Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Joel J.
Honestly, I believe that at the end of it all, no one will give this topic a second look if team 254 and 60 aren't very successful this year. If they do manage to do very well, then everyone will be on them saying they were able to do so well because of an "unfair advantage they created by working in tandem with another team." If they manage to do well as an alliance, then everyone will be extremely bitter and take things to the FIRST level. There, thats a sweeping generalization for you, success driven prosecution. Not only does the aforesaid highlight why we really care about the collaboration of these teams, but it also highlights a problem I have noticed in alot of places, including FIRST: everyone has a knack for acting in their best interest, but not for acting with the intent of finding the most suitable compromise.
|
while i agree with the rest of your post i have to show an opposite side to this. because Kingman and the Cheeseypoofs broght this up in such a dramatic fashion...i don't see it not becoming a national FIRST issue. to me, your argument is like saying steroids are bad because they make people better athletes. and if the people weren't better...we would't care. that isn't true. if the athletes weren't better kids wouldn't take them with such disregard for the future that they do...but steroids would still be incredibly harmfull. successful or not, 60 and 254 are hitting uncharted (good? bad? who knows?) territory in FIRST that will almost have to be addressed. i do, however, wish both teams the best of luck this season. it would be kind of interesting to see them against each other at nationals. it kind of (emphasize "kind of") reminds me of when 45 (another well recognized team) donated their 'toy'-robot (sorry...didn't have another word to use) to another team for use at a competition and wound up losing to it in a match. it'll be interesting.