[FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...Manual-Release

Noteable items:

• Teams will no longer recieve Chairman's or Dean's List Feedback forms
• One mentor is able to watch Dean's List interview
• Chairman's award winners are asked to record and post their interview presentation
• You no longer 'win' awards, you 'earn' them.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

This makes me happy.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Except now we get beeps and things. I am not sure this is any better.

Also I liked the Chairman's feedback form, it helped us from our first event to our second. If done well I believe those forms could really help teams figure out what they are missing.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

"And you can go nuts with adding sounds to your carts for safety purposes."

This doesn't make me happy...or at least it won't make me happy while at the events. I know some team is going to put some stupid sound on their cart and go obnoxious with it. Also, someone take the hammer out of my hands before their "get out of the way" horn gets some much needed percussive maintenance.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Disclaimer: I have yet to read the Admin Manual.

Reaction: This is a step in the wrong direction. I get that the feedback form is flawed, but feedback is a positive thing.
Personally, I know I took great pride as both as high school student and as a mentor whenever we received feedback forms loaded with "currently strong" marks even if we didn't win the award. I also got a lot out of the comments, both in terms of where we can improve as a team and where we can strengthen our submissions.

Transparency in terms of submissions is another issue altogether, and doesn't really compare to the feedback forms. Requiring teams publish their submissions/presentations is not a replacement for feedback on your submission.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I really don't like this change. Our team was brand new to Chairman's presenting last year, and the feedback form's comments helped our team improve in general, within Chairman's and team structure in general. I understand that teams may be complaining about their non-selection (which really is not what a Chairman's team should be doing, from what I understand. I read something like this in the WF Award thread, and I'll modify it for Chairmans: A true Chairman's team would be motivated to become a better team from seeing another team win, not grumble about losing), however, teams that are new to Chairman's might like the feedback so they can improve their presentation and team.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

A friend on facebook said it better than I ever could have:

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

For people who may not have seen a Chairman's feedback form. We uploaded both of ours from last season here.

I do like the move back to a real PDF manual, that makes me happy. I was never a fan of the online system or the PDFs it produced.

Also getting rid of the banner restriction was a good call, I think that is something that should be decided venue to venue.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Something notable not in the blog post is section 4.9.2:
Is this a step in the right direction?

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Wow, I mean wow! I have been saying for years that FRC needs to provide MORE feedback to the teams regarding how they are doing. Now they are taking away the only real feedback that any team gets?? This is beyond silly. FIRST, please read this and make the feedback form better. Don't remove feedback from the system. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE change this before week 1 events.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I'm also disappointed that they're getting rid of the feedback forms. While I never actually got my Dean's List feedback....I really liked seeing the Chairman's feedback, after collecting a few year's worth, you can easily see that the team has improved each year and it's really useful in figuring out what your team is doing right and what you need to work on. I'll admit, the feedback isn't always the most helpful, but taking it away entirely is not the answer.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Only thing new there is the 5 person limit.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

More importantly, they explicitly state that more than zero people can officially be in the pit. Long overdue.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Is it just me or can you not zoom in on the iOS app for the manual? If not, that's terrible.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Is it too early to start the "Petition to end the sounding of robot cart sirens/horns/beepers/buzzers/alarms" thread? ....

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

You're absolutely right. What I quoted that I was happy about was Frank basically explicitly saying to stop yelling, not necessarily that other noise devices are being allowed. Some teams will make the effort to add a warning devices to their cart and a fraction of those teams will use them inappropriately and ruin it for everyone. However we now have something to point out to the Safety Advisers who think yelling is a good idea.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I cannot seem to find any robot display section in this manual comparable to section 5.4.3 from last year, described in this blog post from last year. Did I just miss it or does it not exist?

Also, the minimum unbag time for the robot access period is back to 2 hours after being 30 minutes last year. I wonder what prompted the switch back.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

That is a good point. I would like the rule to state something along the lines of I don't see why this is even an issue, I have never had someone not move when I asked them nicely and there should be more than one person helping move a robot cart anyway.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I know it is subtle, but I really like the change from 'winning chairmans' to 'earning chairmans'. I do not feel teams should be strategizing and planning their outreach efforts to "win" an award.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Is it too soon to start the kickstarter to post bail for me after I dismantle the sound system on a cart?

