[Venkatesh]

I just took a look at what team 68 had constructed last year. It was most impressive. Kudos to TT.

I believe that if a team constructs such an awesome monstrosity that is not clearly against the rules, there should be some sort of appeals process to allow such designs to be permitted. Many teams would have loved to block the entire field last year, but how many tried? I think that there might be some merit to a general FIRST-wide vote on such an issue.

I would loved to have the chance to go up against something like that. How would one fight it? I think one could try to go under the arms (if there was room) or to try and force TT out of that position by creating some sort of stacking havoc. It is just like a wall in Jezzball, that good old game.

On the other hand, a general FIRST-wide vote might not fit the ideas of FIRST very well. We would start down the path of lawyers and such. The idea of questioning the rules of FIRST is like questioning referees in sports. There is some validity in some cases, but on the whole such a thing would most likely hurt an organization.

Can anyone think of a way to implement an appeals process for something like this without creating a burecratic machine?