Perhaps that's where the issue about BoR's comes to the fore. You all already know the boy. And completing the review should be a function of what more you'd like to know from him. Not necessarily what you see at the moment.
It's interesting you should put it that way. You're correct, I already know the boy, in fact for the group of boys currently in the troop, if you add up all the BOR's they have had, I have probably been on the board for 90 percent of them, and at least one for each boy. For the last few EBOR's, it was the sixth (out of 6) BOR I had done for that particular Scout. I also stand on the side of troop meetings on a regular basis, so I observe what these Scouts are doing when they are not in a BOR. The point is, I almost (and I say almost, and I am half-joking) don't need THEM there at the BOR (much less their uniform) to know what I need to know. But that's not the way it works either. In my opinion, the BOR is designed at least as much as a learning and character-building exercise for the Scout as it is for the adults to learn something new about the Scout. I'd like to hope that in a few years (or less) when the Scout is sitting in front of a college interviewer or a job interviewer or a thesis committee or wherever his life may take him, the experience of having spoken with me at a BOR might be of some small benefit. I have no data on this, but I'd like to think it's true.
As for the uniform, I think it is worth quoting exactly what the G2A says on this subject:
220.127.116.11 Wearing the Uniform—or Neat in Appearance
It is preferred a Scout be in full field uniform for any board of review. He should wear as much of it as he owns, and it should be as correct as possible, with the badges worn properly. It may be the uniform as the members of his troop, team, crew, or ship wear it. If wearing all or part of the uniform is impractical for whatever reason, the candidate should be clean and neat in his appearance and dressed appropriately, according to his means, for the milestone marked by the occasion. Regardless of unit, district, or council expectations or rules, boards of review shall not reject candidates solely for reasons related to uniforming or attire, as long as they are dressed to the above description. Candidates shall not be required to purchase uniforming or clothing such as coats and ties to participate in a board of review.[/size]
So even though the uniform is not REQUIRED, the Scout is required to THINK about what he is going to wear to the BOR. He SHOULD wear the uniform if he is able to do so. If you read the first three sentences together, I would say they mean that if the Scout is not in uniform, he should (must? probably "should", not "must") have a good reason for not doing so. I also see nothing there that says you can't ask a Scout where his uniform is - but you cannot "not pass" him for not wearing the uniform. (That is not unusual, there are many questions that are asked at BOR's for which there is no "wrong" answer in terms of "passing" the BOR.) Now, even if wearing the uniform is "impractical", the Scout must still think about his attire in advance: "the candidate should be clean and neat in his appearance and dressed appropriately, according to his means, for the milestone marked by the occasion." I suppose we could have an entire thread or five on what THAT means to each of us.
Now, I would agree that a BOR could be a gray area because it is not in the handbook.
It's kind of interesting that the BSA tells the adults how the Scout is supposed to be dressed for a BOR (see above), but the BSA does not tell the Scouts how they are supposed to be dressed. I wonder if that is an oversight, or intentional.
Edited by NJCubScouter, 19 November 2016 - 07:19 PM.