So, for the palms through E+30, those all look correct, assuming that those MBs were earned prior to the date of the EBoR.
So, 9/8/19 looks OK for time since previous palms 5/23/19, but possibly missing a MB. I’m wondering if there was a 5th MB that was previously marked as “Leader Approved”, that was later removed (e.g. erroneous entry) or if the 5th MB was originally credited in time for the 9/8/19 date to have worked, then later changed for some reason.
So, this one is a bit confusing. It seems like the date earned would have to be different for these two, since it seems unlikely that a scout would complete 6 MB all on the same day (except maybe after summer camp?) It seems kinda like a data entry issue by whomever was marking the palms as earned. That is, the scout might have completed all of the requirements for palm E+40 three months prior to completing the requirements for E+45, but they were marked with a Completed date on the day that the AC logged them, rather than on the day that the requirements were actually completed.
I can see some value to trying to straighten out the programming logic on this (e.g. prevent identical Date Completed for multiple palms except on EBoR date), but I’m not sure how high this would be prioritized, since it seems like an issue that can be controlled by properly implementing advancement policy. Also, it’s not clear how easy it would be to capture changes in the rules, if there are some coming down the pipeline.