Quote:
Originally posted by Ian W.
if we have this rule, it will more or less stop her from being a driver.
in any case, this rule has made my life much harder, because i don't want to tell my team member that she can't drive because of a stupid rule which is completely unfair to her. this is the most un-FIRST-like rule i've ever seen before. as far as i know, FIRST has been about getting EVERYONE, not just the healthy (as in not handicapped) people. this rule kind of shatters that notion of mine.
|
If this rule stands, I'm sure FIRST would make exceptions to the rule, especially in circumstances as you described. I think if you simply emailed them, or asked in the team forum they would clarify.
I can't believe that FIRST would discriminate in ANY way against the disabled. Heck, if your friend drives I would think Deano would do everything to make it easier for her. How would she feel about driving from an IBot?
I wholeheartedly agree with M, this rule seems unnecessary. If they simply enforced the stated rule of "no communication with the robot" then it wouldnt be an issue. The new E-stop rule will also change the strategy behind an autonomous shut off. I think the only time a team will push the E-stop button now is if their robot is going to commit autonomous suicide.
Ricksta-
I hope you trip on your way to the controls, just to prove that accidents DO happen, especially to those who are cocky about it. Even the most sure footed people stumble sometimes...