Since there are still valid concerns with posting the amount of teams on a waitlist and the amount of open spots, how about something even simpler and a bit more subjective. There could be a simple solution of a "waitlist status" that is updated by the RD.
Red waitlist status = long waitlist, unlikely to get in
Yellow waitlist status = waitlist larger than expected capacity
Green waitlist status = Most/all teams from waitlist will get into event
Quote:
Originally Posted by nukemknight
Isn't the event already successful (from the aspect of having teams attend the event) if the waitlist is being used? We need teams to be successful, not just the events.
|
Events don't take place on the date of registration. There is still a ton of work that has to happen before an event takes place successfully, even if teams are on the "waitlist" (which is almost assured at most regionals, given the 15+ reserve spots after initial registration). It's already been noted that certain teams bring a volunteer base, including key volunteers, with them. Others are known for their preparedness and ability to aid other teams at the event.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain
In theory, there shouldn't be an issue with publishing the waitlist just like how they publish officially registered teams. That way you see a waitlist that
1) tells you how many teams are on the waitlist
2) what teams are on the waitlist
but it doesn't tell you when or in what order the team registered. We can still keep the implicit criteria and discretion of the RD, but I don't see why the data has to be behind a wall.
In reality, you would just need a few people who wouldn't understand that kind of process and get upset with FIRST for not explaining it to them properly.
|
If I check that waitlist on Date X and see team A on the list, and then check the same waitlist on Date X+1 and see teams A and B on the waitlist I know that team A registered before team B.