Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
I was responding to the fact that without having ever been to the event, or apparently viewing the publicly available team list (follow the event link from the TBA page, and it's one more link to the spreadsheet), you had the appearance of criticizing the teams at the event for making choices that they chose to make. I believe a close analogy would be the "scorched earth" debate, particularly if triggered by someone from far away--say it happened at a Sacramento offseason and I, never having been to such an event, complained from down here. So, I responded from the standpoint of someone who WAS at the event, both days, working WITH the organizers to keep the event going. Trust me, it was a lot harder and a lot more frustrating than it should probably have been. Reference the thread on the event for some of the issues we had at various times.
Also, I did note (in the "spoiler") that I was not being entirely serious in the second paragraph. Some of it was intended as a "where does this sort of questioning stop", by showing the logical continuation of your stated reason for offseasons. For the record, the goal of the Fall Classic differs somewhat from your reasoning; for convenience:
I guess some folks can't tell the difference between someone being angry and someone being sarcastic, even when the "sarcasm tags" are in use. It was a little bit of both, to be fair, and I did significant rewriting to tone it down from the original post. (On the topic of discussing with the event organizers--if you have a problem, real or perceived, with how an event is run, or something that happens with an event, shouldn't you contact the organizers, prior to posting on CD, as much as possible?)
|
I couldn't tell what part was sarcasm and which part was anger. (And sarcasm is often hidden anger.) It's the problem with Internet postings--you can't hear tone of voice.
As for the complaints about the event, I wasn't the one complaining about the event--it appeared that you were. I was thinking about the broader issue of selecting off season alliances, and this situation just highlighted this bigger issue. It made me think much more about how we need to focus on that during our alliance selection at off season events.
254 told us that they chose 1114 at IRC because they has already allied with 469 and they hadn't been with 1114 before. I thought that was a tremendous attitude. We are all both competitors and alliance mates because of the FRC format. We should try to join with as many teams as possible in various situations. It sure makes it much more fun!
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/im...es/biggrin.gif