add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Dress codes can be confusing: "Business Casual", "Smart
Casual", etc.
I propose the follow scale 1-10:
1 is the most casual, 10 the most formal.
This is for men's clothes, women would have a similar
scale.
1: You must wear a bottom. Swimsuits, pajamas OK. No
shirt OK for men. Shoes optional.
2:
Any shirt, bottom, shoes. Stained, torn, etc is fine.
3: Look somewhat presentable: No very stained, torn, or
offensive clothing.
4: No gym shorts, tank tops, sweatpants, loud graphic
shirts, sandals, or flip flops.
5: No T-shirts or jeans. Polo shirts, khaki pants, shoes, and
the like. Most "Business Casual" falls here.
6: Dress shirt, khaki or dress pants and shoes. No white
socks. Tie/jacket optional.
7: Long sleeve dress shirt, tie recommended, blazer, dress
pants, dark socks, dress shoes.
8: Full suit and tie.
9: Tuxedo or "black tie"
10: Ultra formal or "white tie"
This is this
ISO_20standard_20fo...A_20Minute_20rules)
Appreciate the additional details though. [nineteenthly, Jul 12 2012]
Where do adaptors like this one fall?
Buttinfront_20Fashions
[normzone, Jul 12 2012]
[link]
|
| |
11: Any of the above decorated with a few croissant crumbs/flakes. |
|
| |
As somebody whose default setting is 'stained Carhartts and
t-shirt selected at random' (I guess that falls at about 3.7),
it would really help me out. I will dress at a 3.7 level to
any occasion (including those involving major holidays
andor the in-laws) unless specifically told to 'dress nicely',
and this is a damn sight more specific than that. |
|
| |
Hang on, I've got a bun in one of my pockets. It's got
10w40 on it, but just that one spot... |
|
| |
Welcome aboard [Lvl100Mu2]! |
|
| |
[+] Welcome to the hb! I'm generally at a level 3, but what's this nonsense about #1. How can Church of No Pants operate like this? |
|
| |
There's definitely cultural differences to take into account here. And it's probably worth going through them from a non-US perspective here. |
|
| |
1: You must wear a bottom. Swimsuits, pajamas OK. No shirt OK for men. Shoes optional.
This is not acceptable in the UK, unless you are actually in a body of water. |
|
| |
2: Any shirt, bottom, shoes. Stained, torn, etc is fine.
This is acceptable only where you are crawling around on your belly in some Somerset field, trying to evade capture. |
|
| |
3: Look somewhat presentable: No very stained, torn, or offensive clothing.
Probably OK, so long as you are decorating or cleaning out a fank. |
|
| |
4: No gym shorts, tank tops, sweatpants, loud graphic shirts, sandals, or flip flops.
This is a given at all levels. |
|
| |
5: No T-shirts or jeans. Polo shirts, khaki pants, shoes, and the like. Most "Business Casual" falls here.
In countries with a longer-established history, such garments would, if worn in an office environment, mark you out as a suspected sexual predator. Shoes excepted, of course. |
|
| |
6: Dress shirt, khaki or dress pants and shoes. No white socks. Tie/jacket optional.
Same as 5, re khakis. White socks are unacceptable in any circumstance if you are over the age of 7. |
|
| |
7: Long sleeve dress shirt, tie recommended, blazer, dress pants, dark socks, dress shoes.
I suppose that there are terminological differences here (for example, I am assuming that "dress shirt" means a, y'know, shirt with buttons and that "blazer" is equivalent to a suit jacket that matches the suit trousers). |
|
| |
8: Full suit and tie.
