[TRWSHSHLX]

Coming from a robotics program that had to share a motor controller between 3 robots for FTC, I know first hand what it means to be under-funded, under-sponsored, and insert similar adjectives.

It's true that some teams have more resources than others, however, does that mean other teams should hate on them just because of that? No. Almost all of the resourceful teams have dedicated people (students and or mentors) working on how to sustain the partnerships and similar stuff. They've earned their resources by working for them.

As for purposefully denying the balance of a bridge, like many others already said, if the cooperative bridge is already balanced, just leave it. It's one thing to not accept the invitation, but to go against your own alliance robot and ram the bridge on purpose? Maybe the ramming team can approach your own alliance partners and suggest not to cooperate (for whatever reason) and if your partner think the action is better for them in the long run, they will agree.

Every team out there is trying to win, and there's nothing wrong with that. However, winning is not critical in FIRST to be inspired. Of course everyone want to be a winner vs. being on the losing side, but does that mean they are not inspired to build a better robot next year, have more outreach activities, or try to find more resources? No. There will only be 3 teams (4 teams if counting chairman) to be the "true winner" of the competition, but that doesn't mean the rest of the teams are not inspired. If the level of inspiring of your team is solely based on the result of the season, here's a phrase for you, as I'm not going to comment anything towards any team in particular:

It's about the journey, not the destination.