FRC rules around seating need to change.

[Sperkowsky]

I was prompted to write this post after a few bad experiences and a few interesting reads here.

We should start off this post with a blurb from the Admin Manual specifically 4.12
4.12 Bleacher Rules

Sitting together in a group during competition matches makes the game more exciting and fun. It’s whereyou can show support for your team. Since
very often there is not enough seating to accommodate
everyone, there has to be a policy regarding seating. Teams are not permitted to save seats for team members that are not present. In addition, it is not permitted to hang banners or ribbons to designateseating. Event staff will remove and discard any banners, roping, etc., used to designate seating. Please taketurns sitting in the bleachers if seating is limited. If there is a crowding problem, we ask that you kindly leave after your team’s match and return later if possible.

The rule is simple. Saving seats is not allowed.

However, this rule is consistently broken by the majority of teams in FRC. In fact many people are ignorant to the fact that this rule exists.

Cue my experience this past weekend at champs.

After volunteering for 4 days straight doing field reset our field (Newton) was not chosen to reset Einstein. It was disappointing but, we got to watch great finals matches and I proceeded after cleaning up the field a bit to find Einstein seating. Being I only needed 2 seats one for my mom and one for me I figured this should not be too big of a problem. I found 2 of the best seats that were not going to be reserved for teams on Einstein and sat in one knowing the rules well I did not put anything there to reserve the seat and I proceeded to text my mom to come by. However, right then I got stormed by a team whose seats I apparently "Stole." For reference this team was taking up 6 rows of seating in the lower level of the dome with many many empty seats. I explained calmly that the seats were empty allowing me to sit in them which they did not take kindly to. I was screamed at, called names, and felt physically in danger when a student jumped over a seat to sit next to me. Taking what I explained to hopefully be my mom's seat. I ended up leaving the seats in favor of worse ones next to a team that would not irritate me for the entire night. Worse seat better people.

However, I have seen situations like this way to often. Coming from a small team we only have 5-10 people in the stands. Often we are high up in the stands and despite their frantic screaming you can not even hear them. Our second year our team decided to go for the spirit award bringing family friends, school administrators ect. They got to the venue earlier then everyone else and rushed to sit. A larger team then came up to them telling them those seats were reserved since they sit there every year. Our team not knowing the rules got up and let them sit there.

People generally feel very entitled to save seats. Despite the fact that its clearly not allowed per the admin manual.

So, we need to figure out some solutions. Factoring things like scouting, large teams vs small teams, and spirit into the equation.

My proposal goes something like this. Everyone gets 7 reserved seats for scouting towards the front. There are then 2 rows of seats for spectators only not affiliated with teams directly and then another good section of seating reserved for volunteers. Teams will then have to find their own seating towards the top again not being allowed to save seats. If a team has an issue where a team will not give up saved seats they should have some way to report the situation and cause some sort of repercussion.

But I know my solution is not even close to perfect. So lets figure this out.

[araniaraniratul]

I was prompted to write this post after a few bad experiences and a few interesting reads here.

We should start off this post with a blurb from the Admin Manual specifically 4.12
4.12 Bleacher Rules

Sitting together in a group during competition matches makes the game more exciting and fun. It’s whereyou can show support for your team. Since
very often there is not enough seating to accommodate
everyone, there has to be a policy regarding seating. Teams are not permitted to save seats for team members that are not present. In addition, it is not permitted to hang banners or ribbons to designateseating. Event staff will remove and discard any banners, roping, etc., used to designate seating. Please taketurns sitting in the bleachers if seating is limited. If there is a crowding problem, we ask that you kindly leave after your team’s match and return later if possible.

The rule is simple. Saving seats is not allowed.

However, this rule is consistently broken by the majority of teams in FRC. In fact many people are ignorant to the fact that this rule exists.

Cue my experience this past weekend at champs.

After volunteering for 4 days straight doing field reset our field (Newton) was not chosen to reset Einstein. It was disappointing but, we got to watch great finals matches and I proceeded after cleaning up the field a bit to find Einstein seating. Being I only needed 2 seats one for my mom and one for me I figured this should not be too big of a problem. I found 2 of the best seats that were not going to be reserved for teams on Einstein and sat in one knowing the rules well I did not put anything there to reserve the seat and I proceeded to text my mom to come by. However, right then I got stormed by a team whose seats I apparently "Stole." For reference this team was taking up 6 rows of seating in the lower level of the dome with many many empty seats. I explained calmly that the seats were empty allowing me to sit in them which they did not take kindly to. I was screamed at, called names, and felt physically in danger when a student jumped over a seat to sit next to me. Taking what I explained to hopefully be my mom's seat. I ended up leaving the seats in favor of worse ones next to a team that would not irritate me for the entire night. Worse seat better people.

However, I have seen situations like this way to often. Coming from a small team we only have 5-10 people in the stands. Often we are high up in the stands and despite their frantic screaming you can not even hear them. Our second year our team decided to go for the spirit award bringing family friends, school administrators ect. They got to the venue earlier then everyone else and rushed to sit. A larger team then came up to them telling them those seats were reserved since they sit there every year. Our team not knowing the rules got up and let them sit there.

People generally feel very entitled to save seats. Despite the fact that its clearly not allowed per the admin manual.

So, we need to figure out some solutions. Factoring things like scouting, large teams vs small teams, and spirit into the equation.

My proposal goes something like this. Everyone gets 7 reserved seats for scouting towards the front. There are then 2 rows of seats for spectators only not affiliated with teams directly and then another good section of seating reserved for volunteers. Teams will then have to find their own seating towards the top again not being allowed to save seats. If a team has an issue where a team will not give up saved seats they should have some way to report the situation and cause some sort of repercussion.

But I know my solution is not even close to perfect. So lets figure this out.


It's an interesting solution, I haven't done the math so can't really swing either way. Yet, It's really shocking that people aren't aware of that rule in the handbook (had to remind people multiple times), and I think FIRST could really make a point by establishing some sort of penalty or better staff enforcement and awareness of the rule. I'd like to think people are good and are just a bit unaware, but you never really know.

[216Robochick288]

As someone who did scouting I would be very sad about a seat so far down, it makes it hard to see everything that goes on. I will also say that having reserved seats up front for some people would disintegrate, as some teams dont have scouters, some dont have that many, etc happen, making students go "I wanna sit by someone and look, a free spot!" and take it. I can also tell you with grand certainty that students love to rip down signs about where they can and cannot be (ie, under stairs, back hallways, etc) and without extra hands to police them can be an awful pain.

Realistically, until FIRST sets a president to say "Saving seats means we save the award you get for a team that follows the rules",the best solution is to simply show the team in question the rules, and if a problem occurs to contact event staff. I know some event coordinators will go through at the end of the night and make a "dont save seats" bin, if it looks like they have left "spirit" shakers, coats, etc to save seats. They earn it back when they have a coach come talk to them so they can be explained that seat saving is directly against the rules.

[spydan]

Would T6 enable event staff to issue Red/Yellow cards to teams for seat saving? Has this ever happened at an event?

T6: "All Teams must be civil towards their own Team members, other Teams, competition personnel,
FIELD staff, and event attendees while at an FIRST Robotics Competition event.
Violation: Behavior will be discussed with Team or individual. Violations of this rule are likely
to escalate to YELLOW or RED CARDS rapidly (i.e. the threshold for egregious or repeated
violations is relatively low.)"

[Montavo]

However, this rule is consistently broken by the majority of teams in FRC. In fact many people are ignorant to the fact that this rule exists.


FIRST could really make a point by establishing some sort of penalty or better staff enforcement and awareness of the rule.

There has not been a regional I've attended that doesn't have people saving seats, seeing reserved seats sometimes raises the urge for me to tell others if they know about the reserved seats rule but I simply don't want to be "that guy" and start preaching about the rules. People are these events to have fun and compete; As Ron mentioned, FIRST does need to have better enforcement and awareness of the rule.

[Bluman56]

I was prompted to write this post after a few bad experiences and a few interesting reads here.

We should start off this post with a blurb from the Admin Manual specifically 4.12
4.12 Bleacher Rules

Sitting together in a group during competition matches makes the game more exciting and fun. It’s whereyou can show support for your team. Since
very often there is not enough seating to accommodate
everyone, there has to be a policy regarding seating. Teams are not permitted to save seats for team members that are not present. In addition, it is not permitted to hang banners or ribbons to designateseating. Event staff will remove and discard any banners, roping, etc., used to designate seating. Please taketurns sitting in the bleachers if seating is limited. If there is a crowding problem, we ask that you kindly leave after your team’s match and return later if possible.

The rule is simple. Saving seats is not allowed.

However, this rule is consistently broken by the majority of teams in FRC. In fact many people are ignorant to the fact that this rule exists.

Cue my experience this past weekend at champs.

After volunteering for 4 days straight doing field reset our field (Newton) was not chosen to reset Einstein. It was disappointing but, we got to watch great finals matches and I proceeded after cleaning up the field a bit to find Einstein seating. Being I only needed 2 seats one for my mom and one for me I figured this should not be too big of a problem. I found 2 of the best seats that were not going to be reserved for teams on Einstein and sat in one knowing the rules well I did not put anything there to reserve the seat and I proceeded to text my mom to come by. However, right then I got stormed by a team whose seats I apparently "Stole." For reference this team was taking up 6 rows of seating in the lower level of the dome with many many empty seats. I explained calmly that the seats were empty allowing me to sit in them which they did not take kindly to. I was screamed at, called names, and felt physically in danger when a student jumped over a seat to sit next to me. Taking what I explained to hopefully be my mom's seat. I ended up leaving the seats in favor of worse ones next to a team that would not irritate me for the entire night. Worse seat better people.

However, I have seen situations like this way to often. Coming from a small team we only have 5-10 people in the stands. Often we are high up in the stands and despite their frantic screaming you can not even hear them. Our second year our team decided to go for the spirit award bringing family friends, school administrators ect. They got to the venue earlier then everyone else and rushed to sit. A larger team then came up to them telling them those seats were reserved since they sit there every year. Our team not knowing the rules got up and let them sit there.

People generally feel very entitled to save seats. Despite the fact that its clearly not allowed per the admin manual.

So, we need to figure out some solutions. Factoring things like scouting, large teams vs small teams, and spirit into the equation.

My proposal goes something like this. Everyone gets 7 reserved seats for scouting towards the front. There are then 2 rows of seats for spectators only not affiliated with teams directly and then another good section of seating reserved for volunteers. Teams will then have to find their own seating towards the top again not being allowed to save seats. If a team has an issue where a team will not give up saved seats they should have some way to report the situation and cause some sort of repercussion.

But I know my solution is not even close to perfect. So lets figure this out.

Sam, I know exactly what you're talking about and agree 100%. Funny enough, I was with a friend just as a spectator and ended up sitting right behind you and your mom (creepiness not intended, sorry for not introducing myself) during the entirety of Einstein. The whole weekend finding seats was a struggle. Even top tier teams (identity will remain disclosed for obvious reasons) were extremely hostile. You could clearly tell I just wanted to watch matches as I was wearing a FIRST Alum badge and had no team affiliated attire the whole time.

It's extremely off-putting and I am someone who is very invested in FIRST. I can only imagine how terrible the experience may be to someone who is just walking in to learn and watch FIRST in action. I don't mean to be preaching to the choir, I just wanted to point out this was not an isolated occurrence. I had to deal with this all week/end long.

[GBK]

Not only is saving seats a problem but teams standing up during matches is a problem. In some cases the entire teams stands during their match, in others someone from the team always seems to need to get up for some reason during the match causing the entire row of team to stand and let them out.
Makes it kind hard on scouting.
At any rate if you are at an event we are at, we will gladly make room for you to sit if we have it. Keep in mind we normally sit in the nose bleed seats so we don't have to fight for them. We might also put you to work scouting!

[PayneTrain]

My proposal goes something like this. Everyone gets 7 reserved seats for scouting towards the front. There are then 2 rows of seats for spectators only not affiliated with teams directly and then another good section of seating reserved for volunteers. Teams will then have to find their own seating towards the top again not being allowed to save seats. If a team has an issue where a team will not give up saved seats they should have some way to report the situation and cause some sort of repercussion.

But I know my solution is not even close to perfect. So lets figure this out.

Not all teams scout, unfortunately.
Some teams want room for 8 people, some only need/can spare 2 or 3.
There should be some neutral way to handle negative behavior at all aspects of a competition. Sports events allow attendees to notify event personnel of uncivil behavior.

The solution to getting the seats you want together as a team is pretty simple. Show up early and show up together. You don't have to beat 148 to the venue to get great seats together as a team, but you have to decide whether or not it's worth it.

[AlexanderTheOK]

Side note regarding people standing up:

It seems people standing in the walkway at champs didn't understand they were blocking several of the middle seats. People come by and decide to watch, making the three rows slightly above the main walkway difficult to see anything in without standing yourself.

It seems like it could be an issue caused by arena design, but it was rather irritating to constantly have to go tell people in the walkway to take a seat.

[DonRotolo]

True story: 3 or 4 years ago in STL, when we played out in the pits and sat on bleachers, seats were at a huge premium. Saturday afternoon, and some guy in his 40s or 50s with a young child in tow is looking up at the bleachers to find a seat. He looked just so lost...

I went down and asked him if he needed a place to sit. He seemed surprised, but said Yes. I ushered him back up and had some team members squish in more to make room. And I helped him (and his 10-ish daughter) understand what was going on, on the field.

Long story short: He was an executive VP of some large company (no names), invited by FIRST to stop by and see what we are doing. He'd just driven in from another state, and it seems I was his first contact with FRC. By the time he'd left, he was going to have his company sponsor "a couple" of teams for several thousand dollars each. He offered for my team, but asked him to consider teams local to his company, and maybe send a couple of engineers there too.

Bottom line: That guy you just intimidated out of "your" seats was thinking of sponsoring you for $5k. Smooth move, Einstein.

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

Not all teams scout, unfortunately.
Some teams want room for 8 people, some only need/can spare 2 or 3.
There should be some neutral way to handle negative behavior at all aspects of a competition. Sports events allow attendees to notify event personnel of uncivil behavior.

The solution to getting the seats you want together as a team is pretty simple. Show up early and show up together. You don't have to beat 148 to the venue to get great seats together as a team, but you have to decide whether or not it's worth it.

I honestly don't think just coming super early is a final good solution to the problem. This was a similar problem at another robotics competition we compete in called Robosub. Granted people were coming early for first signups on the practice field in this competition but it was getting ridiculous where people were coming hours before the doors opened up. It's really not healthy to cut even like 2 hours a day during the entire course of the competition but teams will still do it to remain competitive. This competition solved it by having a lottery of slots based on which teams were there when doors opened. I think having 8-9 dedicated seats per team for scouting would go a long way in solving this issue.

[PayneTrain]

I honestly don't think just coming super early is a final good solution to the problem. This was a similar problem at another robotics competition we compete in called Robosub. Granted people were coming early for first signups on the practice field in this competition but it was getting ridiculous where people were coming hours before the doors opened up. It's really not healthy to cut even like 2 hours a day during the entire course of the competition but teams will still do it to remain competitive. This competition solved it by having a lottery of slots based on which teams were there when doors opened. I think having 8-9 dedicated seats per team for scouting would go a long way in solving this issue.

