Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmv123
The post I was responding to implied it should be the staffers at FIRST headquarters, and that we should just go along with what they decide.
|
That is, to some extent, a true thought.
However, we should be doing our best to inform them of how any decisions they make affect us (as a whole). And, going along with that, they should be thinking of how any major decisions like this will affect teams, and effect the goals and mission of FIRST.
This particular decision, and the manner of its carrying out, match up to some others they've done in the past.
--FVC switching to FTC (result: teams with several $K invested in VEX stuff already did not enter FTC, and suddenly VRC had a really strong foundation to grow on)
--The inaugural district area (result: MASSIVE outcry, questioning, complaining, etc. on a variety of issues. Now, 6 years later, the outcry is going the "other way"--instead of "why do they get them" it's "why don't we have them".)
--Changing of control systems: '08-'09 rather than '14-'15. The former was mostly unannounced--we had a few months, as I recall, but beta teams were few in number, and it was rather sudden. The latter we knew was coming when FIRST put out a call for proposals roughly two years in advance, a call for alpha teams, and a call for beta teams. Slight difference in methodology, showing that they learned from a past mistake.
If there's one thing FIRST takes away from this announcement and its fallout, it should be this: If a major change is coming up, consult the community, in some form, before making the announcement. "Test the waters" if you will, or in another manner, try to get a few key people on board first. At least hear their objections. THEN announce and work on answering other questions that crop up.