Re Chairman's feedback, I have no words. Well, that's a lie, I have words. They just consist of 4 letters and aren't appropriate for this forum.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

The only thing that stands out for me is that Canadians don't typically stand facing the flag. It caught me way off guard when everyone did it at IRI. I'm assuming its a traditional American thing?

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Huh, so banners weren't actually allowed in the arena in the past. Even though we've been doing so since at least 2009 (at least at Traverse City). Good change to reflect reality.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Yes, not only is it tradition, it is a part of the United States Flag Code.

---

I didn't know Canadians don't face their flag. You learn something new every day.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I swear we're being trolled on the feedback thing. That can't be real.

The core issues with feedback stem from what seems like a lack of uniform training on how to provide the feedback, seeing as it's all over the place depending on the event/region. It's like if there's a consistent traffic jam on the freeway and the way you fix the problem is by ripping up the road.

I remember a lot of responses in championship reflections (including my own) to add more feedback, make it a digital copy that is emailed to the TIMS main and alternate contacts at the conclusion of the event, and provide feedback at Championships. (In fact, as impractical as it is, I wish they would provide feedback on CMP pit interviews as well). I just don't understand why this change was made.

I like the other rule updates, including the ability for sound on the cart. We'll just play some smooth jazz and funk though. :cool:

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I will personally strangle the first team that adds one of those backup beepers to their cart and then gets stuck outside my pit while we're in the middle of a harried repair job between matches. :yikes:

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I tend to agree. I'm also going to say something here that's perhaps a bit controversial. It's about time that teams are required to release their Chairman's information when they win. There have been a couple times where I've been privy to team chairman information that you immediately know isn't true - things like teams suggesting they started teams that they really didn't, organized events that they merely participated in, etc. Public scrutiny of winning chairman entries will hopefully help naturally moderate some of the 'inflation' that goes on when entries are 'secret'. That's long overdue. It's also a great stepping stone so other teams know just how much more they can do in their community, and you never know when it might spur someone to inspiration and a great idea.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

On that note, I think the "release interview videos" is definitely a good step in the right direction.

All I can really say about the lack of feedback is that I am incredibly disappointed. Teams deserve better.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I won't go that far. I will say, that there will be a "special" discussion during our pick list meeting about teams with beeping carts.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

What can I say - I prefer the more direct approach. :p

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I think the yelling robot/cart noise change will be a net positive. I have seen the robot yelling mostly propagated by volunteers insisting that teams do so. This new directive should result in different training and fix that. I also think that most teams don't read the administrative manual/are lazy in general when it comes to things like this, so I doubt we will see many teams doing this.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

This is coming from someone who is not part of our chairmans/awards team, but I don't see why everyone is so upset. What feedback could possibly be better than seeing the submission from the winning team? This now allows teams to review their entire program against many of the top teams, rather than focus on a few specific points from a feedback form. I think this is a great change.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Some regionals give great feed back. for Example: X outreach is really innovative!! or you need to focus in Y and Z. These are the things that teams need in order to improve. The release of videos and what not are only of limited value.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Wait, can the cart use music to make others aware? For example, could I loop the 1960's batman theme to make others aware?

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

If you're interested in irritating the entire regional, sure.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Fair enough.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I dont like the current feedback form because of exactly this reason. It implies that there is a "formula" to win Chairman's when that couldn't be farther from the truth. General presentation and essay feedback are great but I'm on the fence about judges telling teams specifics about what they need to "fix" for Chairman's. It puts an emphasis on "winning" the award which FIRST is trying to steer away from. Rather than teams leaving a regional thinking they might have won if they started just mentored a few more FLL teams or called more politicians about STEM in the classroom, FIRST probably wants teams to leave inspired by the award "winner" to do more stuff for their community.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

The United States national anthem "The Star-Spangled Banner" is all about the flag.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

When you watch their video you don't get to see what their presentation was, just the non-judged video that was created.

Coming from a team that has only participated in chairmans twice, we really enjoyed the feedback. We got notes about presentation ideas, information about who spoke clearly or not, who's pacing was too fast or just right, and what content was good and where they felt we could use work compared anonymously to other presenters they had viewed.

Of course at our other event we got a near blank form...

