Re: Robot Collaboration
 

Ken and John,

I don't think that sponsorship can be just made up as we go or else the $3,500 rule is just so much non-sense.

My particular part of Delphi has no shop to make a single part for our robot. If I want to get something made I have to apply the $3,500 limits or my team has to make it. If I can just call anyone who does work for me a sponsor or team member, then the rule has no teeth, especially, if I can barter for the goods and services.

Remember Dean's statement that words mean what they mean? Well, the rules discuss even donated labor having to be accounted for.

If all I have to do is call one my donator one of my team sponsors why even discuss such a thing as donated labor?

I am back where I started on this one. I don't think I like this.

Let's do a thought experiement... ...suppose that this was done by ChiefDelphi and another Delphi team or two.

Based on the heat that Chief Delphi has taken over the years for pushing the limits of (what I feel at least) were more grey rules, I am sure that the calls for our heads would have been as loud as they were relentless.

If you'd be upset if Chief Delphi did this, what is different about these two teams doing it?

Joe J.

Re: Team 60 & 254 breaking new grounds in FIRST!
 

Ditto.

And thanks to 60 for warmly and generously sharing their plans from a past robot arm with us this year. There were new members on our team that didn't believe 60 would say yes to our request. My husband and I, of course, were confident they would. They did with bells on. It helped open some team members' eyes about the possilibities of coopetition between teams.

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

While the FIRST experience is based on Gracious Professionalism and inspiration, and I have no doubt that each and every member of teams 60 and 254 have been somehow enlightened or otherwise inspired by their building experience, much like every other FIRST team, I believe that other aspects are key, chief among those being team-building. The members of an individual FIRST team, who go through all of the ups and downs of build alongside each other, will perhaps benefit in ways that the members of collaborating teams wouldn't. But then again, I am neither a member of team 60 nor team 254, so my opinion is relatively inconsequential. Just a slight comparison, though: Corporate outsourcing.

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

DJ, Jeff, you guys definatly took my post in the wrong direction...

i was in no way "team bashing" as i was accused of. i was simply stating a fact that some teams arent so lucky to get a decent team, much less two. all i was trying to say is people arent too happy about the pairting, and i was just stating that. no need to give me negative rep points for stating a fact.

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

I really do not know what to take of all this. It technically seems as if FIRST rules don't rule this out but it also seems a bit unfair. If you're going to pair up, why don't one of you take a rookie team under your wing and show them the ropes? Why take two, experienced veteran teams and make one robot essentially, just copied. FIRST is about gracious profesionalism, but it also is a competition...FIRST Robotics Competition, as the title says right here.

Competition- A test of skill or ability; a contest.

How is having something done for you a test of skill? Why compete if you're perfectly matched? I understand working together, assisting and all, but building whole components for each other...seems a bit unfair. Wouldn't everyone learn more in the end if you made your own robot? Ok, one team may be experts in drive trains, the other in appendages. Well, how are the teams supposed to grow and learn and advance their knowledge if they have others do it all for them? It, overall, is a very unique idea but still shakey in my book. Just...wow.

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

i would suggest that instead of arguing over this right now, you should go and build your robot.

what is done is done! PERIOD!

I personally dont want this turning into what happened to truck town thunder (when they posted a teaser, people complained and FIRST decided to change to rules)

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

It may be too late for that at this point. Numerous questions about this venture have been brought up, and need to be addressed in a official manner. Expect some sort of ruling from FIRST in the near future. Although, I highly doubt that either team would be barred from competition.

On the other hand, there is still that cryptic comment on the first page of Team Update #10. It's already been addressed earlier in this thread, but it warrants consideration. FIRST was hinting that they had seen something that was creative, deserving of recognition, yet illegal. This may have been what they were talking about.

The next few days should be interesting, to say the least. Then again, isn't that always true about the last week of build season?

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

Ken, will you exlpain to me how this is going to be an issue... I am in need of a little clafirication.


And I would like to say the following. Please don't hold any of it against, me I'm not trying to be rude.

As a member of Team 60, I am used to the constant whiplash of the design of our robot. If we are not knocked down at least once a year for our design, it is a very rare occurrence. I do not hold any grudges, because I also realize that some of our alumni have acted in an undignified and very ungracious manner.
Teams had every right to be upset.
Now, however, we have done a lot to improve both our reputation and the spirit of FIRST. We are mentoring two teams in Arizona, eight LEGO league teams, we help out whenever we are asked. Gladly.

This alliance is the next step. Our CAD drawings for this year's robot, any past robot, strategies (from game strategy to marketing strategy to team organization) have been available fully and completely to those that ask.

We did NOT create this alliance to push down any other team. The parts were student machined. All labor was donated. When we were designing, we were desingning together. When we were building, we did as much, if not more than other teams.

And it IS a real life solution to the problem. If an engineering company has to team up with another company to produce a product, they both put in man hours and they both put in the effort. I've seen it happen in REAL LIFE. At Laron, no less.

As I said before, do not think less of me. This is my third year on this team, and I have been educated this year, far more than the last two combined.

PS Dima, darling, we love you, but I don't think this will end without much of a fight.

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

Though I support our team and team 254, I don't really think that is important actually I agree with dima, what more is there to say?

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

Just to correct a much much earlier statement. Our robots are the same exactly except the wiring. that is to say the same wires go to the same places they are just arranged differently. both teams will be able to use programs from the other team. all parts and programs are interchangeable

on another note, interchangeable parts revolutionized the world and that pretty much compares to this.

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

Solex. That's completely your personality. haha! Through all of this I never thought ONE OF OUR OWN would say such a thing!

It makes me laugh! :D

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

We built a microwave. You built a toaster.

I cannot use the parts from my microwave in my toaster. I don't think the comparison is remotely valid.

In response to a later reply:
While it may be true that certain components are shared between toasters and microwaves, the parts from one cannot be used in the other in any practical sense. The resistors capacitors, nuts, bolt and screws that you'll find in both the toaster and the microwave are analogous to our speed controllers, robot controller and pneumatic systems -- our kit of parts.

The heating coils from my toaster serve no purpose in a microwave oven. Likewise, the microwave's timer isn't too useful on a toaster. These are unique systems that were designed to best suit their products; though each product is designed to accomplish the same goal -- to prepare food.

FIRST robots are kitchen appliances. In the end, they all score points just as all appliances help to feed us. Through your collaboration, however, I now have two toasters and no microwave. The students on teams 60 and 254 are now highly efficient at making toast, but did anyone learn how to use the microwave?

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

actually you most likely could. you would need more parts but you could still use some.

Re: Robot Collaboration
 

Okay, so you've got two toasters... from what? This analogy doesn't completely make sense (although I like where you went with it).

If your goal is to make a toaster, make a toaster. We set out to make the SAME thing. It's not like we went out to change our robot into something completely different. We weren't trying to transform "toasters into microwaves" we just wanted to work together.