Pillows. Delightful, plush pillows, Sean. That's what we were talking about. I think. Last I remember, at least.

This lightened the mood a bit, I must say. Though, a live reminder would really go a loooooong way.

WTF? Who does he think he is? You SOOOO need to do the paperwork on THAT one. Though in that case, I then start wondering how much is the presumption on the student's part, and how much is the student being like "well, I really would like to turn it in late" and the mentor being like "Sure, no problem!"

I don't think that it's the student's "fault", per se. I actually like the student. I don't even think that she hasn't done what she's supposed to do. I'm more of the mindset that it is completely unfair to the other students to allow someone to walk in on the morning of the presentation to turn in their assignment.

Vortex, Joe is currently dealing with a similar situation. After being explicitly warned not to cheat (this guy has a history), one of Joe's cadets was just thrown out of summer training for cheating.

His parents called Joe last night pleading for the kid to be given a second chance. Sadly, much of Joe's staff agrees with the kid and his parents. I spent most of our walk this morning reassuring Joe that he's not a huge asshole for insisting on enforcing the standards.

I will not lie. I will not cheat. I will not steal.

Isn't that the cadet's creed? Or part of it?

I find it disturbing that not only does the cadet in question not have a problem violating that creed, but so does Joe's staff.

I think that creed is from West Point, and this is ROTC, but it still applies. Joe is mad at the staff because many of them (but not Joe) wrote letters of support for this kid that were glowing. Joe's letter said something like "he's a good cadet but if he cheated, I want him out." I don't get saying things like "even if he did cheat, it was a small mistake, please don't punish him" and so on. Their loyalty should be to the program, not to this kid.

I don't get valuing loyalty over integrity.

Sadly, much of Joe's staff agrees with the kid and his parents. I spent most of our walk this morning reassuring Joe that he's not a huge asshole for insisting on enforcing the standards.

That is sad. Especially on the part of the staff. I can understand (although I don't condone) a parent wanting leniency for their kid, I don't understand the staff. How is a person supposed to learn ethical behavior if they aren't expected to behave ethically? And gives them a huge sense of entitlement that does them no favors.

Obviously the cadet learned his "ethics" from his parents; as Kerfuffle Bunny would say, "nature or nurture; discuss".

Vortex, can you say something along the lines of having to assemble all the presentations beforehand and that there's no way one turned in so late can be included? (Recently, for our Bataan Death March meeting (six hours! the first half of which was people reading their slides to us!) people's last-minute changes weren't included because of technical problems and they had to be pulled off a thumb drive that was assembled earlier.)

And Fay - yes, lovely!

On the shoes thing: I remember, when I was about six or so, my friend Scott and I would spend the social hour after Friday night services sliding in our slippery dress shoes on the wooden floor of the social hall. Run, put your weight on your toes, and slide across the rest of the floor. So, both of us were wearing shoes without rubber soles, and I think that was normal for kids at our synagogue then.

Sadly, much of Joe's staff agrees with the kid and his parents. I spent most of our walk this morning reassuring Joe that he's not a huge asshole for insisting on enforcing the standards.

If he lets the cheating cadet get away with it, Joe's punishing the cadets that didn't cheat. Why should their efforts be held to a higher standard than those of the cheater? If the cheating was on an exam, for example, why should someone who worked honestly have his grade considered comparable to the grade someone who cheated?

Stephanie, the rules are the rules. That's why they're rules.

Even if there are facts that might justify leniency, there's no right to a second chance.