Quote:
Originally Posted by JB987
Would this body of FRC team "judges" providing feedback also actively vote for their favorites and actually help select the CA based only on the video? Or would they just provide feedback to that team? If actively selecting the CA is based on video only then isn't there a danger that team's with access to professional media to produce their video would have an advantage over other teams? At least with an essay and live interaction between presenters and judges a team that is "video-graphically challenged" can compensate somewhat for their lack of professional input on their final video product.
|
The intent behind the idea is that it would be an elective process teams could use for feedback removed from the selection of the CA, simply to provide input to the team. Possibly having the roll-up tool bring to the top submissions that have had less feedback to date, and pushing down those with more feedback.
I think the community as a whole is pretty good about reading/commenting on various teams that submit designs, questions, programs, etc... and I would imagine they would equally support giving teams feedback on things like CA. I also think (but unfortunately don't have numbers to back) that the CA judges are often folks that are fairly close to the mentoring community (if not the same people). The feedback from a cross section of Chief Delphi readers would probably be reasonably consistent with what a CA judge would provide.
Just an idle thought on a Sunday afternoon, it could also just be an inherently flawed idea and should be scrapped for something better. I could just see a situation in the next couple years where my team is ready to start submitting for the CA, and that the feedback from 10 random CD readers would probably be greater in value to me than a single set of judges at a regional.