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Reading this blog from Frank makes me feel like my 2014 FRC end of the year feedback survey responses were really read in detail, taken seriously, and given a lot of individual thought, and not just aggregated into a pie chart. It's nice for an individual to feel as if he or she has influenced an organization's policies and procedures on a national level.

I agree with the changes made to the Chairman's Award process for 2015, and I hope to see good things come from these changes.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

You are actually ok with the complete removal of feed back? I have never given or received any sort of evaluation without some sort of feedback mechanism. If the only feed back a team get is the winner's "project," I fear the a lot of innovation will be removed from the "solutions" that earned Chairman's. Without some sort of constructive criticism, all projects will begin to look alike and a RCA arms race will ensue. Team X mentored 25 FLL teams? We need to do 35 next year! Oh, Team Y (not the Y team) did X at the Uber California regional, let's do that same thing here!

How do I know this, Matt? That seems awfully cynical.

Because I do project based learning in my classroom on a regular basis. Every year I get the same thing from students: "Do you have any examples of a good project?" "What does a good project look like?" One year I caved in and I gave them a few good examples. At the end of the project the vast majority of them were copies of those "example" projects. It was really disheartening.

Without proper rubrics and feedback, teams will go with what they think works. This means more and more submissions will look more and more alike.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Apart from "No more than five members in an individual pit," it also has the following preface:

As I've said before, I don't think it's out of line to keep a very limited number of people quietly working in the pit during the ceremony while the rest of the team attends the ceremony.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Coming from a team who competed in the chairman's award for the first time last year, we found the information very helpful going from Dallas to OKC. We did absolutely horrible in Dallas and scored in the mid range for about everything.

With the Dallas feedback we improved and got a high score with almost everything in OKC. I greatly would appreciated the feedback forms and I am extremely upset that they are taking them away, because they worked for us as a way to see what we needed to focus on more and how to better our interview. I hope they over turn this rule before week 1.

Here is our feedback from OKC.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Actually it says no more than 5, does not say requires allowing more than zero. As long as the Region is allowed to override anybody bringing the rule book over to attempt to argue a Region rule, I'm good to go with it. Respect is the key.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

If a regional is making its own rules, that run counter to the FRC rules ("world" rules), then that is an issue, and someone bringing the rulebook over to state that "This is allowed by 'world' rules" had better be given a good explanation--for example, an unpublicized written rule from the venue saying that such and such is not allowed.

If the regional does not have a good reason, then allowing them to override "world" rules is a very bad idea. But if they do have a good reason, then that's a whole 'nother matter.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I understand not wanting Chairman's to fell like a checklist. I've definitely had discussions with my team about how we know we are bad at some things on the checklist but that's not what the award is about and that there are plenty of important part of embodying the ideal of FIRST that aren't covered in those check boxes so it's okay if you aren't masters of all of them.

With that being said, teams need individual feedback. I've seen a bunch of published Chairman's presentations and my team and I have read dozens of Chairman's Award essays and watched more videos than I want to count. With all of that we still were in desperate need for direct feedback last year, which we got from the judges at the Dallas Regional. On the field you know pretty quickly how your robot stacks up against everyone else but without feedback it's really hard to tell what parts of your presentation you aren't doing well. It's not about starting one more FLL team it's about learning to better communicate what your team is doing.

Every team does a ton of great work and it's often not their work they need to improve but how they present it and what parts of their work they highlight for the judges. This is to me is the most crucial part of the judge feedback, the boxes are useful but for the most part a team knows about where they fall. The feedback about specific points the judges found interesting or different are also useful. Something you think every team does could be very unique and you don't know until a judge tells you.

Also a major new thing in the Chairman's process that I didn't see any one highlight.

This means Chairman's videos must be completed at the same time as the essay now. Where before you had until your interview to complete the process.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Yes, I believe it is

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I see nothing against that rule in the book for a Region to say no one in the pits during ceremonies. Zero is no more than 5.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Can you please show us where FIRST states that Regional Competitions have the authority to create their own rules?

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Regarding the loss of feedback forms and the change from "winning" the Chairman's Award to "earning" the Chairman's Award:


The Chairman’s Award represents the spirit of FIRST. It honors the team that, in the judges’ estimation, best represents a model for other teams to emulate, and which embodies the goals and purpose of FIRST. It remains FIRST’s most prestigious award.