:/ Maybe I'm just crazy but I don't see how it is that crazy to show up an hour early to get the seats you want. Maybe you do something like 10 blocks of 20 seats that can be lotto'd off as long as your whole team count you requested +/-5 shows up when the doors open? I don't see why you should punish teams that sacrifice for good seats, but FRC is about to reach a point where the organization might have to step in and save people from themselves (ie hour limits on meetings in and out of build season, time to show up to a venue, etc)

[BrennanB]

I honestly don't think just coming super early is a final good solution to the problem.

Or when you show up earlier than another team and they run/superspeed walk to get better seats than you.

[dcarr]

One factor that doesn't help this problem in St. Louis is that the entire 300-level of seats in the dome is off-limits to teams, leaving many good seats empty while teams resort to the 400 and 500 levels. It's not clear why this is the case - I would think that reserving a few sections for VIPs and making the rest available would be fine.

[Montavo]

Or when you show up earlier than another team and they run/superspeed walk to get better seats than you.

Almost relatable
http://i.imgur.com/9TcUUmE.gif

[gblake]

The title says the seating rules need to change. I don't think that is right. The existing rule needs to be enforced. Changed rules that aren't enforced will be as useless as the current rule.

People need to stop being squeamish about identifying the rule-beakers. The situation needs more "sunshine", not a code of silence.

[s_forbes]

For what it's worth, I've never had an issue sitting inside of another team's "reserved" seating to watch a few matches. Most teams want to be able to have their members sit together during eliminations, and some mark off where they intend to sit. If you ask to sit in their empty seats during qualification matches, they almost never object. The vast majority of people in the stands are pretty reasonable.

I'm fairly confident that you will have better seats by communicating with other teams in the stands than by having FIRST sanction off a section where you are required to sit.

[Pauline Tasci]

The problem with the current process is that to get good seats you have to push your way right when pits/stands open and have a lot of people moving back and forth from pits and stands.

In LA a LONG time ago we assigned seating sections everyday, everyone had an allocated number and it would change everyday to ensure people had good seating at least once. I think this option could work with a separate area reserved for scouts.

But really, we just have to enforce the rule that exists now.

[Chief Hedgehog]

Not only is saving seats a problem but teams standing up during matches is a problem. In some cases the entire teams stands during their match

Since you were on Carson, you didn't have this problem with 4607... But yes, our team gets up and screams like crazy for our team. We have a cheer squad and a cheer captain - and have 8 different cheers we use throughout the event. 4607 can be quite obnoxious - we know this. We use our shields, light sabers, flags, and anything we can get our hands on and wave them like crazy. Funny thing is, we look at this like a sporting event and our team/fans have been well conditioned by our football games (Back to Back State Champs!). We go nuts for our squad - and we won't change this for the foreseeable future. That and we bring down a lot of people.

But we are fun and bring in those around us. We cheer for those teams we are allied with and have never had a complaint.

I coach them throughout the season that there are no saved seats and we have not yet had a problem.

As for scouting, if your scouts are in the lower rows, they will have a tough time scouting the field.

[Gamma +]

As much as I despise conversations like these, I must comment on the issue. I was disgusted at how abrasive and inconsiderate teams were in the stands at champs. As an individual trying to float around the dome, watching as many matches on different divisions as possible, I rarely sat in one seat for more than a single match, and I didn't have the luxury of showing up early and claiming a single seat. It was strange to me that teams were so reluctant to let a single, polite robot enthusiast temporarily use vacant seats that would be left empty otherwise. On top of that, it startled me to see how hostile teams were towards each other. In subdivision playoffs, I observed a team that had just lost their match stand up and yell awful things at another team that was cheering for the winning alliance. The cheering team was in fact, not from the same division, and they were simply congratulating their friends- completely harmless, and with no ill intent. It is understandable to be passionate about winning, but it is absolutely ridiculous to yell and shout at supporters of the winning alliance. This is neither gracious nor professional. That being said, I am very grateful to the people who did have reserved seats that were gracious enough to share them with me.

[jnicho15]

I think there is a point that is acceptable. For example, I see no problem saving a few seats in the 400s at Einstein for the people in the pit packing the crate. However, some teams do go too far.

[GBK]

Since you were on Carson, you didn't have this problem with 4607... But yes, our team gets up and screams like crazy for our team. We have a cheer squad and a cheer captain - and have 8 different cheers we use throughout the event. 4607 can be quite obnoxious - we know this. We use our shields, light sabers, flags, and anything we can get our hands on and wave them like crazy. Funny thing is, we look at this like a sporting event and our team/fans have been well conditioned by our football games (Back to Back State Champs!). We go nuts for our squad - and we won't change this for the foreseeable future. That and we bring down a lot of people.

But we are fun and bring in those around us. We cheer for those teams we are allied with and have never had a complaint.

I coach them throughout the season that there are no saved seats and we have not yet had a problem.

As for scouting, if your scouts are in the lower rows, they will have a tough time scouting the field.

The seats sectioned off at Championship for teams that were on the field were great for watching matches. Not all venues do that or have the ability to do that. The issues we encountered were higher in the stands as well as at district events. Your team sounds like a lot of fun. I would rather see a team having that kind of enthusiasm than a team with its members sleeping in the stands or playing games. Keep up the good work. The bottom line is everyone is there for the same reason. We all want to see matches. Considering those around you is part of gracious professionalism

[jimbo493]

Regional and district events won't change, there is too much variability in seating, from individual seats to bleachers. However at CMP they should assign seating. At NOAC, which is a large event in the Boy Scouts Order of the Arrow, we were all given a name badge like at CMP, and on the bottom it had each of the 4 shows, and an assigned seat, they didn't strictly enforce it, but each group was sitting in the same area, once you got there you could move around within your group. There were 4 shows, so two shows you had lower bowl seats, and 2 shows you had upper bowl seats. Then you could have sections book off for visitors and VIPs assorted around the dome, by every field. This way there would be no argument about "saving seats". And then you could assign a block of scouting seats, and you would have to specify your number of seats you need-max 8 for scouting.

Just my 2 cents

[I_AM_Clayton]

the seats were empty allowing me to sit in them which they did not take kindly to.

I understand man. At champs this year during quals a friend and I went to watch matches on another field during Hopper lunch. We found good seats that had a reasonable view of the field. Before having the opportunity to sit a lady stuck out her leg blocking our path and informed us that she had most of the seats in the row saved for her team for when they returned. We didn't mind since we were taking a small lunch break and there were only two of us. At the time I knew about the rule but didn't feel the need to start a confrontation.

We moved over and sat in a section to the left. A few team leaders of another team shot us looks everyone once in a while for the less than 10 minutes it took to eat our lunch and see 2 field resets and only 1 match. The next day we decided to go up to the 400's level to eat our lunch. I feel that we shouldn't have had to worry about finding seats for a few minutes to eat lunch. Teams shouldn't be able to save seats for an entire day unless they are physically sitting in them. If no one is sitting in them for a long period of time I feel like other people should be allowed to sit in them. Not to say that you shouldn't be able to leave and come back to your seats, but that leads right back to the saving seats rule. I appreciate the team that didn't throw us out or attempt to throw us out of their section. We returned the favor by leaving promptly after finishing our lunch.

[hrench]

The existing rule needs to be enforced. Changed rules that aren't enforced will be as useless as the current rule.

People need to stop being squeamish about identifying the rule-beakers. The situation needs more "sunshine", not a code of silence.

So we have a simple rule that isn't enforced. I appreciate Sperkowsky's ingenuity of thinking up a new plan, but I don't think a more complicated rule will do any better.

I encourage you to call-out the offender. They have people reading CD. It will get back to them and they won't do it next time.

I've volunteered 'crowd control' at the Greater KC regional where we normally don't have enough seats and it's routine for the announcer to occasionally remind of the 'no saving seats' policy.

[hardcopi]

Not sure the answer to this because something obviously needs to be done. Last year I think it was that we had 2 mentors get up to use the restroom. They left their stuff (laptops, cameras, jackets, etc) in their seats. We had parents from another team shove their stuff aside and sit in those seats. When we explained they yelled at us about not saving seats and continued when we asked them if we could retrieve the belongings.

It goes both ways is my point. Maybe we have to go to assigned areas for each team. Seems a bit much but the current system isn't working. I do know Einstein could be a TON better if it was held on the wide side of the field instead of the smaller curved side.

[JesseK]

A fundamental issue with this topic is brought up in the first story that gives us context:

The OP wanted to save a seat.

Ignore any perceived contradiction, perceived double standards or perceived hypocrisy. This situation brings up the point that people want to sit together, and should be allowed to sit together.

How many saved seats it too many? 1 seat? 12 seats? 48 seats for the 54-person team?

[Sperkowsky]

I encourage you to call-out the offender. They have people reading CD. It will get back to them and they won't do it next time.


The thing is. The team whom I had a specific issue with was actually a very well respected team. Probably had one of the top 10 robots in the world this year. The other thing is that is was an issue mostly between a few parents and a single team member. I do plan on contacting a mentor on the team though.

[Brandon Holley]

A fundamental issue with this topic is brought up in the first story that gives us context:

The OP wanted to save a seat.

Ignore any perceived contradiction, perceived double standards or perceived hypocrisy. This situation brings up the point that people want to sit together, and should be allowed to sit together.

How many saved seats it too many? 1 seat? 12 seats? 48 seats for the 54-person team?

Additionally - if an empty seat is 'fair game' at any point in time, it becomes a real powder keg of a situation anytime someone gets up to use the restroom, eat, check the robot etc.

If you enforce the letter of the rule to its most literal interpretation, anytime someone gets up (for whatever reason), a pack of people can be waiting, claim a seat and quote the rule. I'm not saying people and teams don't take advantage of this, but at the same time I'm failing to see how many of the proposed solutions aside from straight up assigned seats will address the issue. I also can't quite wrap my head around how assigned seats would work with the variability in team size and how that too wouldn't lead to chunks of empty seats in premium locations that people would subsequently want to sit in...

-Brando

[OccamzRazor]

It is simple really yet people seem to still insist on acting foolish.

We had our entire team trying to find a few seats together and the newer students who did not know any better were respecting the wishes of other teams that wanted to save seats even though they are not allowed to do so. After I watched my team finally end up in the 400 section and people were still trying to save seats up there I had them all sit down wherever there was space because at that point we were in the nosebleeds and it was getting ridiculous for Einstein.

There were mentors from other teams and parents yelling about us sitting in 30 empty seats but lets face it....the short side of the stadium is not large enough for this behavior. Even if you need to sit in the middle of a team saving seats, do it and explain to them that they are simply not allowed to save sections, the stadium is too small on the short side for all these teams to fit, and that being aggressive and confrontational can cost their team awards as well as the respect of the FRC community.

OP I am sorry you had that experience but one person defying a crowd never ends well. I hope you contact their mentor and have a discussion about the event since everyone is wearing a convenient name tag. You were in the right but unfortunately people are tired, short tempered, and not their best at the end of a long week.

Once most of the teams are out of the running they seem to devolve into tired and angry people that throw GP out of the window once they have nothing to lose. This is a culture that should change.

[nrgy_blast]

The biggest issue here isn't team vs team seat saving (first come first serve, we all know that you probably shouldn't jump into the middle of a large team section just because someone left to use the restroom). It's when a team blocks members of the general public from coming in to see what's going on. Whether an 'un-tagged' exec from a large company looking to "see what it's all about", parents or relatives showing up on Saturday to check out the action or an unsuspecting passer-by that just happened onto one of our tournaments, we need to show these people what FIRST is all about!

Welcome people into our crowd, don't show them how petty we can be about who is going to sit where to watch a match. If you leave your seat(s) unattended, don't expect them to be there when you get back, especially when people unbound by the general rules show up and need a spot to park on Saturday!

[GreyingJay]

Maybe there should be saving of a reasonable number of seats. There seem to be legitimate needs for minimum seating (scouting). Maybe each team gets to claim X number of seats using lanyards or labels or some such, but only in contiguous sections. Or something.

I've always interpreted the no-seat-saving rule as going both ways. No, you're not allowed to reserve seats for your team. Yes, that means I'm allowed to pop right in and sit in the middle of your "saved" block, and there's nothing you can do to stop me. But no, I won't do that unless I absolutely have to. I will be respectful of your desire to "save" a block of seats for your team scouts or parents, within reason, and when possible, if you are respectful of my need to take one of "your" seats if nothing else is available.

I would hope that every team would abide by this unwritten rule and agree with it, but clearly that's not happening.

My own story: I was lucky to be able to attend Worlds last year and I too, along with a few of my freshman students, was pushed away from a set of legitimately empty (as-yet-untaken) seats by an overenthusiastic mentor/parent from another team desiring to claim them for their team. Like, almost literally pushed, this mentor/parent shoved their way through. I made some comment to my team members like "Let's go find somewhere else guys, OUR team is graciously professional". My kids called me out on being passive aggressive but what can you do.

[Greg Needel]

Let me start out by saying I don't have the total answer to this, but it is something that FIRST needs to address. Over the years I have seen numerous terrible things happen as a result of trying to save seats including but not limited to : making kids cry, making adults argue, making adults cry, strategies involved in blocking access to exits and entrances, injuries from running, inadvertent tripping, etc. All just to try and get better seats.


Here are some sacrificial (beat them up all you want) ideas on things that could be done to help.



Control which doors will be open at what times and make an easy system of a zig zag line like amusement parks for entry through a single entry.
Tickets/assigned seats - teams put in the number of seats that each team needs and then a lottery happens to assign blocks of tickets. If teams want to swap tickets later so be it.
Auction or raffle the best seats for charity - big team that wants good seats let them pay for them.
Dedicated areas for x number of students per team (scouts) in the best section.
Sections for active playing teams only (they do this at championship and it could be done at regional events also)
Have sections dedicated to teams that want to win the spirit award and those who don't


I think generally this issue stems from the fact that teams take FRC events at different levels of seriousness. For some getting prime seats is about having the best spots for scouts which means better data and better event results. For others they just want good seats to see their robot play on the field. Both of these are fine, but they create situations where people act inappropriately, which in my opinion sets the tone of the event and defines the experience of many teams. (nobody wants to start their event by getting yelled at by the local power house team who feels like you are in the way).

I don't have a solution for this but how many years are we going to let people's experiences at event be influenced by something small and crappy like saving seats before it changes.

[Karthik]

I think generally this issue stems from the fact that teams take FRC events at different levels of seriousness. For some getting prime seats is about having the best spots for scouts which means better data and better event results. For others they just want good seats to see their robot play on the field. Both of these are fine, but they create situations where people act inappropriately, which in my opinion sets the tone of the event and defines the experience of many teams. (nobody wants to start their event by getting yelled at by the local power house team who feels like you are in the way).

There's also the case which I heard was the ugliest this year, and that was getting seats for opening and closing ceremonies. These were cases where the teams who were involved were not on the playing field or stage, yet there were people defending their seats like a herd of hyenas defending a watering hole.

[SM987]

We'll start another thread for this, but we're developing a series of PSA's which we hope will be used to humorously educate attendees at FIRST events about this issue, as well as others.

As others have mentioned in this thread, the vast majority of people are reasonable. Communication is key. There are some attendees that are hellbent and it simply isn't worth the effort, but these are the rare exception. I think ignorance of the rule is far more common than people maliciously "offending".

