BDPT00

They're all playing from the same sheet of music, but attitudes vary greatly.  Unless he staffs (NYLT and Wood Badge) are participant focused, and have a servant leadership mentality, the course will fall short of expectations.  If the staffs are hung up on their own importance, they will provide a lesser quality program.  We read comments here all the time regarding aloof Wood badge staffers.  That's because they are staff focused instead of participant focused.  Takes a long time to change that culture.

I agree with Stosh.  Scouting provides an opportunity to experience success.  These kids get tossed aside all the time.  They try hard to keep up (they just want to be 'normal,' and that's hard work for them).  They experience failure and rejection every day.  Scouting provides a safe place to fail and try again (if the unit plays the game the way it should be played).  With guidance and reassurance, they will gain confidence, security, and comfort.  Give them a chance.  They're just wired a little differently, but they can still get the job done.  Plenty of room for growth, and self-improvement for all of us. 

The moving a person is from a long time ago (pre 1990).  If you took the course since then, it would have been a 'local tradition' that was carried over by someone who still saw value in it. 

There certainly could be bluffing (lying would be more accurate).  Administrating the game can be difficult, as can the debrief.  There's a lot that can go wrong, and that can be disastrous.  It's risky, and I'm not a fan.  To me, the most significant thing is still the attitude of the staff.  If they think it's fun to watch people squirm, or they want to see some drama, then they totally don't understand what being a staff member is all about.  Servant leadership requires empathy with/for the patrol members.  In Scouting, we're accustomed to having fun.  This game isn't fun for those playing it, and it shouldn't be fun for those watching it either.  The game is awkward in a Scouting setting, and if it doesn't go well, it serves no purpose.   

Yes.  It says field uniform.

I was told I can wear my parent arrow of light pin, is this true?

Sure you can.  But it doesn't go on your uniform (It's for civilian wear).  I've often seen advancement pins worn on a ribbon that can be affixed to the uniform shirt or worn around the neck on special occasions (Blue & Gold, Courts of Honor).  For normal uniform wear, it's not appropriate (and there's no 'proper' place to put it). 

That's a shame.  Sounds like there's more than one thing wrong there.  Somebody should definitely contact you.  I'd be very surprised if they don't.  Keep us posted on that one. 

Yes, it can be a tough game, and yes, it takes a talented staff to pull it off effectively.  Not an easy task.  I've seen good and bad, and I think the game is too risky to be handled by 'amateurs.'  It can turn sour in a hurry, and the point is easily lost or misinterpreted.  If the staff gets excited about the game, or think it's fun, then they're totally out of touch with what's going on.  I've seen that, too. 

Who cares?

Stosh wrote:

Tahawk is correct.  Other than common sense, there is no reason why you can't wear your uniform and have your cocktail.  The uniform doesn't matter.  What does matter though (with or without the uniform) is if Scouts are present. 

What's fuzzy logic got to do with money vs. placement?

This has now become two different subjects.  One is based upon affordability and mixing of uniform and non-uniform wearing apparel.  The other subject has to do with knowingly (or often just ignorance of the guidelines) wearing pins (and patches and sashes) in the wrong place.  Two entirely different things with different reasons.    

Safety/security/legal mandates:  better care.

Pins on shirt pocket:  don't care.

Oldisnewagain,

One would have to look hard to fine me using the word 'judge,' and equally hard to find criticism of a Scout.  I'm talking to Scouters here.

Gumbymaster,

One would, likewise, have to look hard to find ridicule of dated uniforms.

It appears that we're trying pretty hard to find fault with the premise that it's our responsibility to set the example.  Gumbymaster mentioned that 'uniform' is one of our Methods.  Personally, I always try to keep the Aims of Scouting at the forefront, as well as trying to use the Methods.  It's not always easy, but we have a pretty simple mantra we go by ... I do my best.  In fact, I frequently raise my right hand and promise to do just that.  I would submit that that means not cutting corners or trying desperately to find ways to subvert those Methods.  The Handbooks and Guidebooks are there to help us do it.  Sometimes they probably get in the way of having some fun, but they mean well.  So do I.  

I remember back in college days when a guy from our school ended up in court because he was wearing a patch incorrectly.  It happened to be an upside down U.S. flag on the backside of his jeans.  It was his form of protest, and it didn't go over well with the uniform police.  There are limits.  Now with more liberal interpretations of our first amendment, he'd probably be ok because he was expressing himself.  Ok, yes, until he walks into the wrong bar. 

