[mathking]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Thanks for the input; I understand this perspective on how the soft deadline helps limit the flow of work after the deadline.

My follow up is, if we kept the bag system, and added access windows, what do you feel would be the right amount of time to allow, such that teams like yours did not have to build a second robot, but the system of a soft deadline and more limited after-build work is preserved? I feel this kind of compromise is a step forward that more people can agree on than just ripping off the Band-Aid of Stop Build Day right away, and this is where people should focus their efforts on finding common ground.

My gut says... 10 hours a week without competition, 2 hours a week with competition, in addition to any unbag windows provided to District teams already. But maybe that's too much?

I think 10 hours might be a bit much, but in principle adding some limited time each week with robot access is a good compromise. It would limit the workflow and not require the kind of time commitment the build season entails. I might instead offer some total number of hours over the time period. But I think you have hit the nail on the head with finding middle ground. (One big advantage of an unbagging period might be an increase in the number of robots that are operational for practice rounds.)

Just to be clear, I am not advocating for an un-bagging period as way to ease into getting rid of Stop Build Day. I think it is a reasonable middle ground instead of getting rid of it. I still think that if we get rid of Stop Build Day we will reduce the number of students who participate. (As a side note, we will also reduce the chances for those who opt to stay with FRC to do other things.) I think reducing the participation rate is a bad idea.