I know our team typically has 10-15 guests (family friends, parents, school board officials etc.) that may be at their first FIRST event. In a perfect world, we have time to explain the etiquette, but it doesn't always work that way.

[GreyingJay]

Another option, tangential to this issue: give guests special colored lanyards and instruct ALL teams to treat these people as VIPs. (Maybe they do this already, I don't know.)

Even when all teams are at their best behaviour they're going to walk into a stadium full of banners, loud cheering, colored T-shirts everywhere and they're just not going to know where is it "ok" to sit. To have team members welcome them into the fold, invite them to sit down and explain what's going on would be the ideal scenario, as some of you already do.

[gblake]

Who is going to carry the sentiments (quality and quantity) expressed here to the correct ears within FIRST?

Does anyone already connected to the correct lines of communication want to volunteer to do it?

Blake

[Chris Mounts]

Although I agree that the saving of seats is a huge problem, we had to arrive at MSC over 1.5 hours early to get alright seats, we need to look at the situation from the seat savers perspective as well. The adult mentors are responsible for the students at these events. This is a difficult job made almost impossible if we have students spread out over an entire stadium. We have a rather small team compared to many. I can't imagine the issues that huge teams have with keeping track of all the students.

With that said their are several 'regulars' who aggressively save seats. These teams are typically large,+30 students.They know who they are because they come prepared with things like team colored blankets to cover rows of seats. This is unacceptable and puts others in a bad situation. Walking into that section and asking them to remove their blanket is very likely to lead to a confrontation. I'm not sure how to deal with this.

If someone was being paid to run these events it would clearly be their job to take care of it but it is extremely unfair to ask a volunteer who is already giving so much to go get in an argument with people who should know better. I guess it falls to all of us to protect GP even if it is uncomfortable.

[MrRoboSteve]

Who is going to carry the sentiments (quality and quantity) expressed here to the correct ears within FIRST?

Does anyone already connected to the correct lines of communication want to volunteer to do it?

Blake

One route would be to fill out the survey (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2016FIRSTChampionshipSurvey ), and put comments about the seating in there.

[Citrus Dad]

This is the classic tragedy of the commons (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/TragedyoftheCommons.html) problem - we have a scarce resource over which we compete but there is no means of allocating that scarce resource amongst ourselves. That leads to conflict that is not easily resolved.

The reasons why seats are saved are generally rationale and important:
- Adult mentors must be able to monitor the minor students in their charge.
- Scouts, who are participants in the action on the field and in the metacompetition in the tournament, need good views of the field and to be in close proximity to each other run scouting systems.
- Teammates and supporters prefer fellow companionship.

The current rule doesn't recognize any of those imperative needs. In fact, I have not seen a clear rationale for the existing rule.

The solution is the one used in so many similar situations before--create a seat allocation process that meets these imperatives. I suggest allocating two blocks to each team, one for scouts (and that will vary by team--we need 12), and another for other team members. The first block should be set up in an area with a good view of the field (not in the bottom rows based on watching how other teams set up). Teams might be willing to trade block locations for certain considerations (e.g., first pick of the first alliance :D ) The second is much more discretionary.

BTW, I also like the idea of the VIP lanyards. We really do need to be mindful of who we are interacting with--it's a reality of gaining funding for FRC.

[notmattlythgoe]

BTW, I also like the idea of the VIP lanyards. We really do need to be mindful of who we are interacting with--it's a reality of gaining funding for FRC.

I know, let's badge everyone at the event! Nothing can go wrong there right?

http://media0.giphy.com/media/qmfpjpAT2fJRK/giphy.gif

[GBK]

This is the classic tragedy of the commons (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/TragedyoftheCommons.html) problem - we have a scarce resource over which we compete but there is no means of allocating that scarce resource amongst ourselves. That leads to conflict that is not easily resolved.

The reasons why seats are saved are generally rationale and important:
- Adult mentors must be able to monitor the minor students in their charge.
- Scouts, who are participants in the action on the field and in the metacompetition in the tournament, need good views of the field and to be in close proximity to each other run scouting systems.
- Teammates and supporters prefer fellow companionship.

The current rule doesn't recognize any of those imperative needs. In fact, I have not seen a clear rationale for the existing rule.

The solution is the one used in so many similar situations before--create a seat allocation process that meets these imperatives. I suggest allocating two blocks to each team, one for scouts (and that will vary by team--we need 12), and another for other team members. The first block should be set up in an area with a good view of the field (not in the bottom rows based on watching how other teams set up). Teams might be willing to trade block locations for certain considerations (e.g., first pick of the first alliance :D ) The second is much more discretionary.

BTW, I also like the idea of the VIP lanyards.[QUOTE=Citrus Dad;1583975] We really do need to be mindful of who we are interacting with--it's a reality of gaining funding for FRC.

I ran into this at MSC an older couple came in that seemed to know little about what was going on. They sat with us and I explained enough about the game for them to be happy with what they were seeing. They watched several matches and were on their way. The next day we saw the woman at opening ceremonies with a mic in her hand. She was the representative of one of the major sponsors of the event.

[cgmv123]

Another option, tangential to this issue: give guests special colored lanyards and instruct ALL teams to treat these people as VIPs. (Maybe they do this already, I don't know.)

At Championship, this happens already. Badges of invited guests say "INVITED GUEST".

[Sperkowsky]

At Championship, this happens already. Badges of invited guests say "INVITED GUEST".

Most invited guests from what I observed were either VIPS or people affiliated with FIRST already.

Normal guests who just come by because they heard of a robotics competition have badges without anything under it from what I observed.

I also found some teams had tons of mentors with invited guest badges. Allowing them to stand field side during matches on the dome floor. Anyone know how that works?

[gblake]

This is the classic tragedy of the commons (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/TragedyoftheCommons.html) problem - we have a scarce resource over which we compete but there is no means of allocating that scarce resource amongst ourselves. That leads to conflict that is not easily resolved.

The reasons why seats are saved are generally rationale and important:
- Adult mentors must be able to monitor the minor students in their charge.
- Scouts, who are participants in the action on the field and in the metacompetition in the tournament, need good views of the field and to be in close proximity to each other run scouting systems.
- Teammates and supporters prefer fellow companionship.

The current rule doesn't recognize any of those imperative needs. In fact, I have not seen a clear rationale for the existing rule.

...Setting aside whether or not those are imperatives, and whether or not the current rule needs to recognize them; the current rule does accommodate all three just fine, so long as the venue is an appropriate one.

- Adult mentors can monitor students in whatever sized groupings the adults care to use.
--- Adult mentors will be wise to adapt the size of student groups they monitor to be compatible with the available blocks of open seats.
- People (teammates and supporters) wishing to sit together can move as far away from the field as is necessary to find a large enough block(s) of open seats.
- Scouts who wish to use a scouting system that is incompatible with the current FIRST rules, will be wise to choose a more appropriate scouting system.

If event planners are forced into using a venue that won't have enough usable seats (expected attendance, plus some extras), the event planners should put in place special rules/plans that will produce reasonable compromises; otherwise the current rule seems fine to me.

Did I overlook anything?

Blake

[wazateer1]

Another option, tangential to this issue: give guests special colored lanyards and instruct ALL teams to treat these people as VIPs. (Maybe they do this already, I don't know.)

My favorite thing about myths is they usually had some kind of visible outcome in the culture they originated in. One of my favorite typical myths is that of the "god in ugly human form". Travelers started telling myths of Gods who would pretend to be humans, ask for a night to stay, when they didn't receive it lay down some serious hurt, and when they did grant riches or long life or strong children or something. Most people think the lesson was that gods are fickle, but the truth is that this public mentality meant the hospitality of Ancient Greece was unparalleled. Turns out, treating every stranger like a "god" in disguise gives major credit to your culture. And who knows, maybe some of them will actually grant you "riches". :)

[Chris is me]

If your takeaway from the VIP stories is "we should make VIPs easier to identify so that no one is accidentally a jerk to them", I think you're missing the point of the story.

Edit: wazateer1 beat me to it.

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

- Scouts who wish to use a scouting system that is incompatible with the current FIRST rules, will be wise to choose a more appropriate scouting system.


For me this is the big one that I don't think the current rules is an appropriate accommodation for. There are many seating areas that are just not acceptable for scouting and is the reason teams like ours and many others have to come early to get the necessary seats and then worry about losing these seats during lunch and breaks. If the scouters can't see the robots on the field or can only see them for half the match, what is the point in scouting? In the event that scouts can't see the field properly, what is a team supposed to do for scouting? At that point the data becomes pretty bad and could be even worse than not scouting at all.

[GreyingJay]

If your takeaway from the VIP stories is "we should make VIPs easier to identify so that no one is accidentally a jerk to them", I think you're missing the point of the story.

Edit: wazateer1 beat me to it.

What I meant was much more along the lines of what wazateer1 said. Treat everyone nice because you just never know, and it's the right thing to do besides.

[bduddy]

Quite frankly, a blanket "no saving seats" rule is not reasonable in the face of many common scenarios, such as:

-Teams or their guests arriving at different times
-Parts of teams temporarily leaving their seats for, say, lunch, the pits, or even the bathroom

There needs to be new rules that properly balance these needs against the understandable concern to not have the entire seating area partitioned on Thursday, with no room for guests or later attendees. I'm not sure what it is, but...

[gblake]

Quite frankly, a blanket "no saving seats" rule is not reasonable in the face of many common scenarios, such as:

-Teams or their guests arriving at different times
-Parts of teams temporarily leaving their seats for, say, lunch, the pits, or even the bathroom

There needs to be new rules that properly balance these needs against the understandable concern to not have the entire seating area partitioned on Thursday, with no room for guests or later attendees. I'm not sure what it is, but...Quite frankly, in your first point, you appear to making an assumption that (IMO) is not reasonable. The assumption I think I see is that if some non-trivial parts of teams, or some non-trivial numbers of team guests, arrive later than others; that the rest of the world has to allow them all to sit with whatever part of that team sat down first, and/or allow them all to sit at the most favorable location any team member claimed.

What the rule says (implies) is that when folks arrive late, they can either form a new group that sits wherever seats are open, or the entire group (both the original- and later-arrivals) can move as much as is necessary to find a large-enough block(s) of seats.

This is precisely the point. I am more than confident that whoever wrote the No Saving Seats rule was 100% aware of your first scenario, and wrote the rule to expressly forbid a "saving seats" response to it.

If people stop saving seats for folks who are arriving "later" :rolleyes:, I think the second point you make will very nearly disappear. There might be a few things left to iron out (especially around the lunchtime topic), but I predict the big picture will be much improved.

Blake

[IndySam]

For what it's worth, I've never had an issue sitting inside of another team's "reserved" seating to watch a few matches. Most teams want to be able to have their members sit together during eliminations, and some mark off where they intend to sit. If you ask to sit in their empty seats during qualification matches, they almost never object. The vast majority of people in the stands are pretty reasonable.

I'm fairly confident that you will have better seats by communicating with other teams in the stands than by having FIRST sanction off a section where you are required to sit.

I have had HOF teams deny me seating in their area.

[FarmerJohn]

After volunteering for 4 days straight doing field reset our field (Newton) was not chosen to reset Einstein. It was disappointing but, we got to watch great finals matches and I proceeded after cleaning up the field a bit to find Einstein seating. Being I only needed 2 seats one for my mom and one for me I figured this should not be too big of a problem. I found 2 of the best seats that were not going to be reserved for teams on Einstein and sat in one knowing the rules well I did not put anything there to reserve the seat and I proceeded to text my mom to come by. However, right then I got stormed by a team whose seats I apparently "Stole." For reference this team was taking up 6 rows of seating in the lower level of the dome with many many empty seats. I explained calmly that the seats were empty allowing me to sit in them which they did not take kindly to. I was screamed at, called names, and felt physically in danger when a student jumped over a seat to sit next to me. Taking what I explained to hopefully be my mom's seat. I ended up leaving the seats in favor of worse ones next to a team that would not irritate me for the entire night. Worse seat better people.

I'm going to be skeptical here. I don't think this is an accurate representation of events. A lot of this seems exaggerated. I'm not saying you're lying, and you do bring up a legitimate concern, but I highly doubt that you were screamed at, called names, and physically endangered.

Here's what I think most likely happened: You took some convenient seats that belonged to some scouts - probably had some supplies around the seats, but nobody in them directly - and the team saw you. They then said something along the lines of "Hey, we were sitting here" and proceeded to sit around you, not doing anything to kick you out of your seat. You got mad you couldn't get the seats you wanted (and the seat you were saving, even though you're complaining about saving seats?) and decided to post about it on chief.

This thread has the right idea, but I don't think things happened the way you claim they did, and I don't think this is as big of a problem as you claim.

[Sperkowsky]

I'm going to be skeptical here. I don't think this is an accurate representation of events. A lot of this seems exaggerated. I'm not saying you're lying, and you do bring up a legitimate concern, but I highly doubt that you were screamed at, called names, and physically endangered.

Here's what I think most likely happened: You took some convenient seats that belonged to some scouts - probably had some supplies around the seats, but nobody in them directly - and the team saw you. They then said something along the lines of "Hey, we were sitting here" and proceeded to sit around you, not doing anything to kick you out of your seat. You got mad you couldn't get the seats you wanted (and the seat you were saving, even though you're complaining about saving seats?) and decided to post about it on chief.

This thread has the right idea, but I don't think things happened the way you claim they did, and I don't think this is as big of a problem as you claim.
Who are you to discredit me?
What do I gain in exaggerating these events?
Were you there?

I will not justify myself as I do not have to.

[Chris is me]

I'm going to be skeptical here. I don't think this is an accurate representation of events. A lot of this seems exaggerated. I'm not saying you're lying, and you do bring up a legitimate concern, but I highly doubt that you were screamed at, called names, and physically endangered.

Here's what I think most likely happened: You took some convenient seats that belonged to some scouts - probably had some supplies around the seats, but nobody in them directly - and the team saw you. They then said something along the lines of "Hey, we were sitting here" and proceeded to sit around you, not doing anything to kick you out of your seat. You got mad you couldn't get the seats you wanted (and the seat you were saving, even though you're complaining about saving seats?) and decided to post about it on chief.

This thread has the right idea, but I don't think things happened the way you claim they did, and I don't think this is as big of a problem as you claim.

"I think your story sounds ridiculous, so you must be completely lying about what happened"

Even if he embellished a little bit, this isn't exactly an out of the blue occurrence at the Championship, and I would think the dozens of posters replying in agreement would reinforce this. I certainly don't think that the OP was claiming he was kicked out and screamed at when actually nobody engaged him at all.

[PayneTrain]

I'm going to be skeptical here. I don't think this is an accurate representation of events. A lot of this seems exaggerated. I'm not saying you're lying, and you do bring up a legitimate concern, but I highly doubt that you were screamed at, called names, and physically endangered.

Here's what I think most likely happened: You took some convenient seats that belonged to some scouts - probably had some supplies around the seats, but nobody in them directly - and the team saw you. They then said something along the lines of "Hey, we were sitting here" and proceeded to sit around you, not doing anything to kick you out of your seat. You got mad you couldn't get the seats you wanted (and the seat you were saving, even though you're complaining about saving seats?) and decided to post about it on chief.

This thread has the right idea, but I don't think things happened the way you claim they did, and I don't think this is as big of a problem as you claim.

