[Madison]

The thing that concerned me most about the "solutions" FIRST is implementing is that they're considering answering rules questions privately -- though they're being asked publically. This has a few disadvantages, as far as I'm concerned.

It seems like it'll actually increase the already-overwhelming volume of questions that they receive on the message board. While there were redundant questions during the 2003 season, it was possible, at least, to see if FIRST had previously answered your question.

Worse, privately answered questions let FIRST off the hook, so to speak, in that inconsistancy in rulings and answers will no longer be obvious to the teams. That worries me because there's already precedent that shows FIRST can't always agree on a common interpretation or explanation and with such a private-answer system, it'd be impossible to identify those differences. Furthermore, many rule changes were made via the message board and never mentioned or incorporated into a team update.

I'm sorry, FIRST, but while I realize that clarifying yourself three hundred times can be a burden and a strain on resources, I'd much prefer you all have to handle that than having teams kept in the dark about what information others have been given.

That's the biggest concern that immediately jumped out at me. I'll reread later and see what more there was.