Re: Team Update 4
 

I have a little adage I try to hold myself to: "Deal with it, or shut up and deal with it."

Some of us should take a few minutes to step back, cool off under the collar, and maybe grab a sandwich.

Re: Team Update 4
 

A perfect example of this. Last year for our rookie test we had 4 mini teams that had to build a robot in one week to navigate a maze. We showed them how the maze was set up and gave them dimensions, but not the real maze. 2 days before their mini competition the got a glimpse at what the real maze looked like, one of the teams builders started to complain that their robot would not turn in the tight corners of the maze and asked me to make the maze larger just for him. We did not change it for him at all and nobody else has a complaint about the field. So needless to say dont change the rules and dont change the field CHANGE YOUR ROBOT because that's the only thing you can truly control.

P.S the student who asked me to change the field did not make our team last year or this year because he argued that is was unfair and unjust, but that's how competition and LIFE works.

Re: Team Update 4
 

LOOK, LOOK! It's a moderately on topic post that's not about the FTC debacle!
You two clearly aren't thinking creatively enough. Scoring for your opponent makes loads of sense when there's 9+ points sitting on the top row in the form of a completed LOGO. All you do is have your feeder score the wrong GAME PIECE for your opponent, and you wipe out the LOGO bonus. Scoring for your opponent to lower their score! I thought it was pretty brilliant and hilarious, personally. Anyways, I posted a question to the Q&A a while back that outlined this scenario. So I'm taking credit for the <G39> rule change in this update until anyone else admits to having a twisted enough mind to think that up.

However, I'm not taking credit for this:All I did was post about the rule change before someone else did. And show back up in the thread to nod along with everyone else and bring a little order to things. I suspect that the biggest push came from people who developed all the CAN technology and either wandered across the thread or were otherwise informed about the rule change.

Re: Team Update 4
 

I actually thought of it too but with using the robot however that could have been flagged for yellow carding under egregious behavior. But you aren't the only twisted one :ahh:

Re: Team Update 4
 

Turf wars solve nothing.

When I first heard about the minibot being Tetrix-based, of course I was upset after spending hours and hours working with VEX and building a very successful program through it. I was also upset because FTC's presence in Canada is slim to none, and I thought every team would jump on the free Tetrix kits available on I will not compare the two kits here, as my opinion is biased to VRC due to the extensive work I've put in with it.

I'm happy FIRST is trying to expose more students to STEM programs, and I always have been. I'm disappointed in the politically-heavy way they're doing it.

Regardless, my team's minibot will have VEX stickers proudly all over it, not to say we like VEX more, but to prove that we're about expanding not just the FIRST program, but all STEM programs.

-Nick

Re: Team Update 4
 

lulz....where'd you order game pieces this year?

Re: Team Update 4
 

As someone who has spent a fair amount of time seeing unfortunate things happen with the intermediate program, despite the best efforts of great people, I'd ask those of you who are having "visceral" reactions toward what you're reading to think carefully before acting (My buddy Chris has some great ideas on how to deal with things, later) and help your team and its students to be successful as best you can - first and foremost - now.

Also, be very thoughtful and careful as to what terms you use and who you direct your displeasure toward. The "GDC" is a general term many people throw around here. Please remember that this committee is largely made up of volunteers, but also includes some FIRST employees for obvious reasons. I spent a few years working on the intermediate program GDC.

So, any time you associate the "GDC" with an activity and assign credit or blame, please understand, for those of us on the outside of that process, that there's no way of knowing, for certain, what information and decisions are coming exactly from where or who's recommendation leads to what action/ruling. Be mindful, if it's here or in a letter later, that there's no way for us to know what information comes from which portion, or all of the "GDC" under certain circumstances.

Peace ... go build robots with kids and show them a better way to live their lives in the process. Years ago there was a local cover band I loved to go see play, The Vultures. On the back of their shirts was the motto, "Passion in the face of adversity." It was good advice then, and it's good advice now. Take your passions and direct them where they are most needed right how - toward your teams :).

Now...about minibots going vertical ....

Re: Team Update 4
 

I don't care that they limit minibot to Tetrix and some raw materials, that is a fine constraint that levels teams to some point.

My problem is that if you go to the FTC-Tetrix site:

http://parts.ftcrobots.com/store/def...y=9&c=1&bhcp=1

the parts are one price and another price when you go to the FRC-Tetrix site

(http://www.legoeducation.us/store/de...ID=159&bhcp=1).

In the real world, an organization uses it purchasing and political muscle to get a better price for its members.

In this case, First SEEMS to be letting FRC subsidize FTC or Lego. I don't think Lego is starving! I have asked the question in the official forums and have not seen any answer. Maybe Update#4 is the answer?

Does not seem correct or fair. We are a well funded team and the difference in costs will not prevent us from building a minibot or two if we are successful. Not true for others.

Re: Team Update 4
 

Man, all this whining about how FIRST is being political, it reminds me of, oh, I don't know, politics, businesses, other non-profits, and maybe even groups of people in general?

BTW, my team doesn't give two flying monkeys about the whole FTC-vs-VRC debacle, and I had to bring them all up to speed before they knew why it was such a big deal to "the entire FIRST community (/sarcasm)". Are they bummed that they can't use anything their hearts desire? Sure. But are they fuming mad, ready to quit this excellent program, because we've got a classroom full of VEX kits that we can't use? Nope. We're too busy working on our hostbot and game strategy to care.

