Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

I've watched this for the last two days and have been trying to find a way to write what Al did.

Lets look to fix the control system problems. Remind roboteers and mentors that a 125LB robot moving at 9FPS slamming into another robot creates a lot of force so connectors, cables and COTS electronics may be damaged. Put as much design effort into our electrics and electronics as we do for our mechanics. Remind designers that CPU cycles and network capacity is not infinite, less is always more. Make every CPU cycle and network message count.

Lets pull together as a community on these topics. All teams now and in the future will benefit from the shared knowledge of how to do these things.

But as Al and IndySam said:

Add me to that list too. Nobody benefits from retribution.

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

I would like to know the team simply because it seems they could use a hug.

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

There are ways to improve the time to troubleshoot power issues on the robot and they should be explored. Documentation is a fine thing but at some point we have lots of documentation now and all too often it's missed. Writing documents is fine to offload responsibility for risk to those that should be reading those documents. However, as Einstein demonstrates shifting responsibility does little for the reputation of FIRST generally. The people in the stands are there to see the show and robots not moving is what you expect at a museum.

There are proper ways and improper ways to conduct investigations if you know you have a real issue. I should hope the message of this report is tempered to consider that not everyone who takes issues with the status quo is going to operate with reckless disregard for policy and process. I should also hope that this report makes it clear to FIRST that stonewalling channels can lead to negative outcomes. Just a point as I have often found that it's a serious problem to get the attention of those that have the power to command resources to investigate within the organization. That alone can never justify the risk of this situation but I can see how the factor contributes.

From my last post it's clear that ranking or de-ranking Team 25 (based only on the unique information I have as I have their original A version router) couldn't have been the practical goal. Under the circumstances any effect on who won was probably as stated by Al and this report merely secondary to the person's goal to demonstrate the cause and effect of their ability to deny service to robots (regardless of whom was effected which in many ways made their point useless anyway).

Given the only person who has been confirmed to cause any issue was only doing something that anyone could have and probably did stumble over (hence some of the earlier failures). I return to the same point as the others. This was a bad decision on their part and they have paid their price according to what FIRST deemed acceptable. FIRST is the most effected. FIRST lost money, reputation, resources, and opportunity on a national stage as the direct result.

As to the idea presented elsewhere that no team can understand how these teams felt. Let me point out that frequently teams ranking towards the top are effected by the ruling of the refs on the behavior of other teams on the fields during matches. I have personally been involved with a team that felt they were improperly impacted by the actions of other teams and people on the field during play. While this is more unusual than normal it's really quite similar. These are all fantastic teams. I feel badly for the seniors on these teams who will soon no longer be able to hold student roles, but beyond that these teams are not magically great. They have important recognized qualities that will carry them past this and we hope to future recognition.

Let no one mistake that I still think the smart thing for FIRST to do is legally bind these people to silence and strongly discourage any attempt to discover who these people are. We are a large organization. I worry not about the majority of FIRST and how it will behave but I worry that somewhere in FIRST there is a small number of people that will play hero if they find out and only compound the misdeed.

Let us focus on the positive which is that FIRST can move forward into the future hopefully better for this.

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

Well no, but it could influence the drivers.
http://www.sciencentral.com/video/20...pic-advantage/

:cool:
/tangent

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

This is probably why i am more scared of 1114 than 2056. lol (I love them both though :) )

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

I wonder what is going through their minds when they face each other! :P

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

Especially if 1114 is in blue and 2056 is in red...

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

I believe he's referring to the colour of the teams individually, and not when there on the field (Bumpers).

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

That's the point! If their team colors oppose their bumper colors, who has the advantage?

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

I'm really proud of FIRST and its volunteers for putting such a thorough report together. This was a fascinating thread to read, and I appreciate everyone pretty much holding it together and providing a good discussion.

Although unrelated to the report, it did make me finish my recap of Championship. You can read it here.

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

Everyone else :D

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

DUNT DUNT DUHHHHHHH

lmfao

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

With the passage of time, things get clearer in my head but I don't know if I am happier about the situation.

First, for my own part, I apologize unreservedly to FIRST Canada. My early post was totally unfounded. I am sorry for implying that perhaps this was in any way connected to bad blood associated with the Greater Toronto East Regional. This was very unfair of me.

Second, as to naming the individual and the team, it is clear from the various eye witness accounts that a LOT of people know who this person was and what team they were associated with. KEEPING THIS A SECRET IS UNTENABLE. It will get out. Once it does, I suppose that there will be a lot of digging around looking for reasons why this information was kept secret... ...and I assure you that it is always possible for conspiracy theorists to weave together plausible narratives that will paint the individual, team and FIRST in a much worse light than if they had published the information themselves.

I BEG FIRST, the associated team and even the individual to publish what they know. While it is painful in the short run, it is going to be better to get this out in the light of day now.

While they are at it, they should probably address the rapid departure of Bill Miller. Even the most charitable observer cannot help but wonder if his departure was related to all of this. I am not saying it is or it isn't but I think it is in FIRST's best interested to address this openly.

Calling 'em as I see 'em.

Joe J.

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

The best thing about forum discussions is that we don't need to be physically with the person (/ team / entity) to give them a cyber-hug.

So who's with Taylor and me, and wants to give the currently (and hopefully permanently) unknown team a group hug?? Come on, CD community, let's set an internet record!

Cyber-Group-Hug time! :)

Re: [FRC Blog] Einstein Report Released
 

Does that mean we're having another unofficial ChiefDelphi web hug?? :D :rolleyes: