other information opening peoples' eyes wide to
what was previously almost an insider's secret.

Again in my opinion, the reason why there has been very little discourse
on the new reservation system is because we know almost nothing about
the selection criteria. Philmont has played this one very close to the
vest, having well learned the lessons from the previous selection
protocols, that any and every flaw in whatever system would be endlessly
criticized and second-guessed by the ever-increasing legions of the
unsuccessful. Other than some general grousing, it's hard to bitch when
you have no idea of what they're doing and/or not doing. Darts at 10
feet, perhaps? Your guess is as good as anyone's.

If I had to pick two issues that were (and remain) the keys to the
various critiques that were offered over the past 5 years, they would be
A) Giving some weighted preference to applicants who lost out, with
increasing preference for each continuous year in a row they lost out;
and B) Taking into account the size of a Unit, with applications also
being weighted based on the number of registered, age-eligible Scouts in
the applying Unit. There were about a half-dozen or so lottery schemes
proposed on this and the previous Philmont list-server (including one
from myself), all basically being variations on the above themes. I
personally feel this is still the way to go - perhaps because I have a
nagging sense that Philmont is using a straight up, unweighted, and
purely random selection that treats every applicant identically,
regardless of how long they've been trying to win a slot, or how large
they are. But I have no proof, so doubtless it's just paranoia or sour
grapes on my part, take your pick.

Councils are not given priority per se. Philmont sets aside a certain
percentage of the availble slots for Council Contingents. The number of
slots per Council is based on many years of negotiations and actual
attendance figures. Here in National Cap, for example, we have been
sending Council Contingents to Philmont for over 50 years, and have
settled (I believe) on 12 Crews per year, down from 16. If the Council
had to keep returning unused Crew slots, Philmont would eventually ask
us to cut back to 8 Crews. If we were instead constantly sitting on a
large waiting list, the Council would try to get back up to 16 Crews.
That might take years to do, especially nowadays.

Many Councils (a surprisingly large percentage, actually) never ask for
a Council Contingent. Others request only small numbers of slots,
commensurate with the level of interest. Off the top of my head, maybe
two dozen Councils have either one mega-Contingent (12 - 20 Crews all on
one date), or multiple small Contingents (8 - 16 Crews spread over
several dates). Other Councils combine to form Contingents (for
example, when I came as a Scout, both times it was one Contingent made
up from three neighboring Councils).

Anyway, it is important to realize that Councils are not competing
directly against Units, except in general terms. Rather, they are more
competing against each other, and changes are slow coming.

Finally, the every other year restriction. This pertains ONLY to
individual Units going on their own. It does not pertain to Units going
with their Council Contingents. HOWEVER (and I believe with Philmont's
encouragement), *most* Councils have instituted the same restrictions
within their own Contingents. But not all. In addition, there are no
restrictions on Scouts or adults going provisionally, either with their
own Council or with whoever else they can find, literally nationwide.
So it is indeed possible for people to go to Philmont year after year in
"apparent" violation of the every other year restriction. They are
within the letter of the law, if not the spirit. That is yet another
issue for Philmont to address some day, if they so choose.

The final answer, of course, hasn't changed in the ten years since
getting into Philmont became an issue - as has been discussed at some
point almost every year, we need another Philmont. Another night's
(repeat) topic, perhaps....

- Dr. Bob

-------------------------------------------------------
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.
-------------------------------------------------------

 
Received on Mon Nov 1 22:14:58 2004