Re: Uniforms on Board of Review members?
Steven G. Tyler (sgtyler@EROLS.COM)
Thu, 4 Dec 1997 07:59:09 -0500
Bruce E. Cobern wrote, in part:
> I think that I have said several times that I am as "guilty" as others, so
> that I am really talking about a "do as I say, not as I do" type of thing,
> talking about that ideal unit, as it were. But is a generally accepted fact
> that it is easier to fill an empty position than to find somebody to take
> over a position that appears to be getting done, even if it is being done by
> someone with many other jobs. Thus by doing both we might actually be
> discouraging others from stepping forward to "meet a need."
Just to be clear: I didn't intend to imply that your actions are wrong
in any way or to be critical, Bruce, nor do I contest that an "ideal"
unit would function as you say. I also agree that at times, a few
individuals can be so quick to shoulder the burden that others are
discouraged from participating, and that anyone (ourselves included!
;->) who is inclined to take on tasks from outside his/her "assigned"
area should be cautious for exactly the reasons you cite.
With that said, I am not persuaded that, on policy, function or any
other basis you or others have cited, committee members should refrain
from being uniformed. I do agree that MC uniforming should not be
required, even for BOR's, but I do think it should be encouraged,
particularly where the MC is in contact with the Scouts.
Sorry for the prolix, but I do not want this relatively minor "policy"
disagreement to obscure the fact that we are in general agreement on the
importance of adhering to the principles of Scouting; I suspect that,
faced with the same set of "real life" facts, we would be even closer in
application than our stated policy differences might suggest.
Steve on Cattail Creek
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City