I saw some team mom go full starfish, laying out over rows of seats, while she start speaking in tongues trying to save seats at championships.

I will believe almost anything.

[IndySam]

I'm going to be skeptical here. I don't think this is an accurate representation of events. A lot of this seems exaggerated. I'm not saying you're lying, and you do bring up a legitimate concern, but I highly doubt that you were screamed at, called names, and physically endangered.

Here's what I think most likely happened: You took some convenient seats that belonged to some scouts - probably had some supplies around the seats, but nobody in them directly - and the team saw you. They then said something along the lines of "Hey, we were sitting here" and proceeded to sit around you, not doing anything to kick you out of your seat. You got mad you couldn't get the seats you wanted (and the seat you were saving, even though you're complaining about saving seats?) and decided to post about it on chief.

This thread has the right idea, but I don't think things happened the way you claim they did, and I don't think this is as big of a problem as you claim.

You should be glad I have a policy of not giving out red dots.

[s_forbes]

I saw some team mom go full starfish, laying out over rows of seats, while she start speaking in tongues trying to save seats at championships.

Of all the stories I've read online, this sounds like the truest. :)

[Citrus Dad]

Quite frankly, in your first point, you appear to making an assumption that (IMO) is not reasonable. The assumption I think I see is that if some non-trivial parts of teams, or some non-trivial numbers of team guests, arrive later than others; that the rest of the world has to allow them all to sit with whatever part of that team sat down first, and/or allow them all to sit at the most favorable location any team member claimed.

What the rule says (implies) is that when folks arrive late, they can either form a new group that sits wherever seats are open, or the entire group (both the original- and later-arrivals) can move as much as is necessary to find a large-enough block(s) of seats.

This is precisely the point. I am more than confident that whoever wrote the No Saving Seats rule was 100% aware of your first scenario, and wrote the rule to expressly forbid a "saving seats" response to it.

If people stop saving seats for folks who are arriving "later" :rolleyes:, I think the second point you make will very nearly disappear. There might be a few things left to iron out (especially around the lunchtime topic), but I predict the big picture will be much improved.

Blake

You're solution is unreasonable and even unworkable. You're saying that if teams can't get their entire group there in line at 5 am they are FOL and they should expect that to stay together they will as a group have to get up and move, as a group, to another large block of seats (that most likely doesn't exist elsewhere within view of the field). In other words, only small teams are rewarded by remaining small so that they can continue to sit together.

That doesn't sound like a recipe for "making it loud."

[Citrus Dad]

Setting aside whether or not those are imperatives, and whether or not the current rule needs to recognize them; the current rule does accommodate all three just fine, so long as the venue is an appropriate one.

- Adult mentors can monitor students in whatever sized groupings the adults care to use.
--- Adult mentors will be wise to adapt the size of student groups they monitor to be compatible with the available blocks of open seats.
- People (teammates and supporters) wishing to sit together can move as far away from the field as is necessary to find a large enough block(s) of open seats.
- Scouts who wish to use a scouting system that is incompatible with the current FIRST rules, will be wise to choose a more appropriate scouting system.

If event planners are forced into using a venue that won't have enough usable seats (expected attendance, plus some extras), the event planners should put in place special rules/plans that will produce reasonable compromises; otherwise the current rule seems fine to me.

Did I overlook anything?

Blake

Yes, you did.

1) Are you the sole arbiter of "Adult mentors can monitor students in whatever sized groupings the adults care to use"? That's a non-answer. You MUST leave the discretion of that grouping to the mentors in charge, not to YOUR definitions. Many mentors want to keep their charges together in a certain location. You have to leave them the tools to accomplish the task, not proscribe them for you own selfish need to sit where you want.

2) How do you accommodate large teams that can't find a sufficiently large contiguous block of seats that will accommodate all of the students? It's not possible to do this without saving seats.

3) So you believe that scouting systems are entirely superfluous to the FRC experience? In other words the only important people on FRC teams are the pit crew and the drive team and everyone else be $@#$@#$@#$@#? The reality is that all of the successful teams have complex scouting systems that require close proximity. Why you would want to end technological innovation and the associated educational benefits that it creates simply because you want to be able to sit where ever you want sounds incredibly selfish.

And you still haven't addressed my first point: tragedy of the commons problems are only solvable through rational resource allocations. They are never solved through "lets be nice." We have to address this straight up.

BTW, I see that you are in FTC, not FRC. You don't even have standing on this particular issue because these issues of scouting and team size aren't relevant to FTC.

[EricH]

I think the basic "agreement" should be something like this:

--You CAN save seats, in a block or a line, but only enough for your team members who are present AND likely to sit down during the event (that is, pit crew and drive team don't necessarily count).
--Other persons (adjacent teams' members and/or non-team folks) can sit in any open seat, particularly if they ask.
--If someone leaves the stands to go to restroom or lunch, they should be able to sit within, or next to, their team's saved area.

And the big portion of this: Have the bodies in the seats. Most effective way to save a seat is to sit in it. Translation, 2-3 people shouldn't be saving 40 seats, it should be 20-30 people saving 40 seats (ballpark numbers). If you've got the former, see my second item above.


I've got no problem with saving seats for team members so the team can sit together. I've got a problem with not allowing people whose team wasn't able to save enough seats to join you and sit near their team.

And I'll go on record that one of the MN teams on Galileo is a great example of this (can't remember who offhand, or I'd call 'em out better). They readily allowed small groups of our team members to take their empty seats when our section was full up. I want to say I recall Buzz doing the same thing a couple of times.

[gblake]

Yes, you did.

1) Are you the sole arbiter of "Adult mentors can monitor students in whatever sized groupings the adults care to use"? That's a non-answer. You MUST leave the discretion of that grouping to the mentors in charge, not to YOUR definitions. Many mentors want to keep their charges together in a certain location. You have to leave them the tools to accomplish the task, not proscribe them for you own selfish need to sit where you want.
Of course I'm not the sole arbiter ... For FIRST events, for this topic, FIRST is. That's why I read FIRST's rules and follow them.

Adult mentors can prepare for events so long as they know in advance the rules that will be in effect at those events. The current rules say no saving seats. Adult mentors should plan accordingly. That's not my definition. That's the rule. Yell at FIRST, not me. Tell FIRST what they "MUST" do, not me.

And please... The world won't stop spinning if a group has to split into two or three smaller groups; particularly if the group planned in advance for that contingency.

2) How do you accommodate large teams that can't find a sufficiently large contiguous block of seats that will accommodate all of the students? It's not possible to do this without saving seats.
They either sit someplace where there are enough seats to satisfy their desire to stay in one group (probably not ringside or on the 50 yard line), or they split up. See #1 above.

If it's not possible to do it without saving seats, then it's *not* possible. Those teams should plan accordingly; or plan (through their actions) to show FIRST and everyone else at the event that they don't care about following this particular FIRST rule. I would be curious to learn what reason they might have for asserting that the rule doesn't apply to them.

3) So you believe that scouting systems are entirely superfluous to the FRC experience? In other words the only important people on FRC teams are the pit crew and the drive team and everyone else be $@#$@#$@#$@#? The reality is that all of the successful teams have complex scouting systems that require close proximity. Why you would want to end technological innovation and the associated educational benefits that it creates simply because you want to be able to sit where ever you want sounds incredibly selfish.
I neither wrote that scouting systems were superfluous; nor used any strings of special characters in my post; nor wrote that I wanted to end technical innovation, nor ... That is all just over-the-top exaggeration.

I wrote that teams need to take into account FIRST's rules (all of them) when selecting a scouting system to use. I have done FRC scouting from places throughout a stadium and I know enough about what scouts need to do. Until FIRST changes FIRST's rules, scouts should follow FIRST's rules.

What you wrote here almost sounds like you are telling us that all successful (on the field success) teams use scouting methods that depend on ignoring/violating a FIRST rule in order to create their success. Surely that isn't true.

FIRST's rule, not mine is that seats may not be saved. I presume they did that to create a welcoming environment in the stands where all people employ their most gracious and professional demeanor. How we got from there to discussing my alleged selfishness is a bit mysterious.

Are we saying that if I walk into an event at 8:00 AM, see 5 people "saving" 30 seats in a nice part of the stands for people who will arrive at at maybe 8:30 or 9:00 or later, that I am being selfish (and the other folks are being gracious and professional???) if I choose to sit in one of those 30 seats for the either the next few minutes or the next few hours???? And that by doing so, I and other like me become responsible for the collapse of FRC scouting???? Again, that's a bit over-the-top.

And you still haven't addressed my first point: tragedy of the commons problems are only solvable through rational resource allocations. They are never solved through "lets be nice." We have to address this straight up.
There *is* a rational resource allocation in place. It satisfies, or is the chosen best compromise for, all requirements/constraints FIRST places on their events. That allocation is "one person who is present" = "one seat". FIRST codified it in their rules. If you want to suggest a different rational allocation, talk to FIRST.

BTW, I see that you are in FTC, not FRC. You don't even have standing on this particular issue because these issues of scouting and team size aren't relevant to FTC.
This is the most egregious, over-the-top comment of the bunch. In my STEM robotics time, I have been an FRC/FTC/VRC mentor, an FRC/FTC/VRC/SeaPerch tournament volunteer, a VRC tournament organizer, and an FRC/FTC/VRC/FLL spectator. Is that enough standing for you?

I have also been the tour guide responsible for ensuring that the VPs of a $40B revenue /year company decided FRC was worth sponsoring. Luckily on that day we didn't encounter anyone yelling at, pushing, obstructing, or otherwise harassing someone that they didn't want sitting in one of their saved seats.

Sheesh.

[gblake]

You're solution is unreasonable and even unworkable. You're saying that if teams can't get their entire group there in line at 5 am they are FOL and they should expect that to stay together they will as a group have to get up and move, as a group, to another large block of seats (that most likely doesn't exist elsewhere within view of the field). In other words, only small teams are rewarded by remaining small so that they can continue to sit together.

That doesn't sound like a recipe for "making it loud."It is reasonable and it is workable. There is prima facie evidence all over the place. Many teams, both large and small, follow the no saving seats rule, and things work out OK for them.

You personally might not like the rule, but FIRST believes it is reasonable (they published it), and FIRST believes that it is workable.

I agree with them.

[Jeanne Boyarsky]

I think there is a different scenario on Einstein than at a regional field. Einstein reminds me of Disney or the Macy's parade where people get into place hours early to watch an event, but stay for the event. Whereas at a regional, there is more coming and going.

The volunteer crowd control (http://www.firstinspires.org/resource-library/frc/crowd-control) job description includes:
Prohibit teams from "saving" blocks of seats

Now this is hard! But there is someone to complain to if a team isn't letting you sit. Then the crowd control person can support you in your being allowed to sit. (I've done crowd control. People are "creative" in what they say.)

At the NYC regional, I volunteer as crowd control or safety glasses and go sit with the team I mentor for our matches. Which means I show up right before or a match before ours and then leave the seat. I'm not in the seat all day. And I frequently sit in a seat near our team's seats that has other team's "stuff" marking it. Sometimes this goes ok. Sometimes the team informs me it is there seat. I usually say I'll be gone before their teammate comes back and it is fine. One time, a lady wouldn't let me sit. She had tons of bags on the seat so I picked up the bags and sat down. Turns out she had her leg up on the seat and I sat on her foot. Eek.

[XaulZan11]

3) So you believe that scouting systems are entirely superfluous to the FRC experience? In other words the only important people on FRC teams are the pit crew and the drive team and everyone else be $@#$@#$@#$@#? The reality is that all of the successful teams have complex scouting systems that require close proximity. Why you would want to end technological innovation and the associated educational benefits that it creates simply because you want to be able to sit where ever you want sounds incredibly selfish.

I haven't been to Champs since 2014, but has it become that impossible to find 6-10 decent seats together?

[Knufire]

I haven't been to Champs since 2014, but has it become that impossible to find 6-10 decent seats together?

During eliminations on more competitive divisions and Einstein, yes.

[Citrus Dad]

It is reasonable and it is workable. There is prima facie evidence all over the place. Many teams, both large and small, follow the no saving seats rule, and things work out OK for them.

You personally might not like the rule, but FIRST believes it is reasonable (they published it), and FIRST believes that it is workable.

I agree with them.

I disagree with your observation completely. I see many more teams saving seats in the central viewing area around each field than not. I see the same thing at the Regionals we attend. I also see a lot of flexibility from almost all of the teams. It's only an issue at the beginning of the day, and when the stands are completely packed during playoffs.

Whether FIRST believes its reasonable is probably irrelevant because they clearly haven't given much thought to the consequences. And given the complete lack of enforcement they reveal that they believe that it's unworkable.

Notably, FIRST saves seats for Einstein teams during the final. If they lived by their words, they would allow any and all teams to sit where ever they wanted during Einstein. Clearly they even recognize that the no saving seat rule is unworkable.

So, again give me a rationale as to why its a good policy other than a tautology that FIRST thinks its a good policy?

[Sperkowsky]

I disagree with your observation completely. I see many more teams saving seats in the central viewing area around each field than not. I see the same thing at the Regionals we attend. I also see a lot of flexibility from almost all of the teams. It's only an issue at the beginning of the day, and when the stands are completely packed during playoffs.

Whether FIRST believes its reasonable is probably irrelevant because they clearly haven't given much thought to the consequences. And given the complete lack of enforcement they reveal that they believe that it's unworkable.

Notably, FIRST saves seats for Einstein teams during the final. If they lived by their words, they would allow any and all teams to sit where ever they wanted during Einstein. Clearly they even recognize that the no saving seat rule is unworkable.

So, again give me a rationale as to why its a good policy other than a tautology that FIRST thinks its a good policy?

Your general argument this whole time has been based around scouts needing seats which I understand. However, this is all thrown out the window come eliminations as scouting is over.

First reserving seats for teams on Einstein is awesome. Its that little special treat teams get for making it. I do not think anyone has a problem with that. Being the team that you are on I am sure you have enjoyed those seats year after year.

I started this thread because I believe some sort of action needs to be taken. However, I disagree that the rule is unworkable. With clear enforcement and harsher repercussions I am sure most issues would be more easily resolved.

[Knufire]

Your general argument this whole time has been based around scouts needing seats which I understand. However, this is all thrown out the window come eliminations as scouting is over.

Teams do scout during eliminations. Even Einstien.

[AdamHeard]

...

...

...

http://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lyvrkqzZnl1rn95k2o1_500.gif

[evanperryg]

Teams do scout during eliminations. Even Einstien.

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.

Anyway, more on topic:
We've saved seats. Thursday morning at Archimedes, we had a bus of 60-something kids get caught in nasty traffic, and it was nearly an hour and a half behind. We marked out an area with people and scouting items, and explained our situation calmly and graciously to other teams. They understood, and were happy to oblige. There was one team who needed a few seats for scouters, and we gladly gave them the 8 seats they needed. It wasn't a problem for us, I ended up talking to them for quite a while and learned a lot about them. Did we "break the rules?" Yeah, I guess. Does it matter? Not at all, because it was handled professionally by us, and the teams around us. They were very understanding of our situation, and we were understanding of their situation. When people are nice to each other, they don't necessarily need rules to guide their behavior.

TL;dr: If we were all graciously professional to each other, this whole thing would work a lot better. (http://youtu.be/W5FfJ89rGPc)

[EricH]

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.

