Quote:
Originally Posted by =Martin=Taylor=
I think the rules keep getting more restrictive each year...
And there were only a few teams who came up with this innovative solution. They should be rewarded.
|
I agree with you in principle, but I think the better answer would be "The Q&A should actually answer questions like these in advance so that more teams are willing to know if it's a waste of time or not." Non-answers hurt everyone. If they allowed it, teams would feel cheated when they didn't take a legality risk due to their interpretation of a vague Q&A answer. It would be a firestorm. Remember how bad the perfectly, unambiguously legal 469 robot in 2010 was?
Regardless... I can't help but draw comparisons to the "troll bot" debacle debated here just a few weeks ago. Both were failures of the Q&A system, though this was a non answer gone wrong versus a full answer suddenly reversed... They're the same issue to me. The teams are not at fault in either situation.
I'm interested to see if anyone thinks one was different than the other, and why they believe that to be so... but since that would derail this thread, private message may be a more appropriate medium for that discussion. Or I could start a new thread, I dunno.