Quote:
Originally Posted by davidthefat
I already done that, I had the whole thing CADed out and presented a very professional and complete presentation on it yesterday. In fact, everyone commented on how great my idea is and how great my presentation was. The vote was a tie between those two designs. But the thing that scared the people away was the complexity and the level of detail that I went into. I explicitly stated that it is scalable down to a less complex version. Today, we had a re-vote, their main platform was the simplicity. Mine was that their idea filed before in a previous year and that it would be ineffective as anything. It simply will not kick high or far enough.
See the above response. Apparently, my ideas are "too perfect".
|
Similar issue last year happened to me.
Sometimes, people just don't get things, and you have to accept that
everyone can make stupid decisions, even if you don't agree with them.
If you want a chance to rectify the situation, here's what I'd do: HELP THEM. If it really is that bad, help them build the initial robot, get it programmed with basic code, and then show them just how bad their idea is so they can scrap it. Case in point: We went with a scissor-lift initially last year (no one tried them before for FRC, and thought it might work because it was "stable"). At week 3, we realized it was a really, really crappy idea, on top of the lift ripping itself in half under no load, despite all the reinforcement.
By chance, does the kicker happen to be based on some sort of arm, or involve pneumatics?