[tangent] You do want to know what your alliance and your opponents are capable of. Also potential opponents. If you can see that X is vulnerable to defense, and to the tune of Y, while Z barely slows you down, all of that is good to know.

[Sperkowsky]

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.

Anyway, more on topic:
We've saved seats. Thursday morning at Archimedes, we had a bus of 60-something kids get caught in nasty traffic, and it was nearly an hour and a half behind. We marked out an area with people and scouting items, and explained our situation calmly and graciously to other teams. They understood, and were happy to oblige. There was one team who needed a few seats for scouters, and we gladly gave them the 8 seats they needed. It wasn't a problem for us, I ended up talking to them for quite a while and learned a lot about them. Did we "break the rules?" Yeah, I guess. Does it matter? Not at all, because it was handled professionally by us, and the teams around us. They were very understanding of our situation, and we were understanding of their situation. When people are nice to each other, they don't necessarily need rules to guide their behavior.

TL;dr: If we were all graciously professional to each other, this whole thing would work a lot better. (http://youtu.be/W5FfJ89rGPc)
Where your post differs from a lot of others is you allowed the 8 scouts to sit there. There is a big difference between saying that that seat is reserved and asking if you could keep that seat.

[Knufire]

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.


Data can help make strategic decisions during Einstein. Not the same type of scouting that you would do during qualifications where you're trying to gain an overall understanding of a robot's performance, but recording specific numbers or trends that are important to your strategy. For example, when I was sitting with 469 as an alumnus during Einstein 2014, there were students measuring average cycle time during all the Einstein matches and relaying those numbers down to the strategy team on the field.

[Citrus Dad]

Of course I'm not the sole arbiter ... For FIRST events, for this topic, FIRST is. That's why I read FIRST's rules and follow them.

Adult mentors can prepare for events so long as they know in advance the rules that will be in effect at those events. The current rules say no saving seats. Adult mentors should plan accordingly. That's not my definition. That's the rule. Yell at FIRST, not me. Tell FIRST what they "MUST" do, not me.

And please... The world won't stop spinning if a group has to split into two or three smaller groups; particularly if the group planned in advance for that contingency.

They either sit someplace where there are enough seats to satisfy their desire to stay in one group (probably not ringside or on the 50 yard line), or they split up. See #1 above.

If it's not possible to do it without saving seats, then it's *not* possible. Those teams should plan accordingly; or plan (through their actions) to show FIRST and everyone else at the event that they don't care about following this particular FIRST rule. I would be curious to learn what reason they might have for asserting that the rule doesn't apply to them.

I neither wrote that scouting systems were superfluous; nor used any strings of special characters in my post; nor wrote that I wanted to end technical innovation, nor ... That is all just over-the-top exaggeration.

I wrote that teams need to take into account FIRST's rules (all of them) when selecting a scouting system to use. I have done FRC scouting from places throughout a stadium and I know enough about what scouts need to do. Until FIRST changes FIRST's rules, scouts should follow FIRST's rules.

What you wrote here almost sounds like you are telling us that all successful (on the field success) teams use scouting methods that depend on ignoring/violating a FIRST rule in order to create their success. Surely that isn't true.

FIRST's rule, not mine is that seats may not be saved. I presume they did that to create a welcoming environment in the stands where all people employ their most gracious and professional demeanor. How we got from there to discussing my alleged selfishness is a bit mysterious.

Are we saying that if I walk into an event at 8:00 AM, see 5 people "saving" 30 seats in a nice part of the stands for people who will arrive at at maybe 8:30 or 9:00 or later, that I am being selfish (and the other folks are being gracious and professional???) if I choose to sit in one of those 30 seats for the either the next few minutes or the next few hours???? And that by doing so, I and other like me become responsible for the collapse of FRC scouting???? Again, that's a bit over-the-top.


There *is* a rational resource allocation in place. It satisfies, or is the chosen best compromise for, all requirements/constraints FIRST places on their events. That allocation is "one person who is present" = "one seat". FIRST codified it in their rules. If you want to suggest a different rational allocation, talk to FIRST.


This is the most egregious, over-the-top comment of the bunch. In my STEM robotics time, I have been an FRC/FTC/VRC mentor, an FRC/FTC/VRC/SeaPerch tournament volunteer, a VRC tournament organizer, and an FRC/FTC/VRC/FLL spectator. Is that enough standing for you?

I have also been the tour guide responsible for ensuring that the VPs of a $40B revenue /year company decided FRC was worth sponsoring. Luckily on that day we didn't encounter anyone yelling at, pushing, obstructing, or otherwise harassing someone that they didn't want sitting in one of their saved seats.

Sheesh.

FIRST is not a monolithic entity. Of course I'm talking about changing its rules. I'm talking to FIRST here indirectly and also directly. And the only way to get a discussion going about changing its rules is to have a discussion on CD. Your are trying to shut down this discussion by saying "because FIRST said so." That is not a productive line of discussion. That's why I'm responding to you--you're responsible for your thoughts and opinions.

If you read my proposal, I thought that there should be several groups, one of them getting priority seating. But my point is that scouts are competitors who deserve the same respect as the drive team. You said that teams should build scouting systems that don't require sitting together. And I am telling you that will end innovation in technical development of scouting systems. Do you have experience in managing scouting systems that gives you enough background to refute this point? Please provide evidence that your scouting system has been successfully implemented. I think we've demonstrated that ours works.

And yes, all of the successful teams that I've encountered who scout at Champs violate this rule. Every single one of them. I'd be interested to hear any counterexamples you can provide. Obviously I can't provide a list of rule breakers, but I'll start by pointing out every #1 and #2 alliance captain on Einstein saves seats for their scouts. I think the #7 alliance captain does too. (I sat with their #1 pick and know they were saving seats.)

And if you want to really solve the problem you identified as a tour guide, then you want to solve the tragedy of the commons problem. When everyone knows what the rights are to their seats so they don't have to fight over them. Everyone will become more civil. Right now is recipe for conflict.

You're acting like everyone started driving 55 in 1973 when they changed the speed limit. Instead it turned everyone into a lawbreaker. When rules and laws fail, as they are now, it's time to change the rules.

(BTW California's water problems are rooted in the same refusal to acknowledge that scarce resources need to be explicitly allocated.)

And if you're with FRC right now, then put your affiliation on your profile. Right now you have no standing in the discussion because you have no real stake. Past affiliation doesn't count.

[Edxu]

Your general argument this whole time has been based around scouts needing seats which I understand. However, this is all thrown out the window come eliminations as scouting is over.



Scouting continues in elims spearheaded by the top scouts. However, scouting shifts from data recording to strategy recording and robot analysis.

There are matches all the time where a higher-seeded alliance lost sets because they chose not to adapt their strategy to the playstyle of the opposing alliance, or a weaker alliance was able to exploit a hole in a strong alliance's strategy and clutch out a match.

Real example: In 2014 at Ruckus, 610,1241 and 378, the third-seeded alliance were able to defeat the first-seeded alliance of 1126,1114 and 3951 by exploiting a hole in their offensive strategy.
The first-seeded alliance's strategy was to do a standard cycle of 1126 inbound+truss -> HP to 3951 -> 1114 finish, but our alliance realized that by parking 3951 in the opponent's loading area, 1126 was unable to make their truss shot effectively, winning us the match and the event in the end.



On topic: From my own observations at Canadian events,a few teams all arrive at the venue ~60-90 minutes before the doors open in order to secure great seats for the team and for scouting. Among the first few teams that arrive, there is very little rushing because teams tend to discuss what seats they want, make compromises and everyone ends up reasonably satisfied. This was what happened at GTRE, and a little bit of this happened at Waterloo.

In terms of protecting seats, we're as guilty as anyone other team that fields a large group (45 students, we usually put bags on seats etc), but we've tried to change our "seat culture" recently to offer and encourage non-team members to sit in our stands. In fact, I made a few friends that I still keep in touch with today at CMP because they asked to sit in our stands and we obliged.

I think that we still have room to improve in terms of seat-saving, but as it stands, I'm pretty satisfied and happy with how stands and seat-saving is managed at Canadian FRC events.

[Sperkowsky]

snip.

What I just took from your post was

1. It's OK to break the rules because everyone else does it. (a very dangerous precedent to set to a bunch of high school students)

And

2. A persons opinion only matters if they put a team affiliation on their profile. Forgive my sarcasm but Did I miss the memo when you got the power to decide who's opinion was valid?

[evanperryg]

Data can help make strategic decisions during Einstein. Not the same type of scouting that you would do during qualifications where you're trying to gain an overall understanding of a robot's performance, but recording specific numbers or trends that are important to your strategy. For example, when I was sitting with 469 as an alumnus during Einstein 2014, there were students measuring average cycle time during all the Einstein matches and relaying those numbers down to the strategy team on the field.

Alright, now that two people have said this... I guess I wasn't very clear on what I meant. In elims, you aren't really taking numerical data. It's more about a couple of lead scouts taking notes and building strategies out of the strengths and weaknesses of opposing alliances. It's not as intensive.

I'll reiterate my main point: just be nice to people, and they'll be nice to you. Be understanding of others' situation, and they will be understanding of yours. This entire discussion has become uncharacteristically heated, not just for CD, but for FRC in general. It's interesting, absolutely, but let's try not to leverage age, reputation, or rhetoric to prove each other wrong. Discussion, not fighting.

[gblake]

FIRST is not a monolithic entity. Of course I'm talking about changing its rules. I'm talking to FIRST here indirectly and also directly. And the only way to get a discussion going about changing its rules is to have a discussion on CD. Your are trying to shut down this discussion by saying "because FIRST said so." That is not a productive line of discussion. That's why I'm responding to you--you're responsible for your thoughts and opinions.

If you read my proposal, I thought that there should be several groups, one of them getting priority seating. But my point is that scouts are competitors who deserve the same respect as the drive team. You said that teams should build scouting systems that don't require sitting together. And I am telling you that will end innovation in technical development of scouting systems. Do you have experience in managing scouting systems that gives you enough background to refute this point? Please provide evidence that your scouting system has been successfully implemented. I think we've demonstrated that ours works.

And yes, all of the successful teams that I've encountered who scout at Champs violate this rule. Every single one of them. I'd be interested to hear any counterexamples you can provide. Obviously I can't provide a list of rule breakers, but I'll start by pointing out every #1 and #2 alliance captain on Einstein saves seats for their scouts. I think the #7 alliance captain does too. (I sat with their #1 pick and know they were saving seats.)

And if you want to really solve the problem you identified as a tour guide, then you want to solve the tragedy of the commons problem. When everyone knows what the rights are to their seats so they don't have to fight over them. Everyone will become more civil. Right now is recipe for conflict.

You're acting like everyone started driving 55 in 1973 when they changed the speed limit. Instead it turned everyone into a lawbreaker. When rules and laws fail, as they are now, it's time to change the rules.

(BTW California's water problems are rooted in the same refusal to acknowledge that scarce resources need to be explicitly allocated.)

And if you're with FRC right now, then put your affiliation on your profile. Right now you have no standing in the discussion because you have no real stake. Past affiliation doesn't count.

So much putting words into my mouth, so many unfounded assertions, and so much self-centered blindness, I'm not going to bother. Both of our positions are evident. What I wrote earlier was enough for me to describe my opinion.

While the above paragraph is plenty blunt; with it, I'm ending my half of this particular back and forth because evanerryg is right.

In the bigger picture:

Some of us seem to think it's right to tell everyone in line behind a seat-saver to take worse seats (than they would otherwise be in) so that the seat-saver may claim seats for people who haven't arrived yet at a first-come first-served event. I have been, and always will be, dumbfounded by that line of reasoning.

Others among us seem to disagree.

I don't think many people would object to FIRST creating a few enclaves for scouts to use, but we really aren't talking about the scouts here, are we? We are really talking about the much larger population(s) of non-scouts. Let's not get lost in the scouting weed patch. It's one tree, and isn't the forest.

[Chinmay]

OP, one thing that might make you feel a little better about this ongoing problem is that word does eventually get around about the teams that save seats/are obnoxious about it. Though it feels like you lost in those situations, the teams that were being rude are the ones losing in the long run.

The way our community works, no one is going to post on CD that a certain team was hogging the stands, but I can guarantee that this is something that people talk about at competitions. There have been countless instances where I've had a bad experience in the stands and mentioned it to the other volunteers I saw that day... "Team __ was quite rude in the stands" or "Team ___ had one kid always running around the pits and wouldn't listen." Other times, I might talk to my own team about how I was treated badly.

You never know when things like that make their way to the ears of the judges. In a few select instances, I have walked straight up to a judge and told them about my experience interacting with a team. If common courtesy doesn't convince you to share seats, maybe the possibility of losing some points will.

I would also like to touch upon some of the very passionate defense of seat saving that some have made on this thread. I get that teams want to sit together, I totally understand that scouts need to sit closer to the field. I understand where you are coming from and that you really, really care about your seats because they're important for team performance, I used to have the same mindset when I was a student getting scouting data from my team... BUT YOU'RE STILL BEING RUDE. Just because I can understand the motivation, doesn't mean I tolerate the behavior. I am most disappointed in the top tier teams who justify bad behavior with the competitive advantages that it provides them.

I am using this quote as an example to highlight the perceived importance of scouting to a team and (from my understanding of this post) this individual's higher value on scouting than allowing a volunteer or spectator to sit wherever they want. Not at all implying that 1678 has shown bad stands behavior, just that this post does a great job highlighting what I think is the wrong mindset to take regarding seating. I do not think the OP was at all selfish in his search for a good seat after volunteering at the event.

Yes, you did.
3) So you believe that scouting systems are entirely superfluous to the FRC experience? In other words the only important people on FRC teams are the pit crew and the drive team and everyone else be $@#$@#$@#$@#? The reality is that all of the successful teams have complex scouting systems that require close proximity. Why you would want to end technological innovation and the associated educational benefits that it creates simply because you want to be able to sit where ever you want sounds incredibly selfish.


Lastly, a huge thank you to the many teams who have, over the years, offered me a seat in "their reserved section." Many of the instances of kindness are not highlighted--we generally tend to focus on the negatives (not trying to take away from the importance of this problem, just trying to draw some attention to the positive experiences I've had in the stands at FIRST events too).

[Chinmay]

In terms of protecting seats, we're as guilty as anyone other team that fields a large group (45 students, we usually put bags on seats etc), but we've tried to change our "seat culture" recently to offer and encourage non-team members to sit in our stands. In fact, I made a few friends that I still keep in touch with today at CMP because they asked to sit in our stands and we obliged.


I think this snippet suggests a good compromise that we can hopefully adopt while waiting for FIRST to come up with the miracle cure.

I want to emphasize that team "culture" around the many things, such as how to accept loss, how to be inclusive to all members, what to do with seats in the stands etc. comes from the top down. I have noticed that problems in the stands stem from mentors and senior members telling younger kids to reserve seats, and the younger kids trying to do what their teammates suggested. Usually there is some level of miscommunication, and the rookie team member may end up fighting tooth and nail to save a spot because they think someone wanted them to do that. In reality, the mentor or parent would not have condoned or wanted that behavior to save a seat.

Clearly in some cases team leadership is actually suggesting that members should fight tooth and nail, but I think that is the minority. I dont think people are intentionally trying to be rude, my guess is that there is some level of miscommunication.

