PEP refinement ideas

I saw a post recently, suggesting extra items to go towards one of the foraging badges. But the suggestion could not be incorporated because it must include plants that are also native to Montana.

I understand the reasons for this at the initially development of the SKIP program. But after the kickstarter, there must be a great deal of people that are getting involved in SKIP around the world or at least around the United States.

Would it not be beneficial for the goal of SKIP to step away from its Montana requirements?

Of course, PEP is Permaculture Experience according to Paul. There is also PEX, and PEA. A lot of work has gone into making PEP what it is today, that is evident. It would be a shame if the insistence that it remains tied to Montana, forces people to be unable to complete a badge. So much work has gone into PEP, why not have as many people be able to do it as possible? Why lose out on participants because their local resources cannot be linked to Montana?
To continue with the Foraging badge as an example; is it not the point of this badge to encourage the development of foraging skills, the identification of edible species, and the use of these ingredients? How is the development of that skill diminished if the foraged resource does not occur in Montana?

It’s possible for a potential Otis to be from anywhere in the world.

I am aware of PEX, and the possibility of others making badges for different regions of the world. Which is fine if it is something specific for a different climate, such as desert environments. But if every regional variables are excluded from PEP, and require an equivalent PEX badge, then there is a risk of diluting the SKIP program, and diminishing the value of the current curriculum.

I hope this can be seen as a suggestion and concern I have for a body of work, that I am passionate about, and not as criticism.

While I'm not saying there's any chance the foraging badge would change, what might a more broadly applicable foraging badge look like?  Maybe someone could start a new thread to discuss it and post a link here in this thread?

I'm simply here to propose adding an ailment to the Watson list for natural medicine: Tachycardia (fast heart rate)

Last year I fell ill with serious tachycardia and shortness of breath which I was able to greatly reduce (essentially cure, but they come up if I'm dumb and drink too much coffee) my symptoms using natural remedies. Nothing home grown though, but herbs none the less :)

Consider standardizing the format for BB## badge submissions (to earn BB5, BB10, BB20 etc).

For instance, if one goes to the BB10 page here, he or she will find a half dozen different ways of PEPpers presenting their ten completed Badge Bits.  Some are are descriptive links, others non-descriptive links, others have no BB links, but link to the Merit Badge profile, which has all the BB links.  Some are grouped by Badge.  Some count out 1-10, and others have no counting.

Which method adds the most value for the least work to the key stakeholders of the BB## program: Otis, the submitter, the reviewer, et al?

George Yacus wrote:Consider standardizing the format for BB## badge submissions (to earn BB5, BB10, BB20 etc).

This sounds like a Google form not a forum ‘blank page’. As a submitter, I would not want to fill out a form.
As a certifier, I go to the person’s profile and I can avoid checking every link.
I think it is up to the individual if they want to polish their submission (or learn the forum software) to make an impressive or boring post as they choose.

Opalyn Rose wrote:I think it is up to the individual if they want to polish ther submission (or learn the forum software) to make and impressive or boring post as they choose.

Okie doke, thanks!  I find beauty in the simple and 'boring' format of a single merit badge profile link.  So I'm interpreting this to mean that's a sufficient alternative to copying and pasting and formatting a big ol' numbered list of a dozen+ BBs.

George Yacus wrote:
Okie doke, thanks!  I find beauty in the simple and 'boring' format of a single merit badge profile link.  So I'm interpreting this to mean that's a sufficient alternative to copying and pasting and formatting a big ol' numbered list of a dozen+ BBs.

The posts that have a big list of links to different BB’s, especially if they’re older, likely were done before the merit badge profiles existed.

I had applied for my BB5, 10, and 20 before such a page was there. I’m glad it is so much easier to track what we have done, too! I used to have a note to self of what BB’s were done, now I don’t need that.

I like not having to post a long list of links now for BB10, 20, etc. But the lists are still helpful for certain upper level badges that allow sand-level BBs to be completed for them. That way it's easier for certifiers to see which BBs are being used for sand badges and which can be applied to straw+ badges.

I propose a new option for Nest - Straw Badge points:

Dust surfaces in a room. (1/2 point?)

This is a badge bit (BB) that is part of the PEP curriculum.  Completing this BB is part of getting the straw badge in Nest.

In this Badge Bit, you will dust all the horizontal surfaces of a room. This should include a desk, bookshelf, windowsills, and trim/molding or the equivalent.

To complete this BB, the minimum requirements are:
   - only natural cleaners

To show you've completed this Badge Bit, you must provide proof of the following with pictures (or a video < 2 mins long):
   - before, during, and after of dusting the surfaces of a room
   - show and describe what you dusted the surfaces with
   - demonstrate it meets the above stated requirements

I wonder if making a set of metal diveders (like a compass) would be a good sand or straw metalworking BB? I watched this video today, and didn't spot dividers/compasses in the badge, and thought that maybe they'd be a pretty easy metalworking project that creates a handy tool for further projects:

The BB for plant 100 cleavers in Woodland Care says to plant them in a row, 12" apart. I understand that probably makes it easier to film a video for certification, but it doesn't seem to fit with the spirit of PEP or the other BBs that require polycultures and natural ways of doing things. Can the requirements for *how* to plant the cleavers be adjusted?

First time poster here.

I've read my SKIP book cover to cover during my baby's nap times in the past couple of days. I see that none of the measurements are in metric system. I surfed on permies trying to see if online someone else already had "translated" all the measurements. I tried to search the forum for the word "metric" with no success. So my question is: is it possible to adjoust all the Wiki adding metric measurements? This is something I'll have anyway to do for myself, so I can volunteer to do it for everyone (after a meeting with some staff person).

All the best,
talk soon again

Edit: babies to baby's

Welcome to permies, Marta!

As a Canadian who was raised in the Imperial Measurement System which is *not* exactly the same as the USA measuring system, I totally hear you. I'm sort of "half converted" with many areas fully metricized and others - sewing in particular - leaning towards the measurements I grew up with.

That said, PEP refers to "Paul Wheaton" and he lives in Montana where that is the system of measurement, so I'm not sure they want to confuse the system more by using both. Feel free to add conversions to your submissions, although as a person who often has to approve BB's, if they give a "minimum", it's a big help if you make it a bit bigger so there's no question if you're past the cut-off or not.

Jay Angler wrote:Welcome to permies, Marta!

Feel free to add conversions to your submissions, although as a person who often has to approve BB's, if they give a "minimum", it's a big help if you make it a bit bigger so there's no question if you're past the cut-off or not.

Thanks for the reply, the welcome and your tips about, Jay!

I have a clarifying question: would that be okay to show a measurement in metric in a pic and by text showing the conversion in imperial? It's maybe an extra thing to check for who check the submission to "control" that it's correct. At the same time I see for myself that even if most of measurements - weight on an electric scale for example - it's very easy to set to - pounds - I also think that it's very easy for me to forget and take a picture in - gram -.

Cheers,
Marta

Yes - if the picture shows a metric measurement, so long as the text gives the answer to the math conversion, it should be OK.

It usually helps if you give *more* information, rather than the minimum!