Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

If "Dean's List" was truly a late-coming program, then perhaps there was an intrisic debate as to when to release it. My opinion is that it's better to release it now and open the opportunity to students sooner rather than later. It's still better than keeping the opportunity under wraps for another year just they have more time to plan it. That has nothing to do with 'transparency'.

I think FIRST is slowly turning the ship towards better seas. The program, the game, and the overall presentation of the message have all improved this year, IMO.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

So are you saying that the people that did get recognized for the award don't deserve it? There are always going to be people that missed out on getting a chance to receive the award and might have deserved it "more" because of the crunch, I admit that, and I realized I didn't say anything along those lines in my initial post. But in the same breath we should be happy for the people who did get recognized because they did deserve it -- more, less, or the same as the people who didn't get a chance to submit, at least we know that those people did things for our FIRST community that must be substantial in order to receive the award. Not crush the credibility of the award because of the rushed process. Hypothetically if I received the honor, I wouldn't want to hear someone else saying that "the right people did not get recognized"...

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

He's not saying that the recipients didn't deserve it.

He's saying that there are a number of deserving students that, due to problems with TIMS, didn't even get to submit for the award, through no fault of their own.

Some teams with students that could have been nominated did not submit, due to the time crunch. Other teams wanted to leave the students out of the loop (due to the same reasons that students do the same thing with the WFFA), but could not due to the process. Teams that had to involve the students could only involve the students who had time to write the essays.

Saying that the right people did not get recognized may be stretching the truth, but it's a natural outgrowth of the above.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

Ending the discussion on the Dean's List Gaffe:

Let's just chalk it up to another case of less than perfect (= human) planning. I believe that FIRST is also not happy at how it actually 'went down', but when you're dealing with a mostly-volunteer organization, you really have little recourse and authority ff the person who was supposed to get this done is a few days late.

Now, if this had been announced 7 days earlier, would you have found it to be better? That is, would you be happier about how it happened? TIMS issues would have been resolved, discussions could happen in 4 or 6 days and still plenty of time to write essays, etc.

Well, how may of you have never been late delivering a project?

I can't claim to know ANY of the details, but I see this stuff in other volunteer organizations; Whoever ****ed up knows it, and maybe they won't do it again. You could cut their salary in half, but even 0.5 * 0 = 0. Sure, extending the deadline might have helped, but maybe not (and I'd hate to have less time to judge) - but hindsight is 20/20

The horse is dead; stop beating it please.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

At Boston, Dean spoke with a heartfelt apology for the timing of the Dean's List award. He said they knew it was bad timing, he admitted it and apologized. Simple as that. It was better to announce it that late (when the idea came to the board's mind) than to just wait a year and let an entire year of graduates lose the opportunity.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

Dean repeated the heartfelt apology this past Saturday in Raleigh North Carolina.

Even though they didn't get entries from every team the did get a very nice pool of submissions.

Congratulations to the Dean's list regional winners. The honor is well deserved.

I concur with Don. Case closed !

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

Thank you Don.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

From this afternoon's entry on
Bill's Blog "Just 5 Days to Go" (my emphasis)

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

5 year plan?

My goodness, I gotta call him and offer to shine his shoes or get his coffee or something. Wow, maybe it DID get through...:)

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

Does FRC Live get a webcast? I'd be interested in seeing this

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

I haven't heard anything in a while, so I am presenting a friendly reminder. A premature post is simply preemptive communication.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

Sorry for the delay folks!

The video is posted at http://www.vimeo.com/11064599
Since I ran out of battery near the end, Mark McLeod kindly posted a few fill-ins at: http://www.team358.org/history/2010/...ology-Roadmap/


Mark was also kind enough to extract a single frame from one of his early shots showing the FRC 5 year technology plan. But, Bill made it clear that the plan is a secret (watch the video to hear why).

A challenge to FRC students: Decode the magic scroll. (For what it's worth: I see that for 2012 and 2013, the words "Continuously-Variable Transmission" are written. I just didn't have the time to look closer.)

Also, a HUGE thank you to Mark.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

I don't think that, "We have a plan. We promise," is a particularly useful sort of transparency.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

"Here is my plan for ending world hunger, ensuring world peace, and generating unlimited clean energy. I have a plan, I promise."

See, I can do it too. I could even show you a big document with those words on it. Flash it in front of your faces and claim it is confidential.

Sorry, I am angry about this. If you can't tell us anything don't bring it up. If you are just going to stick your tongue out and say "HA HA I can't tell you anything!" Do us a favor, don't even bring it up. To me all the whole technology road map thing did was to leave a sour taste in my mouth. The rest of the presentation was interesting though.


EDIT: Also Don, your link to 358's site doesn't work.

Re: A Request for transparency from FIRST
 

Bill's got a tough job of balancing access to information against revealing too much, especially when some of that information is either not fully baked, subject to change, or in the works.

What if he lets out some details too early, teams make plans, and then the details fall through. How many people would chase Bill with pitchforks and torches for being wrong?

The seem to have been pretty opening during this FRCLive discussion. Kudos to them and keep it up.