Taking a second to think about mindset like Edxu suggests can go a long way. Thanks for maturely handling the situation at champs! I hope teams can have a quick sit down with their members and go over these expectations. I will have that chat with your team at a competition in the stands in front of everyone else, but I'd much rather teams did that on their own time

[TheDoctor_1]

A suggestion:
7 or 8 additional pins are included in the packet, marked "Scouting Team". These pins allow the person access to "Scouting Row" which would be a designated area in the front of the stands. This area would be set off and patrolled by a few of the security personnel. It would be more of an exclusive area than the rest of the seating, akin to the robot queue.

[evanperryg]

FIRST is not a monolithic entity. Of course I'm talking about changing its rules. I'm talking to FIRST here indirectly and also directly. And the only way to get a discussion going about changing its rules is to have a discussion on CD. Your are trying to shut down this discussion by saying "because FIRST said so." That is not a productive line of discussion. That's why I'm responding to you--you're responsible for your thoughts and opinions.
...
And if you're with FRC right now, then put your affiliation on your profile. Right now you have no standing in the discussion because you have no real stake. Past affiliation doesn't count.

I agree with you fully, right up until the last paragraph. As I've stated, some rules are meant to be broken. Ultimately, FRC culture has evolved in a way that makes it inherently work against the grain of the current seating rules, and that's fine. In fact, it's good, as the current culture allows teams to be together in the stands. I can't imagine how much less spirited we would be if we were all split apart, and I can't imagine how annoying it would be to hand out scouting stuff across 2 or 3 different sections.

Where I have a problem is the last few sentences. If he's involved with FRC, then he has a stake in the issue, regardless of what team he is on. Although i believe this is what you meant to say, asking him to specify what team he is with goes beyond the fundamental "yes/no" question. The question of whether he is involved with an FRC team is relevant, considering this discussion carries implications for the teams, but what team he is affiliated with has nothing to do with it. Furthermore, I disagree that past affiliation "doesn't count." Let's be honest, it's not like the seat-saving issue is a new thing. If he was affiliated with a team, and has past experiences with seat-saving while involved with that team, then he has the right to share those experiences and build an argument out of them. Perhaps those arguments shouldn't be phrased in the present-tense, but they are valid nonetheless.

[Chris is me]

... If you need your six scouts to have six seats, why don't they just sit together at the beginning of the day? Where do they have to be other than in the stands scouting? Hold your seats like everyone else who follows the rules does.

If one or two of them has to get up and go to the bathroom, other teams aren't vultures who are going to come down and take those two seats, particularly if they are scattered amongst your team already. Most people are gracious enough that if you politely say that the one seat they are sitting in was occupied by some dude who will actually be right back from the bathroom, they'll move out of courtesy and not because you made them.

You do not have to break FIRST rules to scout, and it's honestly appalling to see veteran, well respected teams encouraging the practice in this thread. It's first come first served, even if your region of the country ignores this rule...

[Basel A]

With all this discussion of scouting going on, I feel it's necessary to insert a small but practical point: I've never seen any evidence that FIRST cares one iota about scouting. I can't remember FIRST ever acknowledging it, let alone making rules/concessions around making it easier.

[Chris Hibner]

I also found some teams had tons of mentors with invited guest badges. Allowing them to stand field side during matches on the dome floor. Anyone know how that works?

Sponsor or donate enough money to FIRST.

Also, Woodie Flowers award winners and local organizers.

[XaulZan11]

... If you need your six scouts to have six seats, why don't they just sit together at the beginning of the day? Where do they have to be other than in the stands scouting? Hold your seats like everyone else who follows the rules does.

Yeah, I don't get the argument of "we need to save seats because scouting is important". If you're scouting every match (which I assume you are since scouting is a key to being successful), then there shouldn't be any need to save seats.

Is the argument really "We need to save seats for our pit crew and other members so when they can sit with the team when they come to the stands. These need to be good seats because our team values scouting"?

[GreyingJay]

Is the argument really "We need to save seats for our pit crew and other members so when they can sit with the team when they come to the stands. These need to be good seats because our team values scouting"?

It seems that way.

Q: Our scouts need seats together.
A: Make sure they all arrive at the venue at the same time before the doors open.

Q: Yeah, but we need good ones.
A: Then arrive earlier.

Q: What about all the other students on the team that are coming?
A: They can arrive earlier too.

Q: And the team parents?
A: Yup, same.

Q: What about all the students who are in the pit?
A: Look, what's so hard about this?

[IronicDeadBird]

I wonder if you could just implement a backpack rule, where if you want to save a seat the seat needs to be occupied by a backpack, purse, or satchel. Not a coat, not a blanket, something that would be considered a carry on for a plane.
One bag one seat.
If you want to game the system and bring 40 extra backpacks to a competition to secure an area go ahead and bring 40 extra backpacks to secure an area. I'd actually pay to see a team force all students to carry 2 or 3 bags into the stands just to secure seats.
Actually I'm only even suggesting it because I DO want to see that scenario roll out.
Either way the best seats in the house should be saved for guests, and those with special needs. I also find it silly to think that we need to give scouts so much room when we could just share more of the scouting information we collect. Instead of having 3-4 people from every team at an event gathering the exact same data (how many high goals were made, how many low goals, did they climb) if people just shared the information we would free up a lot of seats. A cross team electronic scouting database would dissolve a lot of threads about "how do we share information at a venue without wireless" it would promote better relationships between teams, it would save paper that is turned into airplanes.
People need to realize that people that aren't on their team aren't the enemy. If you have a stranger with no team affiliation sit down with your team and you help explain the game to them and show them how things go guess who they will most likely cheer for? YOU!
Another rule that annoys me has to do with noise makers. I know you want to cheer for your team and make some noise, but my parents didn't come to an event to have their ears blown out by your stupid horns.
Its hilarious that teams will invest money into cameras and tri-pods to have a better view at the driver station, yet somehow the only way we scouts can get the information they need is if they "have a good seat".

TL:DR
For a group that takes pride in being GP

There is nothing gracious about these passive aggressive behaviors at competition
There is nothing professional about only living by some of the rules in the manual

[Larry Lewis]

There is nothing wrong with the current rule. It is very straight forward and clear. You cannot save seats. That being said the responsibly of enforcement should fall on the team leaders (students and adults) to make sure their team is not saving seats.

If you really want to sit in a certain section or as a group, then get their early and make sure you have enough people sitting in the stands to establish your seating area. This does not mean putting down objects to hold seats or not allowing others to sit in those seats. It means getting there early enough to get the seats you want (without running and pushing over people to get them) and allowing others that need seats to sit. The best and only way to save a seat is to be sitting in it.
This is really not hard to do.

Here are some real world examples of what your team can do to fix the problem, keeping in mind we have about 60 people in our group at competition.

Train your team:
This goes for students and adults but make sure they are aware of the rule and stress to them the importance of following it. Make sure they understand that family members of other teams, VIPs, or general public could be checking out this event and have the right to sit in our area. In fact encourage it and talk to them about the game. There is never any good reason to get into an argument or fight over a seat.

How to have your team sit together:
Make sure to enter the venue as a group and stick together. Then migrate to an area big enough to hold your team. In the arena there are plenty of areas for this. Now if this means you are not getting seats closer to the field then get their earlier. There is no reason to run or push to get the seats you want. It is disrespectful and totally against what FIRST is about.

What about having an area for scouting:
Determine where you would like scouters to sit within your group. Generally we try to put them in the back of our group since we can control better people standing and blocking them within our own group. We also do shifts so that their seats are never really vacant. If one needs to run off to do something quick someone is there to take over.

How do you keep your seats when people need to eat or walk around the event?
If you want to retain the general area you are sitting in then don’t send everyone off to eat or do something at once. If you do so you should be ok with surrendering your seats to others. Otherwise do shifts so that not everyone is gone at once. To manage this we come up with a team schedule. Which is also useful for keeping track of where everyone is during the day.

If someone does want to sit within your group let them. Odds are that it is usually no more than 5 people and they may only be there for short duration of time. So really not a big deal. Worst case scenario if the stands are full in your area, have your team members find somewhere else to sit temporarily until people filter out of your area. Again, not a big deal.

Really out of all of this the most important thing is training your team on the rules and setting the expectation that they should be respectful of others at competition. I don’t think putting more workload on FIRST or volunteers to police the stands is the answer. Teams should take on the responsibility for their actions during competition. Our lead teacher sums it up nicely by saying, “Be nice to everyone!”

[Citrus Dad]

I don't think many people would object to FIRST creating a few enclaves for scouts to use, but we really aren't talking about the scouts here, are we? We are really talking about the much larger population(s) of non-scouts. Let's not get lost in the scouting weed patch. It's one tree, and isn't the forest.

To be clear, I'm only talking about the scouts here. I've been very clear about this throughout, and it's disappointing if you are now trying to change the focal point of the discussion as you concede my primary and only point. I strongly urge teams that have lots of parents or are not scouting but participating in the larger community event to find seating elsewhere ion the arena away from the competition environment. I have clearly supported a program that reserves seats only for scouts and that the remainder of the team members should be left to find seating through other channels. I'm agnostic on how seating arrangement occurs for those other team members and supporters.

[Citrus Dad]

It seems that way.

Q: Our scouts need seats together.
A: Make sure they all arrive at the venue at the same time before the doors open.

Q: Yeah, but we need good ones.
A: Then arrive earlier.

Q: What about all the other students on the team that are coming?
A: They can arrive earlier too.

Q: And the team parents?
A: Yup, same.

Q: What about all the students who are in the pit?
A: Look, what's so hard about this?

So we should continue to force teams to arrive at 5 am on competition mornings, thus depriving students of up to 2 hours of sleep, so that they can get seating under your proposal? Is maintaining the current seating rule so important that we should undermine the health of our students? (And saying that they just shouldn't get up so early is a cop out--address the reality of the situation.)

[Citrus Dad]

Yeah, I don't get the argument of "we need to save seats because scouting is important". If you're scouting every match (which I assume you are since scouting is a key to being successful), then there shouldn't be any need to save seats.

We largely do that already. Much of the issue is that scouts actually need breaks and will leave. We've had people than come sit in those empty seats and assert ownership. In addition, certain scouts often have multiple roles at the beginning of the day and putting their butt in a seat isn't the highest priority among those activities.

[apache8080]

We largely do that already. Much of the issue is that scouts actually need breaks and will leave. We've had people than come sit in those empty seats and assert ownership. In addition, certain scouts often have multiple roles at the beginning of the day and putting their butt in a seat isn't the highest priority among those activities.

FIRST should dedicate seats for scouting for each team. They can give 10 seats to each team for scouting and those seats are marked as reserved for that team. In addition, these seats can be placed at the "50 yard line" of the FRC field for optimal scouting. If reserving seats is not feasible for an event, FIRST should have required cameras that stream matches at optimal angles for scouting and this stream shold be standard across all events. When FIRST made a public API it helped get a lot of raw data for scouting but they need to continue to support scouting at events by improving seating and streams.

[gblake]

To be clear, I'm only talking about the scouts here. I've been very clear about this throughout, andNo you haven't been clear about this throughout, in particular in your first reaction to my post about the general topic of saving seats.

it's disappointing if you are now trying to change the focal point of the discussion as you concede my primary and only point. You are welcome to be disappointed if you want, but if you go back and read carefully, you might notice that this isn't correct.

I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

Blake

[Sperkowsky]

No you haven't been clear about this throughout, in particular in your first reaction to my post about the general topic of saving seats.

You are welcome to be disappointed if you want, but if you go back and read carefully, you might notice that this isn't correct.

I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.

Blake

No you are not.

Citrusdad your posts have been increasingly concerning.

Off from that subtopic.
After some thinking about the whole thing I realized that is was kind of messed up that FIRST did not provide better seats for volunteers during large events at championships. IE Opening Ceremonies, and Einstein/Closing Ceremonies. The volunteer section was up in the nosebleeds. Shouldn't volunteers seating be put at a higher priority then teams? I do not think many teams would object to there being a volunteer section on the lower level near the sections they reserve for teams on Einstein.

[grstex]

You said that teams should build scouting systems that don't require sitting together. And I am telling you that will end innovation in technical development of scouting systems.

You want to continue along with the same base scouting system you've been using. He was asking you to adapt so that you no longer need to save seats (which is against the current rules) or build a system that is more flexible with the positioning of your scouts, yet HE'S the one ending innovation?

We largely do that already. Much of the issue is that scouts actually need breaks and will leave. We've had people than come sit in those empty seats and assert ownership. In addition, certain scouts often have multiple roles at the beginning of the day and putting their butt in a seat isn't the highest priority among those activities.

If scouting and scout positions are so important, then why not have a few students on standby as "backup scouts" who sit in the seats of your main scouts while they're taking a break? Signal/text your backup, they take your seat, you get a break.

This next bit isn't directed at you personally:
Across several related threads there are multiple reports of people getting "pushed or shoved" over "saved seats." This burns me up. Shoving people while in a theatre/stadium seating setting is not just un-GP, its not just rude, its flat out DANGEROUS!:mad: People losing their balance and falling down several steps can very easily lead to a serious head injury and a trip to the hospital! NO! NO! NO!

I don't think we need a rule change. I just think we need more awareness. Perhaps next year's game can be named "There's no saving seats!" The endgame can be musical chairs!

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

Leave it to CD to let discussion of seat saving blow completely out of proportion. Everyone is just throwing out what they think the rules should be so I'll try and change the discussion for a bit. Is there any particular reason why having reserved seating for scouts is such a bad idea? Please don't answer with anecdotes of how the rules are now such as "come early and your scouts will have good seats". I'm saying if the rules were changed for this, would it be for the better or for worse and why?

Edit: Also only referring to championships with regards to this hypothetical rule change.

[Sperkowsky]

Leave it to CD to let discussion of seat saving blow completely out of proportion. Everyone is just throwing out what they think the rules should be so I'll try and change the discussion for a bit. Is there any particular reason why having reserved seating for scouts is such a bad idea? Please don't answer with anecdotes of how the rules are now such as "come early and your scouts will have good seats". I'm saying if the rules were changed for this, would it be for the better or for worse and why?

As much as I do like the idea it is extra work. I have also talked to some scouts from different teams and many have different preferences of where they like to sit. Here is my proposal that requires no more volunteers but still gets the job done.

Teams will get 7 team stickers (The removable kind) which they can stick to any seat they want and designate it as reserved. They would still probably have to arrive early to get the best seats but it would only be a single day of that. If a team has more then 7 scouts they either can forfeit the stickers. Ask for stickers from teams who are not using them or sit without the luxury of being able to save the seats. Some people may argue for more then 7 but here is the reason for the number. 1 person per robot plus a lead scout. If a team has a ton more scouters they can be in a different section and the lead scouter can bounce between the 2 sections to congregate data. Also any more then 7 per team can get out of hand quickly. At an event like worlds 7 per team is 4,200 saved seats and at a typical regional that's 420 seats. The last bit is during elims, and ceremonies the stickers are inactive and people can sit in the seat.

[Whatever]

This is kind of tangential but I was kind of surprised at how many people would walk the aisles, get out of their seats, etc during matches. The etiquette at baseball games is to wait until between at bats. Seems like there is enough time between matches to move around that the sight lines should stay clear during matches.