When you really think about it, it is sort of backwards for a team to nominate themselves as the "best" team for others to emulate. If I had my way a team would have to be nominated by other teams in order to be eligible for this award. Then it would truly be something you earn* rather than win**.

I think that these changes are FIRST trying to de-emphasize the competition aspect that has slowly surrounded this award over time. When looked at from this paradigm, these changes are positive. There shouldn't be a feedback form telling teams what they should do to "earn" an award - that turns it right back into "winning".


*earn
- to merit as compensation, as for service; deserve.
- to acquire through merit.

**win
- to finish first in a race, contest, or the like.
- to gain the victory; overcome an adversary.

dictionary.com

Cheers, Bryan

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

There is no such rule. However, most of the rules are written such that volunteers in certain key roles have power over how they are executed. For example, the game section typically specifically states that the final decision on all game rules falls with the head ref, and the robot section states that the final decision on all robot rules falls with the LRI.

Similarly, note the following from the section on people being in the pit during ceremonies (emphasis mine):

What is not clear here is the same as in previous years- who determines whether or not a team needs to remain in the pit? At some regionals, the team gets to opt in or out freely. At the regionals I have been at, it is typically a decision made by key volunteers discussing the matter with specific teams.

Finally, I encourage everyone to consider section 4.9.1:

FIRST now has clearly stated that if a team needs to continue working in their pit (presumably to have a robot that is operable) they can have no more than 5 people in their pit. However, they have very explicitly stated that "all teams should attend" and clearly want everyone to be there.

Out of respect for those who coordinate the ceremonies, those presenting in the ceremonies, your mentors and parents, the volunteers at the event, and FIRST's wishes, I hope that every team member makes an effort to attend the ceremonies.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

RE: Chairman's Feedback

One thing I feel Frank has done well is embrace the idea of the FRC community solving FRC problems.

I can't imagine the intent of this move is to forever remove direct feedback for teams, but perhaps to shock the system into generating a better method. I do feel like a better measuring stick (via more examples of teams that win Chairman's) is a key element.

Perhaps an eventual solution to this could be to utilize the FRC community as a body of judges. Teams post their videos and chairman's presentations, and an aggregating site allows volunteers to view them and provide feedback. In theory, it should be as simple as a form a team could submit with an attached document and link to a Youtube video, and a form survey volunteers can give input through. I hate to throw out an idea I don't have the time or skills to implement at this point, but I feel a system like this would provide more exposure for the teams that submit to it as well as a greater volume of feedback.

I know I'm the type of late night forum lurker that would have no problem looking at a couple presentations a week and spending 10-15 minutes typing out the most honest feedback I can.

-Steven

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Would this body of FRC team "judges" providing feedback also actively vote for their favorites and actually help select the CA based only on the video? Or would they just provide feedback to that team? If actively selecting the CA is based on video only then isn't there a danger that team's with access to professional media to produce their video would have an advantage over other teams? At least with an essay and live interaction between presenters and judges a team that is "video-graphically challenged" can compensate somewhat for their lack of professional input on their final video product.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

The intent behind the idea is that it would be an elective process teams could use for feedback removed from the selection of the CA, simply to provide input to the team. Possibly having the roll-up tool bring to the top submissions that have had less feedback to date, and pushing down those with more feedback.

I think the community as a whole is pretty good about reading/commenting on various teams that submit designs, questions, programs, etc... and I would imagine they would equally support giving teams feedback on things like CA. I also think (but unfortunately don't have numbers to back) that the CA judges are often folks that are fairly close to the mentoring community (if not the same people). The feedback from a cross section of Chief Delphi readers would probably be reasonably consistent with what a CA judge would provide.

Just an idle thought on a Sunday afternoon, it could also just be an inherently flawed idea and should be scrapped for something better. I could just see a situation in the next couple years where my team is ready to start submitting for the CA, and that the feedback from 10 random CD readers would probably be greater in value to me than a single set of judges at a regional.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

They should have said the only sound maker allowed on a robot cart is a bicycle bell. Ring ring ring ring.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I fully agree with you here. While I haven't seen anything quite on the level of what you're describing here, I've seen essays that perhaps stretch the truth a little. As someone who does most of the writing for my team, it's often hard to tell where the line lies between making something sound good and embellishing it to the point where it's not true, so hopefully this will encourage teams to really think about what they're writing before submitting it.

