Quote:
Originally posted by BenSanders
I would like to argue that one bin cannot be qualified as a stack because there has been no stacking done. So no mater how tall any given bin could be it would still not be a stack and therefore not count as a multiplier. This issue does require clarification by FIRST though.
|
The problem you bring up is a problem with semantics. Your definition of a "stack" seems to be something like "a group of things, at least one of which has been put on another," when FIRST's definition of a "stack" is "one or more bins/crates/boxes/what-have-yous which breaks the plane between the first and second levels of a group of nested bins, and protrudes into, at least, the second level."
If I'm wrong, or mistaken, please correct me. This is just an interpretation of your comment, and of FIRST's scoring system.