[dirtbikerxz]

I don't know if other regionals do this, but Lone Star has "spectator" seating. Essentially, if your team is on the field right now, you are allowed to sit there, and get up as soon as the match is done. At lone star at least, I believe that most people respect these rules, and it works out fine. I personally also like the idea of seating for scouters. A possible system might entitle: when you check in on thursday (or maybe earlier) you need to declare how many scouting seats your team needs, max of 6. Use some sort of randomizing thing, and assign seats for scouters randomly (teams are together ofcourse). Then tape reserved signs on those seats (with the assigned team number) so that there will be no fighting within that area. After that, its up to the non scouters in the team to find their own seats.

If we want to push this idea further, make some "scouting team" buttons (like drive team buttons" and you can only sit in the scouting seat if you have the right team badge......

Before people say scouting buttons are stupid (I don't actually know if people will say that :P ) just remember, scouting is just as important as the drive team.

[RoboChair]

If scouting and scout positions are so important, then why not have a few students on standby as "backup scouts" who sit in the seats of your main scouts while they're taking a break? Signal/text your backup, they take your seat, you get a break.

We do already employ this in the stands more or less. Everyone at the event has a job to do and if you aren't doing something in the pits or presenting you are in the stands ready to be one of our 8 scouts every match. So we don't have much coming and going in the stands with the main exception of the non-drive team pit crew.

I feel the need to clarify what we do as a team in the stands to "save seats". Almost all of our team except the pit crew arrives at the venue an hour or more early so they are some of the first people in the door. When they get in they find a good spot in the stands and fill into a block of seats leaving a few scattered seats open, usually in the middle of whatever rows we are occupying as well as a few on the end of the row(s). Most people generally feel weird about sitting down in the middle of a group of people but are fine sitting on the end for a while to watch some matches. If someone wants to sit down with us we won't tell them no unless whoever was sitting there will be right back, most people are fine with that. This gives us at least some ability to sit as a group with a few of us coming and going periodically while not being rude about it. For lunch we will cycle the group out about half or a third at a time to keep the block of seats mostly occupied in order to discourage people from taking over the seats and protect the tablets and computers we use for scouting. While it may not overtly be saving seats, it is technically saving seats. So far herd mentality has been the best approach that we have come up with.

[evanperryg]

With all this discussion of scouting going on, I feel it's necessary to insert a small but practical point: I've never seen any evidence that FIRST cares one iota about scouting. I can't remember FIRST ever acknowledging it, let alone making rules/concessions around making it easier.

Besides the Tableau license, it seems like scouter appreciation varies based on the event. A couple of the regionals in the Midwest (Wisconsin, at least. I think there's a few others that do this) hand out "scouter passes," and they have a dedicated seating area for scouts. The only problem is that there isn't nearly enough seats for 20-30 teams to have 7 scouts there, so it ends up not being worth the effort to get these seats. We're a team of 50-something students and 7 mentors, and at Midwest we tack on another 50 parents, sponsor reps, FTC students, etc. It's pretty hard to move that number of people fast enough to get to the best vantage point possible. A dedicated scouting area certainly has its merits, and I'd like to see FIRST show a greater appreciation for something that has become such a massive part of the culture of any successful team.

So we should continue to force teams to arrive at 5 am on competition mornings, thus depriving students of up to 2 hours of sleep, so that they can get seating under your proposal? Is maintaining the current seating rule so important that we should undermine the health of our students? (And saying that they just shouldn't get up so early is a cop out--address the reality of the situation.)

I'd just like to take a moment to say that I want this on a gigantic poster, in bold, italic, double underlined red text. The fact that I had to be up at 4:30AM for alliance selections at Champs was understandable, they have to cram a lot of stuff in. However, having to wake up at 5:30-6:00 for a normal day of regional quals matches is silly, not to mention this rarely is early enough for us to get good seats.

This whole thread has gone off in about a hundred different directions, so here's my opinions on the topics laid out a little more definitively:

Seat saving is fine when it is done reasonably. Teams being together is part of the FRC culture, and it's evident when you look up from the Einstein field and see a patchwork of team colors stretching across 40,000 seats. It's awe-inspiring, not offensive.
Scouters, and scouting in general, deserves to be recognized by FIRST. It's not like scouting is a niche thing that only the world elite teams do. Everyone does it, and it is deeply ingrained into the culture of FRC. Tableau was a nice step forward, but the place where scouting is underappreciated is at events.
We always push the GP thing, but not everyone understands it. As people have mentioned in that harassment thread that has been going around recently, mentors and parents are to blame for rude or aggressive behavior >99% of the time. With this ridiculous proportion, I believe it is up to the students to restrain their leaders when they feel it is necessary. As a graduating student to other students, don't be afraid to call out one of your mentors if they aren't being gracious or professional. (graciously professional?) Mentors are people, very smart and dedicated people, but they aren't tyrants. On that note, and pardon me if I'm talking out of place, but... to mentors who are aggressive about seats, chill. It might be frustrating, but a little bit of patience goes a very long way.

[gblake]

...
However, having to wake up at 5:30-6:00 for a normal day of regional quals matches is silly, not to mention this rarely is early enough for us to get good seats.
...Someone is going to wind up in the "good" seats and someone isn't. Are you saying that you want a process that ensures you get a good seat, that pushes someone else into a bad seat, and that doesn't involve you getting on line earlier than the person who will be enjoying the bad seat you think they should sit in????

You might not word it that way, but that's the net of it.

Please don't be the person who tells anyone right now that any group of ordinary spectators needs to have a few people rush in to claim and save seats so that the total group all sit in good seats when they arrive later.

Why? Because when you do that you are telling everyone else, including me, that their/my place is in the bad seats that aren't acceptable to you.

Who made the people in the rule-breaking group the special people who don't have to sit in those seats that aren't good enough for them, but are apparently good enough for the unwashed masses (the rest of us)?

That is the perception seat-saving creates in many, many, many people.

Chinmay said it well in his earlier post. That's the sort of thing that makes our beloved Jar-Jar Binks exclaim, "How rude!".

I agree that waking up at ridiculous hours to stand in queues is silly. I'm confident that most folks would endorse an improved method that made sense. FIRST could allocate seating by flipping a lot of coins, by drawing names from a fish bowl, by playing rock-paper-scissors, or by whatever other process might make sense.

In the future, however FIRST wants to allow the process to unfold is the process I'll follow; but right now the process is, "Don't save seats."

Blake

PS: If 2, 3, 5, 10, ... teams at an event habitually form a large group (a mafia? :eek:) of seat-savers who manage to more or less equitably carve up the best/better seats at an event(s) year after year, or at multiple locations in one year; they shouldn't wear out their arms out patting themselves on the back for being gracious to one another.

At a 48 team event, those cooperative savers just told the other 46, 45, 43, 38, ... teams at the event(s) that those other teams belong in seats the savers are unwilling to sit in. They basically told all those other teams to suck it.

Again, that is the perception large-scale seat-saving creates in many, many, many people.

[PayneTrain]

http://eduncovered.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/its-time-to-stop-posting.jpg

[RoboChair]

http://eduncovered.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/its-time-to-stop-posting.jpg

I was trying to come up with a reasonable reply myself, but in typical internet fashion the solution is cats.

How many student versus mentor and parent replies have there been to this thread? I'm curious now after Evan's post.

Back with an edit when I am done counting.

maybe 15 student posts versus 90 mentor/parent/adult

[bdaroz]

I think you were looking for this:

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

[evanperryg]

***snip***

What I'm saying is that the current "rules" (in quotes because of the prevalence of rule-breaking in this specific context) punish large teams, while providing no gain or loss to smaller teams who can get their whole team together relatively easily. (note the world "relatively," I'm sure it still is a pain) Additionally, the current seating "rules" punish scouters by forcing them into bad vantage points. Every team deserves a good spot for their scouters. I recognize that there will always be teams with good seats and teams with bad seats, but what I care about is the scouts having good seats, because they deserve more respect than what they get currently. Citrus Dad said it best earlier when he said that seats are a scarce resource that there is no fair way to allocate, but we can at lease give scouts the respect they have earned.

[Chi Meson]

What I'm saying is that the current "rules" (in quotes because of the prevalence of rule-breaking in this specific context) punish large teams, while providing no gain or loss to smaller teams who can get their whole team together relatively easily. (note the world "relatively," I'm sure it still is a pain) ...snip... I totally disagree. First of all it is a rule, not a "rule." And second, no it is not easy for a small team to find seats that are all together; in fact it continuously requires conflict with the rule-breakers.

If a team is large, then they MUST have enough people to get their butts into at least half of the seats they save. No team needs 30 pit scouts. I am utterly aghast at the number of "large" teams who feel that they are justified in breaking the rules (not "rule") and spirit of FIRST to send a few people (from zero to five people) with signs and posters to set aside 40, 50, 60, and as I estimated this year in Curie, 80+ seats.

I have also observed that the big block of seats "reserved" are never fully used by those teams through the majority of the matches. Looking down into those reserved blocks, there were always open seats, either totally empty or filled with coats, boxes, etc. Not only are teams breaking the rules, they are completely ungracious in their lack of awareness of how much of this commodity they are wasting.

Our team, while looking for 18 to 24 seats had to insert ourselves, each day, between such reservations. We often had to take 3 to 5 seats from such blocks of 40 to 50 "reserved" seats, and always with outward bitterness from the poor parent or student who was tasked with "holding" their reserve (there was often A mom or dad unfairly tasked with upholding that team's breaking of rules-- I always made a point of letting them know how unfair it was for their team to dump such responsibility on a few people).

We could have reserved seats too. We have signs, posters and pennants and banners. The reason why we don't is because it is against the rule. And because we followed the rule, we are forced to be the bad guys who "steal" seats.

I proposed this before, and I will do it again. Some minimal seat saving must be done, clearly, so how about this:
If your butt is in a seat, you can save the seat to your left, and the seat to your right. That is all. If you have a large team, get half of your team out there to the stands.

[Citrus Dad]

I'll wrap up my thoughts on this matter:

Just as the 55 MPH federal speed limit was unworkable (and eventually rescinded in 1987), the "no saving a seat" rule is equally unworkable for the many reasons listed here. Just saying "obey the rule" can''t overcome the strong incentives to violate it, no matter how much anyone wishes that everyone will comply.

Even FIRST sees that its unworkable. Otherwise, why would FIRST tolerate teams camping out at 4 am and allow those teams to move under the eaves in the rain? Why would FIRST fail to tell volunteers to go around and warn teams not to stake out spaces at 7 am after the doors open? Why doesn't FIRST tell all teams to take all of their equipment and belongings outside during the 2 hour lunch break? The answer is obvious--they really don't care about this rule.

That said, FIRST won't change this rule until the value is readily evident to FIRST of assigning seats in some fashion. Creating an assignment system would have costs at least in volunteer time if not in materials and other resources also. It's an axiom of resolving a tragedy of the commons that the value of defining property rights need to exceed the transaction costs (http://is.theorizeit.org/wiki/Transaction_cost_economics) of defining those rights before those rights will be defined. We probably haven't reached that point yet. There isn't enough conflict in the stands, nor embarrassing incidents with prospective sponsors. We will have to go along with teams maintaining an uneasy truce over the need to save seats for many practical reasons versus teams and spectators that may not understand those reasons.

[EricH]

Honestly, I think the best workaround is: Save seats, but allow anybody from nearby teams (or non-team spectators) to sit with you if you have the space and aren't actively using it. Save the seats... by sitting in 'em.

And then be gracious when someone asks to sit there.

[grstex]

I'll wrap up my thoughts on this matter:

Just as the 55 MPH federal speed limit was unworkable (and eventually rescinded in 1987), the "no saving a seat" rule is equally unworkable for the many reasons listed here. Just saying "obey the rule" can''t overcome the strong incentives to violate it, no matter how much anyone wishes that everyone will comply.

Even FIRST sees that its unworkable. Otherwise, why would FIRST tolerate teams camping out at 4 am and allow those teams to move under the eaves in the rain? Why would FIRST fail to tell volunteers to go around and warn teams not to stake out spaces at 7 am after the doors open? Why doesn't FIRST tell all teams to take all of their equipment and belongings outside during the 2 hour lunch break? The answer is obvious--they really don't care about this rule.

That said, FIRST won't change this rule until the value is readily evident to FIRST of assigning seats in some fashion. Creating an assignment system would have costs at least in volunteer time if not in materials and other resources also. It's an axiom of resolving a tragedy of the commons that the value of defining property rights need to exceed the transaction costs (http://is.theorizeit.org/wiki/Transaction_cost_economics) of defining those rights before those rights will be defined. We probably haven't reached that point yet. There isn't enough conflict in the stands, nor embarrassing incidents with prospective sponsors. We will have to go along with teams maintaining an uneasy truce over the need to save seats for many practical reasons versus teams and spectators that may not understand those reasons.

I can't speak for every event, but at Lone Star we listen to complaints about excessive seat saving, and we address them.

Based on the clarifications by your teammate, I'd say y'all don't fall into the egregious category that started this thread, since y'all allow others to temporarily occupy "your area." The problem comes from people holding a dozen seats, and unwilling to give up a single one for a kid on crutches (yes, that happened last year at champs).

Have you considered the possibility that, by strictly constraining access to several regularly unoccupied seats, that those teams are artificially inflating the scarcity of seats, and thus causing this problem in the first place? Ever ride on a subway or a bus? Those seats are first come, first serve, too. But there's an unwritten rule about what a man should do if a woman boards and there's no available seats. The solution isn't assigning seats, its generosity.

[Foster]

You should be glad I have a policy of not giving out red dots.

So sorry, I do have a policy for times like this... If you are saving bulk seats, let the random few sit in them.

[dirtbikerxz]

While I would really like to see some sort of system in place, that is "fair" to assign seating, BUT I honestly can't think of a single way that this would work.

At this point, all I care about is that my team's 4-6 scouters get decent seats... I don't think it will be too hard for regionals to "rope" off an area, saying it's for scouters only, and to sit there you need to have one of your team's limited (i dont know how many there should be) "scouting buttons/badges".

[gblake]

... Just saying "obey the rule" can''t overcome the strong incentives to violate it, no matter how much anyone wishes that everyone will comply.
Each person gets to decide what they individually will do when they are tempted. Some will succumb to temptation. Some won't.

[Hitchhiker 42]

If you have a large team, get half of your team out there to the stands.

Just from a math perspective, even a third of the team is fine. One person saves two seats. 1/3 the team saves the other 2/3 of the team some seats.

[MikLast]

I was trying to come up with a reasonable reply myself, but in typical internet fashion the solution is cats.

How many student versus mentor and parent replies have there been to this thread? I'm curious now after Evan's post.

Back with an edit when I am done counting.

maybe 15 student posts versus 90 mentor/parent/adult

I think part of that is because many students who have frequented the site knows after the ref threads that their opinions arent always listened to..

At least at the two PNW events we go to (West Valley/CWU) everyone has had their general area that they sit at (for example the past two years we took a corner at WV) and we all let others come and go as they please, as long as they arent being obnoxious.