I find this pushback amusing.  We live in a society that is becoming more and more anything goes.  Yet in the grown up world, there are standards for what people wear (call it a dress code if you wish).  Businessmen and women, government officials, bankers, lawyers, clergy, morticians, etc.  When we go to a funeral, a wedding, or a business call, it's customary to concern ourselves with what we think is appropriate to wear.  Then we have uniform services: military, police, many labor positions (drivers, mechanics, food service) and medical staff (and let's not forget sports teams and some private schools).  Kids and casual wear are all over the map, and that's just fine.  Scouting happens to fall in the uniformed category.  Modifications to uniforms in other organizations are frowned upon (including penalties to go with it).  I don't understand why those who don't care about how they look find pleasure in discrediting those who do.  In recent posts, in fact, it's basically come down to name-calling and ridicule.  I don't know or care what a rolling doughnut is, but those who concern themselves with following directions shouldn't be bashed by those who take pleasure in openly ignoring them.  We're given guides to where patches and sashes go.  If I'm going to put a patch on a shirt, I'd like to put it in the correct position.  It either matters or it doesn't.  It matters to me.  Sorry I'm not up to the standards of those who think it doesn't matter or just don't care.  The argument I hear is that uniforming is the only thing the 'police' care about.  That's totally false where I'm from.  Do you have a better argument than that?  The next time you think it doesn't matter, try wearing a ragged t-shirt and flip-flops to a funeral.  Then report back to us.  I'll wait here.     

Trying to find loopholes in the Insignia Guide isn't what this should be about.  If a mentor pin isn't in the insignia guide, then it doesn't go on a uniform.  And if it does, where does it go?  My biggest problem with mentor pins is when the mentor shows up at a court of honor (or district, or council dinner, or wherever), and he wears 10 mentor pins, who is it all about?  If that mentor had any humility, he'd show up at and ECOH with no mentor pins.  If he gets one, it would be special, instead of just another notch on his belt.  I used to wear more stuff on my uniform than I would now.  I take my guidance from General Eisenhower.  He wore one row of ribbons.  When the occasion called for it, I'm sure he'd wear more, but the pictures we see are pretty dressed-down.  I happen to like that.  Seeing multiple pins on a collar, or a pocket flap overflowing with mentor pins is a huge turn off for me.  That's obviously a personal opinion, but I'm stickin' with it. 

We all have things we're proud of, and some of us would like to display them on something seen in public.  Fine.  Blood donor or 'I voted' stickers I would consider OK for that day.  That's what they're for.  As a Scoutmaster, I might wear a sticker like that if it were part of a Scoutmaster's Minute.  Then it's gone.  Ribbons with pins for our kids' accomplishments are fine with me for a unit's court of honor.  Then they come off.  A fathers or mothers pin or a mentor pin (and those district or council pins) I'd think fine to wear when presented.  Then they come off.  A souvenir pin from a vacation place given to me by a Cub I'd see as OK for that meeting.  Then it comes off.  All of these things are mementos, and there's a time and place for them.  Actually there's no place for them on the uniform, but use your discretion when they're presented.  Then take them off.

And one more thing while I'm at it.  The comment made a couple of days ago regarding trainers wearing proper uniforms.  The reason given for that as very appropriate for the trainer, but it doesn't matter for the unit leader is flawed.  One of the major roles for both positions is to set the example.  I see no difference.  Either we set the example, or we don't.  What kind of example do you prefer?  

None of those pins would belong on a uniform.

Matt,

If you're referring to a mentor pin, there is no place for it on a uniform.  If you're referring to a religious emblem from your youth, you're welcome to wear it over the left pocket when the occasion calls for it.  With the exception of those mentioned by Eagle94, pins are meant for civilian wear only.

Yes, if it were done by our Scouts or military personnel.  If it were done by a Japanese color guard, folding their flag and ours, no.  Offended might be a strong word.  I'd have to be willing to accept their ignorance to how we typically fold our flag, and I think I could do that.  Don't know.  Never seen it happen.  Have you?

The only time I've folded our flag in a rectangle is to fit it into a box. 

You betcha.

So how we fold the flag doesn't matter.  OK.  You want some negative comments?  Fold the flag into a rectangle, or don't bother folding it at all at your next flag-lowering assembly.  Or how about folding it in a triangle with the union folded inside.  Even though you might know you're absolutely right doesn't make it acceptable to the vast majority of people.  Most would find the action disrespectful.  I would, even though it was done in earnest.  The flag code only goes so far.  Your version of respect may differ from mine.     

In spite of other opinions, I still think that SSScout's description of the 9/11 ceremony was very respectful, meaningful, and memorable. I'll offer a variation of the same idea. What if the ceremony ended with a darkened room, and the U.S. flag remained up front with the spotlight on it. Everyone leaves in silence. I think that would be extremely meaningful and respectful.

Being a veteran doesn't make one an expert. The US flag often follows other flags (the Olympics comes immediately to mind). I think the ceremony you describe (especially with the lighting on the sole remaining flag) sounds very respectful and meaningful. The problem I encounter most often is that those with opinions will almost always say that there is only one way to do things. There can be plenty of ways to do things 'wrong,' but that doesn't mean that there's only one way to do thing 'right.'