So... I'm from the south where a large number of people are actively defying any type of social distance rules. I'm recoiling in moderate horror and how many of y'all are saying to ignore a social distance guideline, regardless of how stupid it is. I try to be the example, both for the rest of society and for my children.
I vote for cutting the school system some slack--let's be an adult and try to actually come to an agreement before ignoring the rule, flat out lying in front of your child (even if they don't realize it), and attempting to steam roller over whatever harried, poor soul is assigned to be the social-distance-bouncer that day.
If the school system won't come to an agreement ahead of time, sure, bull your way ahead. But I just think it sets a bad example and precedent to simply say "No, I'm gonna do what I want, no matter what," and not even give the system a chance.
EDIT: I actually looked at the date and saw that today was the first day. What did you decide, and how did it go?
My motto since I was about 12 has been "question authority" (why yes, I am GenX, how could you tell?). I absolutely abhor stupid rules, and I tend to comply only to the extent (a) I am forced to, or (b) they make logical sense and I agree with the underlying principle.
I have a very strong negative reaction to the rule identified here, because it strikes me as a rule that is designed to create the impression the school is doing something, vs. a rule that is actually doing something. Rules made by officious busybodies who love to make rules and establish processes are the sort of thing that I take great joys in subverting. But the rules for show are my least-favorite rules of all, because they're cynical and Orwellian -- basically, "we aren't able/willing to do what we need to do to actually
make people safe, so we're going to put on a big show to make them
feel safe." Like taking your shoes off at TSA. That kind of rule inspires less joy in subversion and more compulsion to subvert whenever and wherever possible, purely as a matter of principle.
I firmly believe that I deploy my talents for subversion for good, not evil. I pay attention to what is going on, I take the time to understand the situation and the science, and I'm really smart, so I usually do understand. And yet I recognize that the personality trait that drives me is exactly the same thing that drives people in the "masks are evil" camp. So how can I give myself permission to flaunt a rule that represents an imperfect execution of a laudable goal, if I am going to argue that others don't deserve the same degree of individualism, the same right to decide for themselves whether a decree is good or bad? Sure, I can argue that I'm the exception because whatever. But I am just as limited in the scope of my knowledge as they are -- and I am just as susceptible to confirmation bias and to the desire to make self-serving decisions, even when I delude myself into thinking it's about the principle. And my entire view of government is that there are some choices that require me to put aside my own hubris and trust the Powers That Be to make -- because they are the ones who have insight into all the different players and considerations, who have access to the experts, and who are entrusted with making the best decision for the community as a whole.
So for me, I'd probably roll my eyes, suck it up, and comply. If I really couldn't, I'd talk to someone and make other arrangements. And if I thought the rule was stupid or counterproductive (and I actually cared enough), I'd probably talk to the people in charge of making the rules and suggest alternatives. Because at some point, it's important to signal that you are putting the good of the community first, even if you think the way the community has chosen to implement things is really fucking stupid.
In fact, come to think of it, that's exactly what I did: our school decided that it would be a brilliant idea to make all the parents drive to the school at the same time and line up, in cars, all through the parking lot (and of course backed up onto the road) to pick up necessary books and stuff. I live a half-mile from the school and would normally have walked over. But I realized they probably wanted people in the cars, with the windows rolled up, so they could keep THEIR people farther away (they basically put stuff on the backseat through the rear window). So I did my part and spent a full freaking hour going 0.1 mph to get a couple of things that should have taken 30 minutes including the walk. I considered skipping it; I mean, what are they going to do, tell my kid he can't get his stuff because I "just couldn't make it" to their designated time. But it was a fairly innocuous request that required minimal sacrifice on my part, so I rolled my eyes and complied.