View Single Post
  #25   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 05-05-2016, 22:46
Citrus Dad's Avatar
Citrus Dad Citrus Dad is offline
Business and Scouting Mentor
AKA: Richard McCann
FRC #1678 (Citrus Circuits)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Davis
Posts: 990
Citrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond repute
Re: FRC rules around seating need to change.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gblake View Post
It is reasonable and it is workable. There is prima facie evidence all over the place. Many teams, both large and small, follow the no saving seats rule, and things work out OK for them.

You personally might not like the rule, but FIRST believes it is reasonable (they published it), and FIRST believes that it is workable.

I agree with them.
I disagree with your observation completely. I see many more teams saving seats in the central viewing area around each field than not. I see the same thing at the Regionals we attend. I also see a lot of flexibility from almost all of the teams. It's only an issue at the beginning of the day, and when the stands are completely packed during playoffs.

Whether FIRST believes its reasonable is probably irrelevant because they clearly haven't given much thought to the consequences. And given the complete lack of enforcement they reveal that they believe that it's unworkable.

Notably, FIRST saves seats for Einstein teams during the final. If they lived by their words, they would allow any and all teams to sit where ever they wanted during Einstein. Clearly they even recognize that the no saving seat rule is unworkable.

So, again give me a rationale as to why its a good policy other than a tautology that FIRST thinks its a good policy?
__________________
Reply With Quote