Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line
I tend to agree. I'm also going to say something here that's perhaps a bit controversial. It's about time that teams are required to release their Chairman's information when they win. There have been a couple times where I've been privy to team chairman information that you immediately know isn't true - things like teams suggesting they started teams that they really didn't, organized events that they merely participated in, etc. Public scrutiny of winning chairman entries will hopefully help naturally moderate some of the 'inflation' that goes on when entries are 'secret'. That's long overdue. It's also a great stepping stone so other teams know just how much more they can do in their community, and you never know when it might spur someone to inspiration and a great idea.
|
I fully agree with you here. While I haven't seen anything quite on the level of what you're describing here, I've seen essays that perhaps stretch the truth a little. As someone who does most of the writing for my team, it's often hard to tell where the line lies between making something sound good and embellishing it to the point where it's not true, so hopefully this will encourage teams to really think about what they're writing before submitting it.
I'm not assuming malicious intent on the part of any Chairman's-submitting teams. I'm saying that it's often difficult to see where the line between 'sounds awesome' and 'exaggerated beyond the truth' lies when you want to sound as good as possible to the judges.