I'm not assuming malicious intent on the part of any Chairman's-submitting teams. I'm saying that it's often difficult to see where the line between 'sounds awesome' and 'exaggerated beyond the truth' lies when you want to sound as good as possible to the judges.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Banana phone?

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I thought my 'robot' yelling days were over, but then I realized I can just make a speaker that plays a recording of someone yelling 'Robot' at the press of a button.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I could not agree more this this sentiment.

(1) I agree that poor or inconsistent feedback is better than no feedback at all. It seems like working to improve the feedback would be a better goal than eliminating the feedback entirely. In particular it allows you to see what you are effectively communicating and what is getting lost in translation. You might be doing a great job as a team but not communicating that to the judges. In fact when we won RCA a few years ago we were told that some of the judges knew we had been doing a lot for a few years, but they had been waiting for us to communicate it to them. That's when we won. :yikes: How can you determine that kind of feedback from watching the presentations of other teams??

(2) I agree that taking winning examples of presentations will simply generate more nearly identical presentations both in content and scope. The Chairman's Award needs to be about how an individual team brings Science and FIRST to their community in their own way... it is not how you re-interpreted team X's way to working with their community. FIRST is about innovation. No feedback = formulaic outreach. :(

Even though the feedback we received from our presentations last year was uneven between the events and on some level confusing, it still helped us to improve our communication.

Please bring back the feedback. It is how we learn.
And add the posting of the winners essays, videos, and presentations. It is how we are inspired.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I'll present the counter argument. By having a specific scoring metric, teams are encouraged to do things to fit that mold for the purposes of winning the award, rather than doing things on their own accord because they want to and it is truly meaningful to them.

Additionally, teams that do great work become discouraged that they will never win the award because they are missing one small piece that judges consider to be essential to a Chairman's award winning team, and the teams are not willing to change their ways just for the purposes of winning an award.

I am not willing to mentor n+1 teams just because last year's winners mentored n teams. Quantity of outreach and mentoring efforts is not a priority for our team as much as quality is, and for that reason I've felt that in the past system, we would have never stood a chance. We are not able to travel internationally to start a team, cure cancer, or save babies and elderly folks from collapsed buildings. I'm not saying the teams that have done those things and won the award are not deserving, but those are things we likely will never do, nor have any intention of ever "competing" for doing. However, our lack of participation in those activities should not disqualify us from the running.

I think a more open interpretation of what a Chairman's award team looks like is a good thing for the community overall. And I think removing the feedback for at least a year will help the effort in getting teams to do good work because they want to, rather than because they want to be recognized for it.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I agree with everything you said, except the conclusion that we should remove the feedback form. I think we should change the feedback form. I'd be happy if they just got rid of the checkboxes. I'd be happy with a blank sheet of paper for the judges to write on.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Completely agreed. Any feedback is better than nothing. "This is what beat you" is not feedback. Heck, I'd argue that the best feedback I've seen has been in the comments section of the form.

Also of note, the first team update was released to the admin manual. Video is no longer required to be submitted to STIMS at the Chairman's deadline, and even putting a link is optional. Good.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

They just added this in the Dec. 19th Update. It is located in section 5.5.3

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

I'm very glad they added this section back in. My team will likely be taking advantage of this opportunity.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

As someone who's been doing color guard activities for over three years now, this has always been something that bothered me. We had exchange students from other countries on our team, but they were always respectful of the anthems. Of course, our team, myself included, could always be better at being respectful.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

The core issue with that is CA judges are already quite overtaxed. (All judges are)

Quality feedback is REALLY hard to write. Heck, sometimes even mediocre "do more community outreach" feedback is hard to write and justify compared to team XYZ who won. Plus, now you have to go back, remember specifics from the team and write feedback after deciding which is going to always feel like justifying your decision and isn't always useful.

TL;DR - Good feedback is hard and it's a bigger problem than just handing the judges a rubric.

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

Section 4.5.2.2 of the admin manual reads
The corresponding section in the 2014 admin manual reads
It seems that Elimination Matches have been renamed to "Playoff Matches" - does this indicate a different structure for elims?

Re: [FRC Blog] Software Downloads and Administrative Manual Release
 

My guess is they changed the name because most other sports call their postseason eliminations "playoffs".

The elimination structure from previous seasons is a type of playoff system.