Re: Questions from my Troop&Patrol
(no name) ((no email))
Wed, 15 Jul 1998 14:41:32 +0000
"Bruce E. Cobern" <bec@PIPELINE.COM> writes:
>However, there are several points I would like to make concerning
>the current string of posts between Branden, Mike, and others.
>First of all, there was a specific question asked about how to
>wear the two sashes, OA and merit badge. Thus, people were
>attempting to answer a specific question.
And I Felt that I did a pretty good job in answering that question
with: 1) I can't think of an occasion that I would wear both to and
2)if that occasion ever did come up, here's what I would do (based
on observation, NOT from Scouting publications or books).
>Second, uniforming is one of the methods of Scouting and, as such,
>is a germane topic for this list. It is also important that
>uniforming be correct, or otherwise there would be no need for
>uniforming in the first place.
This, I too agree with in principle and in deed; however,
uniforming is subject to a lot of "local variations" and adjuncts
to this variation, which also should be discussed here. The recent
string dealing with just who gets to wear the Recruiter's strips is
a perfect example of such a "local variation or adjunct".
Again, I agree with Branden and with Jim Sleezer before him that
BOTH SASHES SHOULD NOT BE WORN TOGETHER FOR CORRECT UNIFORMING.
There's no disagreement there. There is a MINOR disagreement (and
that's all it is, because I respect both Jim and Branden's
leadership in Scouting and respect them as individuals to know that
their disagreement isn't with me, but what I suggested as "policy".
Once more, what I've stated is NOT policy unlike the other parts of
the posting to Anthony, which referenced BSA-specific booklets or
>Thus, IMO, it is also germane to discuss the proper way to
>wear the uniform, because we, as the adults (for those of us who
>are) and leaders should be setting the example. Thus we should
>know the proper way to wear the uniform and do so when we
>ourselves wear it.
And those discussions, as Bruce stated, SHOULD be a part of this
list (even if sometimes we go off into "who's book is most recent"
or "which book or authority is going to supercede which others").
That's natural, John, seeing how we're people with personalities
and different "slants" on the answering of a question or issue.
>Thirdly, and probably most importantly, this thread has become a
>discussion on the type of advice we should or shouldn't be
>providing on this list. When it comes to a topic where there IS a
>SPECIFIC answer (such as how to wear the two sashes at the same
>time - YOU DON'T), then the ONLY answer that should be appearing
>in reply to the question is the correct one.
This, I disagree with, Bruce. Not only should the "correct
answers" be given, but some information on alternatives to those
"correct answers". For instance, we talked here a short time back
about the Webmaster and APO Liaison Officer position patches. Both
of those patches are NOT OFFICIAL, yet, we did offer suggestions on
how those patches should be worn and under whose authority those
patches (and others that we've talked about here from time to time)
are to be worn. Merely saying "you can't" and leaving it at that
doesn't really answer the questions "Why can't I?" and "What if
someone TELLS me or INFORMS me that I should wear it?",
particuluarly some adult that may not be as informed as those we're
informing here in this forum...
>If the answer being given is, for some reason, other than
>the official policy answer, then that reply should be clearly
>labeled as such. (The official answer is thus and so, but many
>people do it this way because . . . ) It needs to be clear to the
>person who asked the question, and to others who might also wish
>the answer, what is policy and what is opinion.
And I guess that I've failed in making that distinction clear. I
thought that I did in the way that I responded to the question.
>In this case, what we should have seen is a couple of
>answers saying "you don't wear them at the same time" (allowing
>for differing propagation rates) and that would have been the end
>of it. Instead, what we get from several people, including at
>least one whose opinion is well respected on this list, is
That's what I stated at the start of my response to Anthony:
>then, when presented with the correct information, instead of
> saying a
>simple "thank you, I stand corrected" we get a long justification
> of why
>the wrong information really isn't wrong. (Sorry Mike, but your
> last post
>on this subject in reply to Branden was totally off the mark.)
> That is
>why we are currently having a discussion, not so much about the
> answer to
>the specific uniforming question, but about what kind of
> information we
>should be supplying.
>Bruce E. Cobern
(c) 1998 Mike Walton ("no such thing as strong coffee,...") (502) 827-9201
(settummanque, the blackeagle) http://dynasty.net/users/blkeagle
241 Fairview Dr., Henderson, KY 42420-4339 email@example.com
privately at firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com
---- FORWARD in service to youth ----
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City