Quote:
Originally Posted by gblake
The long answer is long.
The short answer is the prima facie evidence supplied by the highly-visible "build a robot in a weekend" fun stunts, and by the posts written by folks like MrForbes.
I don't see a strong (certainly not strong enough) correlation between the length of the build season and a team's ability to successfully participate in the tournament part of inspiring students. Other factors appear to dominate, and I would much rather see the organization and the community of participants focus on those other factors, instead of on build-season-length or on creating/enhancing a second build season by eliminating bagging (if I understand the intent of eliminating bagging).
Blake
|
Per my first post in this topic:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...9&postcount=57
The inability of FIRST to grasp the evidence of the imbalance of their time/cost/quality pyramid (the top is scope) has driven me personally to decide that the 6 week build season means -
literally nothing to me.
So I am preparing to make it so I have the ability to mentor any student in FRC that wants to do it and can make it there, in a mobile way eliminating the location access roadblocks, for CNC and programming. To put it bluntly: I can certainly run a makerspace with these tools even if FIRST disappeared. I can do it year round and I can therefore budget the costs (time, money, resources, etc).
I've already spent far to long, going on 20 years, watching people dance around this limit. If this was a job and similar passion had nothing to do with it: I would have quit because the cost to me is being utilized poorly. Actually in retrospect I have left 3 jobs for this sort of activity which would have held back my career had I stayed.
Keep in mind - I will still:
FRC - Mentor & Volunteer: CSA/FTAA/Small parts
FTC - Judge
FLL - Judge at NJ State level
However 20 years of FIRST, since I was basically 20 years old, have taught me if people won't move - do what's right.