[EricH]

Closer. But still, I did give quite a list of teams that don't fit that bill--they're student designed, with sponsor building off the student designs or students building their own designs with mentor guidance. Well over half of this year's multi-event winners, in fact, are not built with even the level of mentor involvement that you attribute to them. Speaking as an alumnus of a team that has been a multi-event winner in the past, that most recent assessment certainly does not describe our design/build process, in any year I've been on/around the team.

I would figure that if someone were to compile a list of every multi-event winner in every year, and compile a list of mentor-built teams (if such a list could be compiled), there might be one or two teams that are on both lists. MIGHT be. I don't think there would even be one team on both, personally

Yes, it is your opinion. But when an opinion runs completely counter to facts that have been posted, quite publicly, about a number of those teams, then maybe it's time to relook at the opinion. Or, maybe it's time to provide evidence to support your opinion (and I do mean evidence, not "You know this is happening"-type statements).

With respect to mentors calling each other out: Take it off the open forum. All of you. You can do it in private. You can do it to each other's face and in person. But please keep it off of CD's public forums--we don't need to hear it, and all it does is reflect badly on everyone involved. Do your students really need to hear/read your, shall we say, less-than-complimentary statements? I don't think so! If y'all take that sort of thing outside, the debates go so much more civilly. Thank you.