Oh no, that wasn't what you meant. Yikes. Full suit is the only acceptable way to dress for an office/professional environment. Tie is optional, use your discretion. The only people in offices who wear something other than suits are the cretinous hobgoblins who work in IT. |
|
| |
9: Tuxedo or "black tie"
Omission of kilt is a grievous error. |
|
| |
10: Ultra formal or "white tie"
This applies only to Bullingdon club vermin and can therefore safely be disregarded. |
|
| |
I shudder to think what almost imperceptibe inward cringing would ensue when an American colleague arrives in the EAME outpost wearing a US 6. He would be as well wearing crotchless neon speedos and clown makeup. Of course, this is not a criticism of your fine idea, just an observation that it will be necessary to include a cultural converter if this is to really take off. |
|
| |
//The only people in offices who wear something
other than suits are the cretinous hobgoblins who
work in IT // |
|
| |
I work in an office, I'm dressed at a bout a 4.8 (jeans
and a checked shirt), but I'm not a "cretinous
hobgoblin" IT technician. |
|
| |
Arrogant designer prick, thank you very much. |
|
| |
But the rest of the UK code is OK, right? |
|
| |
My only qualm is with number 1. I rather enjoy shirts
off in the sunshine, whether that be in a park, at a
friend's barbecue, or the unbearable heat of an
outdoor summer music festival (when it's not
raining). |
|
| |
Actually, particularly when it's raining. Something
nice about rain on your bare back. |
|
| |
About a 6 here, engineer not IT. My bosses (up to the CEO) only range in the low sevens (no tie). I don't ever see a suit or even a sports coar unless big customers or the money boys come in. |
|
| |
Oh and [Calum] if you have a right to wear one, a kilt is considered a 9 or better in the US. |
|
| |
One idea with which I contend is your conflation
between amount of clothing and the formality thereof.
There should be two scales. |
|
| |
Also [calum]'s little rant about
proper office attire is, I'm afraid, entirely wrong. |
|
| |
EDIT[calum]'s entire rant is as wrong as an orgy involving
nuclear weapons and knitting needles. |
|
| |
//Omission of kilt is a grievous error. //
This will be true only if:
a) The omission is purely an oversight, and leaves
your nether parts naked or
b) You are a Scot, attending a function where such
eccentricities as kilt-wearing are lauded. |
|
| |
Why does the scale stop at 10? Is one meant to
decline invitations to the better sort of event? |
|
| |
This would entirely screw up the whole 'dressed to the nines' phrase. |
|
| |
//dressed to the nines // |
|
| |
Yeah, the scale should really only go up to 9.
Perhaps zero can be incorporated so as not to lose a
delineation. |
|
| |
(and the negatives for garments of S&M ilk) |
|
| |
I'm an everyday 6.6 - I've found that a long sleeve white shirt, black slacks, black shoes is a very generic look. I've worn it for everything from the Salt Flats to Federal Court. |
|
| |
Wifey cringes, but she likes the fact I'm extremely easy to buy clothing for. |
|
| |
[Max] I presume it is a logarithmic scale; the difference between 2 and 6 is much, much less than the difference between 9.7 and 9.8. |
|
| |
Perhaps it approaches infinity at 10 so that no-one has ever ever actually scored 10, not even Elizabeth on her coronation day. Also, perhaps it tails off towards zero so even the decomposed hacked up remains of an ugly tramp left in a plastic bag in a ditch for a week or two still scores _something_. |
|
| |
"cleaning out a fank" ? Google provides Scottish for coil of rope or noose. |
|
| |
Could have an alternate meaning. If Google doesn't know
what something means, there's a pretty good chance you
don't want to. |
|
| |
By "full suit" I presume you mean "lounge suit",
[calum], as one would wear to work in any
respectable legal or accounting firm? |
|
| |
There are varying grades of suit; from cheap and
black (security guard) to a pick-stitched
chalkstripe
with silk lining, such as one sees on QCs and bank
chairmen. |
|
| |
Wearing a three piece suit here would mark you
out as either an undertaker or a foppish cretin...
or possibly an expatriate American who hasn't
figured out the local dress code. |
|
| |
//who hasn't figured out the local dress code.// |
|
| |
Yeah, it took me quite awhile to get used to all the ochre and wood-ash while smearing on rendered kangaroo fat still gives me a rash. |
|
| |
You brought the rash with you from Canada, you
pillock. |
|
| |
No not that rash, the other one. In any case, the first one was usually decently covered by my 3-piece suit. |
|
| |
Actually... the wood ash serves a purpose. It used to
be rubbed into horizontal lacerations on the chest to
promote scarring. The scars were symbolic of tribal
rank. Mostly in central northern and central western
Australia. |
|
| |
How can you tell, under the starched shirt, dinner jacket and white tie ? |
|
| |
"Rorke's Drift, 1879. It's hot ... damned hot. The men are building a bridge ... it's so hot, they are having to work stripped to the waist. It gives them a curious appearance, but keeps their legs cool ...." |
|
| |