Quote:
Originally Posted by lemiant
In this one I see your defense of the GDC unfounded. An engineering firm might be ok with situation above, but this more like if your customer had ambiguous specs and when you repeatedly went back to them and asked for clarification the customer refused to tell you what they actually wanted. Then when you came to them with the finished product they admonished you for not giving them what they wanted and rejected your design. Additionally FIRST is not the real world and should not be treated as such, one big difference is that here it's not FIRST paying us five grand  . |
Actually, this is exactly how an open bidding process works in the "real world". The GDC did not respond to requests to "validate a design". That is often how it works (always in my experience). A proposal team does not want to ask a question that is too revealing (because all bidders typically see all responses) and the customer will not answer private queries (to avoid an appearance of favoritism). So one is left with a risk management decision (which 118 did well in my judgment).
FIRST is meant to encourage young people to pursue careers in science and technology. If FRC was simply a game and not meant to mimic the "real world" - Why have Chairman Awards? Why the formal focus on quality and safety? Why have project managers? Why have engineering inspiration awards? Why do it in 6 weeks? Why the effort to use industry standard parts? In my opinion FIRST is definitely mimics the real world (with some limits).
Further, in the real world, one also pays to play and assumes a huge risk (no contract award) - at least in FIRST everyone gets their 10-12 matches worth. The $5K is a pittance against what it cost to put the events on. Consider the event volunteers, mentors and teachers and FIRST national staff volunteers. The $5K is just affirmation of serious intentions in my opinion. Teams are not "customers" who should make demands of FIRST.