[marygoggin]

I appreciate when I am told a team will "allow" me to sits in "their" seats. FYI we have a 6 girl team. We seldom see the stands. However I would like a videotape of any team that informs my mother that she had to move from an empty seat. Prepare for an experience. I will play the video and enjoy popcorn for hours. She is old school Irish from south Chicago. Bottom line treat people as you want your mother treated. She is just as important as a team with 80 members. Of which 50 never seem to be in the seats being "saved" for them. I tell my young ladies that I donate considerable time and money to help them achieve their dream. I don't save seats. They can hire someone at their own expense for this job. I consider it training for reality.

[Alex2614]

We have a fairly large team, but we are rarely all in the stands. Our pit crew and drive team are always gone, and we have teams of students out helping other struggling teams get through inspection or get parts that they need.

At a regional, for a majority of the event, we don't have a whole lot of people in the stands (mostly parents). But when we are playing, most of us are up there. So when there are very few people in the stands, we allow people to sit next to us, because it seems many other teams around us experience the same situation. When we aren't on the field, there is no reason to deny someone the seat that's in our section, especially because they usually are just going to be there for a match or two.

So yes, I would say we "reserve seats," but it's really so that we can sit together during our matches (and even sometimes that doesn't happen, we have people spread around the arena sometimes), but all other times it is a pretty "loose" reservation. Saturday is different, though. Most of us are in the stands a majority of the day, and we make sure to leave a few seats in between us for our mentors and students on the pit crew and drive team so they have a seat with us if we are eliminated or for awards.

[Sperkowsky]

So when there are very few people in the stands, we allow people to sit next to us, because it seems many other teams around us experience the same situation. .

This is ironically where I see a problem and where I think there needs to be a culture change.

You can not ALLOW someone to sit with you. You can invite people to sit with you during those times but if they want to stay they can stay and you can not tell them to leave.

[gblake]

So yes, I would say we "reserve seats," but it's really so that we can sit together during our matches.In any venue that isn't overcrowded, my experience has been that it's easy to sit together without any saving of seats.

When you save seats you push other people into seats you have decided are less desirable. You have told them that they don't deserve the seats you are saving, even though they have followed the rules, and even though your team isn't special in any way.

If, instead, your group simply sits in the seats you want to push other people into, instead of telling those other people that they have to sit in them (in order for you to keep a seat open for someone who hasn't arrived or who is mostly elsewhere), then life is good for all.

You will have graciously not prioritized your own interests above someone else's, and you will have followed the rule.

Blake

[Alex2614]

This is ironically where I see a problem and where I think there needs to be a culture change.

You can not ALLOW someone to sit with you. You can invite people to sit with you during those times but if they want to stay they can stay and you can not tell them to leave.

Sorry, bad wording. The thing is, people don't usually stay very long, because 99% of the time, someone needs to sit there for just a match or two, and then they leave. We never ever tell someone to leave, and in fact, we really like interacting with other teams. The point of this, though, is to say that we also like to sit as a team when we are on the field, so we generally spread out somewhat when everyone is out fixing robots. And during that time, people generally sit with us, and we certainly welcome them and in fact invite them to sit as long as they would like.

[Alex2614]

In any venue that isn't overcrowded, my experience has been that it's easy to sit together without any saving of seats.

When you save seats you push other people into seats you have decided are less desirable. You have told them that they don't deserve the seats you are saving, even though they have followed the rules, and even though your team isn't special in any way.

If, instead, your group simply sits in the seats you want to push other people into, instead of telling those other people that they have to sit in them (in order for you to keep a seat open for someone who hasn't arrived or who is mostly elsewhere), then life is good for all.

You will have graciously not prioritized your own interests above someone else's, and you will have followed the rule.

Blake

You missed the point of what I was saying, though. If you had read what I wrote, I said that people from other teams usually come and go in the section in which we are sitting, because they also just want to stay for a match or two, and we have open seats. So we "reserve" a section in one sense of the word, but we often invite others to sit with us if they need a place to sit. In my mind, that is being quite courteous, as we are not pushing anyone else away from those seats. And when we are on the field, or when finals start, people are usually very courteous and volunteer their spots so that our team can sit together. We have often been the team that sits in those undesirable seats. It depends on the day and the venue. We are, in fact, often on the corners of the stands or in the upper sections or off to the side, for this very reason. We sit wherever is open when we arrive, watch opening ceremonies, and half of the team disperses around the venue, leaving half of the seats which were previously occupied, open for other people to sit.

But when we are on the field or during the awards ceremony, we would like to sit as a team, and we pack in as tightly as we can so there is room for others.

At championships, the only time we ever sat as a team was on Saturday, because everyone was always coming and going.

[gblake]

You missed the point of what I was saying, though. If you had read what I wrote, I said that people from other teams usually come and go in the section in which we are sitting, because they also just want to stay for a match or two, and we have open seats. So we "reserve" a section in one sense of the word, but we often invite others to sit with us if they need a place to sit. In my mind, that is being quite courteous, as we are not pushing anyone else away from those seats. And when we are on the field, or when finals start, people are usually very courteous and volunteer their spots so that our team can sit together. We have often been the team that sits in those undesirable seats. It depends on the day and the venue. We are, in fact, often on the corners of the stands or in the upper sections or off to the side, for this very reason. We sit wherever is open when we arrive, watch opening ceremonies, and half of the team disperses around the venue, leaving half of the seats which were previously occupied, open for other people to sit.

But when we are on the field or during the awards ceremony, we would like to sit as a team, and we pack in as tightly as we can so there is room for others.

At championships, the only time we ever sat as a team was on Saturday, because everyone was always coming and going.I don't think I failed to read what you wrote in the earlier post. But FWIW, I personally like what you wrote in the post I just quoted.

You didn't write this originally, "We sit wherever is open when we arrive, watch opening ceremonies, and half of the team disperses around the venue, leaving half of the seats which were previously occupied, open for other people to sit."

I applaud that. I think that is exactly how the don't save seats rule is intended to work.

As far as I can tell you guys are doing the opposite of saving seats, and are setting a good example.

Thumbs up! and +1

Sorry for my side of the miscommunication,
Blake

[Alex2614]

I don't think I failed to read what you wrote in the earlier post. But FWIW, I personally like what you wrote in the post I just quoted.

You didn't write this originally, "We sit wherever is open when we arrive, watch opening ceremonies, and half of the team disperses around the venue, leaving half of the seats which were previously occupied, open for other people to sit."

I applaud that. I think that is exactly how the don't save seats rule is intended to work.

As far as I can tell you guys are doing the opposite of saving seats.

Thumbs up! and +1

Sorry for my side of the miscommunication,
Blake

No biggie! :) I only say we "save seats," because we tend to spread out more when we don't have as many people in the stands, but it's mostly so that when it's time for our matches or ceremonies, our members have a place to come and sit. And the people sitting in "our section" (for lack of a better term, I know it's not ours per se) are generally gracious enough to volunteer their seats back to let our members sit with their teammates if needed. But again, we only spread out because if we don't, our students and mentors won't be able to sit with their teammates, because another team is going to try to "reserve" the spot in the traditional sense of the word (i.e. telling people they can't sit there). So I would say that we do reserve seats, but we aren't as strict about it as some teams. We don't have caution tape spread around a section :rolleyes:

Sorry for the miscommunication.

[D_Price]

From my experience, Our team has never had a problem with seating nor do we save seats. Once our whole team is there, they go up and grab seats for everyone on the team WHO IS THERE. If they are down in the pits, the students will drape a coat or sweater over the seat that is needed. Never have I ever seen someone not allowed to sit in a section. I understand this is a main issue at alot of the larger venues and at Worlds.

[Sperkowsky]

From my experience, Our team has never had a problem with seating nor do we save seats. Once our whole team is there, they go up and grab seats for everyone on the team WHO IS THERE. If they are down in the pits, the students will drape a coat or sweater over the seat that is needed. Never have I ever seen someone not allowed to sit in a section. I understand this is a main issue at alot of the larger venues and at Worlds.
By dropping the coat on the chair you are saving seats.

[Alex2614]

By dropping the coat on the chair you are saving seats.

So then where exactly are those people supposed to sit? Are they supposed to not be able to sit with their team because they've been in the pit all day long? Are they supposed to sit on the other side of the venue by themselves, away from their teammates because their team wasn't allowed to save them a seat?

Just wondering what your team does when you have people out in the pits or on the field all day long, and all they want to do is sit with their teammates for a while.

[Sperkowsky]

So then where exactly are those people supposed to sit? Are they supposed to not be able to sit with their team because they've been in the pit all day long? Are they supposed to sit on the other side of the venue by themselves, away from their teammates because their team wasn't allowed to save them a seat?

Just wondering what your team does when you have people out in the pits or on the field all day long, and all they want to do is sit with their teammates for a while.

If there are no seats left in our area we will move the entire team to an open area. If there are no open areas we don't sit together.

[jvriezen]

A large part of the confusion in this thread is regarding the definition of 'saving seats' It means different things to different people.

Here is I think the most strict and draconian definition of not saving seats-- i.e. if you aren't doing the following you are breaking FIRST's rule:

All CURRENTLY PRESENT members of your party/team are sitting in adjacent seats with no intervening 'empty' seats (by empty I mean no BODY in the seat, coats are irrelevent) and no one is straddling more than one seat, and you make no verbal, non-verbal or other attempt to prevent anyone else from sitting in seats adjacent to your party/team.


The above asserts that leaving empty seats between members of your party (with or without coats) sends a non-verbal message to others (particularly those that are unaware of the no-seat saving rule) that those seats are 'saved' or 'taken'. The non-verbal is particularly strong if all the occupants that are present are wearing the same t-shirt. It says to any visitor "it looks like I don't fit in here"

At the other extreme:

The only way you can actually be accused of 'saving seats' is if you verbally or physically indicate to others that they may not sit in a seat that has no BODY in it. E.g. asking/urging someone to find another seat but allowing them to take a seat if they insist is technically not 'saving' under this definition.


In between there is all manner of using coats, leaving small gaps of empty seats, asking, pleading with others to look elsewhere, etc.

Consider the following scenario:

Two large teams have team sized 'reserved' adjacent sections which are only 50% filled with bodies (maybe less) scattered among the sections.

A large group of people arrive (team, fan bus crowd, general public group, maybe a group of younger kids on a field trip) and they see this and ask the existing team members to compact and sit together so that their group can also sit together. Would you move for them? If not, you can defend that, because you can reasonably expect to stay in the seat you have.

What if the large group decides that taking the empty seats among your teams' seats will get them 'close enough' together-- just like taking a bunch of smaller tables in a restaurant rather than waiting for one big table-- just like the team members you have present are 'close enough'. Will you let these new people sit here, taking most/all of your 'reserved' seats? If the answer is no, I'd claim you are saving seats even if you are willing to let a handful of temporary sitters take some seats. If you are unwilling to give up all your 'reserved' seats to all comers at any time, you are saving seats. Some might argue that if you are sending the message that you are unwilling to give up the seats via coats, spreading yourselves thinly, etc. you are also saving seats, but that is much more arguable either way.

Alas, there are no cut and dried rules that will make everyone happy, due to the special cases of bathroom breaks and drive/pit team seat reservations during playoffs.

Personally, I would advocate that *only* bathroom breaks or concession breaks (of reasonable length) and drive/pit team reservations during playoffs are justifiable scenarios for saving seats.

But the current rules do not allow that.

[nrgy_blast]

So then where exactly are those people supposed to sit? Are they supposed to not be able to sit with their team because they've been in the pit all day long? Are they supposed to sit on the other side of the venue by themselves, away from their teammates because their team wasn't allowed to save them a seat?

Just wondering what your team does when you have people out in the pits or on the field all day long, and all they want to do is sit with their teammates for a while.

They're supposed to sit wherever there is an open seat. If the venue is packed, it is likely that there may not be enough seats with the bulk of the team to accommodate the entire pit crew or late-rising parents, etc. This is how it works - by definition.

The worst part of this is it isn't usually other teams that you put off by saving seats - it's curious members of the general public. If someone isn't going to be around for an extended time period, let someone else sit there!

[Whatever]

Personally, I would advocate that *only* bathroom breaks or concession breaks (of reasonable length) and drive/pit team reservations during playoffs are justifiable scenarios for saving seats.

But the current rules do not allow that.

We had members of our scout team lose their seats while they were volunteering to sing the national anthem this year.

[jvriezen]

We had members of our scout team lose their seats while they were volunteering to sing the national anthem this year.

No, they didn't lose their seats, once they left to go sing, they no longer had seats. Volunteering is a choice and with it comes sacrifices. I've rarely sat with my team during opening ceremonies because I'm volunteering as well.

[Citrus Dad]

No, they didn't lose their seats, once they left to go sing, they no longer had seats. Volunteering is a choice and with it comes sacrifices. I've rarely sat with my team during opening ceremonies because I'm volunteering as well.

Well that should really go a long way toward encouraging teams to send out volunteers for supporting an event--you're rewarded by losing your place to sit.

Sorry, I've really stayed away from this, but when someone makes a statement without thinking through the consequences of what they're saying, it raises a red flag.

[tcjinaz]

Thought I would chime in without quoting anyone in particular with something I experienced on Tesla this year.

This was out first trip to Champs this year, and I was quite fearful of the seat wars. I tried to keep our team civil and accommodating, and succeeded, except for when I almost lost it with the supporters of a team who did not have a clue about what the rules were, nor apparently had ever heard the term Gracious Professionalism. I got over it. The kids, parents & mentors settled into a pattern where we really only reserved 4 or five seats (out of about thirty), and had no problem sharing.

Now for the good part. On Tesla, the volunteer managing the crowd had four rows closest to the field reserved for supporters of teams on the field. I have no idea if this was normal on the other 87.5% of the stadium, but it worked for us quite nicely. Most of the time, we "parked' in a section off between Tesla and whatever field was to our left (I wasn't paying a lot of attention). When our matches came up, we wandered over to the "great" seats and cheered for our team. Then moved on after the match. Two weeks later, I saw our driver on video talking about what it meant to him to be able to see and hear us cheer for them. That plan worked. Was that going on elsewhere?

Tim

[PayneTrain]

Thought I would chime in without quoting anyone in particular with something I experienced on Tesla this year.

This was out first trip to Champs this year, and I was quite fearful of the seat wars. I tried to keep our team civil and accommodating, and succeeded, except for when I almost lost it with the supporters of a team who did not have a clue about what the rules were, nor apparently had ever heard the term Gracious Professionalism. I got over it. The kids, parents & mentors settled into a pattern where we really only reserved 4 or five seats (out of about thirty), and had no problem sharing.

Now for the good part. On Tesla, the volunteer managing the crowd had four rows closest to the field reserved for supporters of teams on the field. I have no idea if this was normal on the other 87.5% of the stadium, but it worked for us quite nicely. Most of the time, we "parked' in a section off between Tesla and whatever field was to our left (I wasn't paying a lot of attention). When our matches came up, we wandered over to the "great" seats and cheered for our team. Then moved on after the match. Two weeks later, I saw our driver on video talking about what it meant to him to be able to see and hear us cheer for them. That plan worked. Was that going on elsewhere?

Tim

I believe the reserved seating became universal policy at cmp in 2014.

[EricH]

I believe the reserved seating became universal policy at cmp in 2014.
Had it on Galileo.

Though I did have to make a comment to one of those volunteers about the other practically screaming at people to move all the way down (to the exit) when there was nobody else coming in (and lots of empty seats), and the team's robot was playing on the left (entrance) side of those rows, practically defeating the purpose of those rows.