View Single Post
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-08-2013, 13:20
Tristan Lall's Avatar
Tristan Lall Tristan Lall is offline
Registered User
FRC #0188 (Woburn Robotics)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,484
Tristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Standardized District Point Model

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan Streeter View Post
So, based off a newsletter that went out to New England teams today, it's confirmed that FIRST is planning on standardizing the district system point model for 2014... so, what do you think?

First off, do you think it should be standardized? Should each region be able to choose how they qualify teams - in something akin to "States' Rights?" Or would it be silly for FIRST not to choose how awards and accomplishments are rewarded?
One of the biggest problems with a real "states' rights" regime is that it gives states licence to do things out of self-interest, without regard for everyone else. It's not as big a deal when the scope of the state's power prevents them from significantly affecting anyone else—but realistically, that's a rare scenario in the real world.

On the other hand, one of the most convenient aspects of decentralized federalism is that each state can function as a (poorly-constrained) experimental group, to test the propositions embodied in their various laws. It's not perfect, but if there's genuine controversy over an issue, one way (but certainly not the only way) to solve it is by letting the chips fall where they may.

In our case, I'm not strongly opposed to regions having their own models, as long as there is an opportunity to discuss whether there will be far-reaching effects, and then an obligation to mitigate those effects unless consensus is reached with the other regions and FIRST.

Overall, I think I'd still prefer it if FIRST built the system at a national level—but I am concerned about their capacity to handle the implementation. (Though FIRST's current directorship does increase my confidence that they'll handle it well.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan Streeter View Post
Second, what do you want to see in the point system? At least a dozen threads exist about exact point models... so while I'm not opposed to talking about details, I'd also like to talk about the "philosophy" and various approaches.
It's worth clearly defining what each Championship (world, regional, etc.) is meant to be: Are they strictly tests of the best on-field performers? Or should they include the outstanding award-winners? Or the best overall teams by some combination of criteria? Some specific guidance from the top would be a nice addition to the conversation—or, if the FIRST leadership isn't certain, or if the community does not accept their reasoning, then maybe we need to settle that question before getting too invested in any particular point systems.
Reply With Quote