Eagle Board of Review
J. Hugh Sullivan (sull@MINDSPRING.COM)
Tue, 25 Nov 1997 18:53:19 -0600
There are two posts which challenge my statement about the uniforming of an
Eagle candidate when he appears before the Board. The challenges are based
on 2 points (1) Guidelines are not requirements (2) my philosophy adds to
the requirements and an appeal would win.
The guideline objection is based on the use of the word "should". Let's go
the book again - this time it is Webster's Seventh Collegiate. First,
"should" is the past of "shall" and a synonym of shall is "must". I'd say a
compelling argument can be made that the objectors are subtracting from the
there are 5 definitions for "should": one expresses condition, another
expresses obligation, propriety or expediency and another expresses what is
probable or expected, one is future and the last is to tone down a
statement. I choose "obligation" and "expected" instead of "tone down".
As far as appeals, I haven't had one in more than 25 years so I really don't
think this District should expect one.
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City