"Welcome to the real world"? If I worked at Google, why can't I use my Windows-based notebook? They're in high school now, kind of late to be sheltering them, much-less hiding seemingly asinine rules and restrictions.

That a catapult was awfully out-of-place in terms of the intent of the mini-bot race, if common sense were applied?

Tell them it's not all sunshine and rainbows, and things don't always go your way. Good luck finding a group of organized human beings that aren't even remotely political.



No one is perfect. FIRST is not perfect, you're not perfect, I'm not perfect. At the end of the day, people make mistakes, and people disagree with each other. But the beauty of choices, is just that. You don't like it? Next year, switch your team to VEX/BEST/whatever. Before you do that, though, do me a favor: Take a poll at your next team meeting. Ask how many people hate FIRST so much for promoting FTC that they want to switch programs next year, then ask how many people are enjoying their time in FIRST enough to overlook this TRAGIC event and continue next year.

Re: Team Update 4
 

Well, if Apple made their player available for your hardware you could use it if you wanted. There are also a dozen other music players for Android available...

I get your point though.

No, it isn't falling apart but a lot of the people I am seeing complain about these minibot rulings are some respected members of the FIRST community. I'm not saying they should have some special say but I am saying that if a large number of them disagree strongly with a decision it should really make us step back and ask ourselves why they are disagreeing.

Because their kits are supplied by a for profit company that signed a contract with FIRST. I support FIRST, I support the ideas it stands for and I will do anything within my power to help any FIRST team (FRC, FTC, FLL, JFLL). THAT is supporting FIRST. Buying parts from a FIRST partner is not supporting FIRST it is supporting that partner. Now, if FIRST wants to mandate that we have to buy those parts to be competitive that is their prerogative. For some reason the wording reminds me of our former President's use of the phrase "You are either with us or against us". I disagree, nothing is ever that two sided, especially when it comes to inspiring the next generation.

After having played with the Tetrix kit a little I understand why it costs so much, it is really nice hardware. I just do not feel it is the proper tool for me to use to inspire our students. Can I still say I support FIRST? Can I still say I support the ideals and goals of an organization that changed my life? With this statement by the GDC I am not sure.

I understand the goal of bringing more awareness of the smaller competitions by using the larger one. I like the idea, I admire the desire to bring FTC and FLL to the same status as the "big robots". Quite possibly the only thing I don't like was that one little phrase. And, maybe there isn't a rational reason why it bothers me so much, maybe I can't explain it to you. I still don't agree with it.

[Rant] This is the Superbowl of Smarts, why should the playing field be level?[\Rant]

Now that I have said some pretty mean things about the GDC I have to give them a compliment. Thank you for doing exactly what we asked for. I feel that the rules this year have a clear intent behind them. If the intent is not clear it was mentioned in either the Kickoff broadcast or one of the blue boxes/ notes in the rulebook. I know you are catching a lot of flak for it but I think that clear and honest communication will only result in an improvement for the entire community. I don't always agree with your intent but I appreciate you sharing it with us.

-Andrew

Re: Team Update 4
 

Can we all please take a deep breath and relax before pouncing on that "Post Reply" button? I doubt if anyone is really ready to leave FIRST just because they threw some limitations at us.

Like it or not, FIRST is a brand as well as a philosophy. As such, it is the interest of FIRST to say you have to use FIRST stuff. Just a fact of life, as many before pointed out.

Another thought to consider is the GDC put restrictions on the otherwise infinite number of variations that the minibots could evolve into. Aside from safety reasons (i.e., catapults), they're trying to be realistic in terms of what the judges will have to evaluate in determining which ones are in fact legal minibots and which ones aren't. So they put it simply as "FTC".

And, yes, there's desire to grow the FIRST community, etc. Personally I don't see how FTC-based minibots will bring this about, but hey, I'm only a high school teacher and a FRC coach, maybe I don't have the necessary experiences to understand the logic. So I do what I can do: I support my team and its students, and not rant about things I don't know about.

So as maltz1881 said, "NOW GET OUT THERE AND BUILD BUILD BUILD!!!!! "

Re: Team Update 4
 

Oh how I wish that were true.

No one ever said that the use of proprietary game pieces was any more just the the FTC requirements, but based on the price, I doubt AndyMark is making much, if any, profit. I would guess that the sale of the game pieces functions in a similar manner to FIRST Choice, where FIRST supplies the materials and AndyMark handles the distribution (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Re: Team Update 4
 

I can't speak for others, but even though I am quite upset about this, I am in no way ready to quit. Like in any Group, you have people who get upset, sometimes fuming, about the politics. Now are they mad about a particular way something was done, yes, but at the end of the day we all agree about while were hear and the ideals. For me this ticks me off, but it's not like it's ruined my season. Honestly besides a couple questions about my FB status about this at the beginning of my day this morning, I haven't thought about it throughout the build day.

Re: Team Update 4
 

The Return of the A-Bomb, and a strategy that will most likely be used. I CAN NOT WAIT FOR COMPETITION!

Re: Team Update 4
 

Don't forget to bring your video cameras to capture it. Though what is the A-Bomb? Unfamiliar with the term.