[walesjd]

Hey you guys, I'm one of team 233's drivers and I do understand the split over collusion versus none and I see a lot of valid points all around.
We sorta ended up going for it some. A lot of the time we just had this basic statement which I thought was pretty good based upon all I had read on all the many rather vigorous forum debates on the subject before any of our regionals. We always go to all the teams in our match before each match(basic check to see what's going on, how they're doing etc) and when we did we usually just told them that as long as our stacks were not hit we had no reason to attack theirs. A major reason for this statment was teams who seemed to recklessly destory all stackes, even if they were winning badly. If they attacked our stacks we defended them(which we almost always had to) and if they didn't we could do other things but either way because of our excelent defense(which I would attribute mostly to the driving of our base driver chris aks "Ash") we could always come out with a high score(though in the case of one match we defended against two bots at once for most of the match where and still got hundres of points). I would also like to say that in the few matches we had a real agreement with the other teams, either by accident or because of a change in the opinion of the other teams, the stacks went down or we still had to defend. Anyway, that's a bit of a layout for what we did. Beyond that I loved it when the other teams went at us hard. Anyway, if you have any specific points about what we did you'd like to object to or discuss go ahead, if you just want to say collusion is evil then that's allready been said.
Thanks,
Josh