|
contraversy and FIRST - that's new!
Okay - FRC has posted a message regarding tethers and the "New" interpretation. I am glad to see that they did this - "better late than never".
This should end the debate over legally having one and what kind.
NOW, FIRST please re-issue a "New" interpretation regarding interaction with them. What will not get us disqualified? Both those using them and those defending against them. There have been many good and rational questions on this subject. The fact is as long as the entanglement issue was as "gray" as it was, it masked the need to deal with those issues.
I'll assume since the "send home" devices are part of the robot - they also should be constructed as robust as the rest of the machine. Expect full contact and collisions.
Many messages have attempted to tie "gracious professionalism" in with intent - Will the "intent to damage" be expanded to include "send home devices"? This also another rule that is written in the manual, I belive it's a judgement call the referees will be required to make - is that correct?
I just hope that a bigger can of worms hasn't been opened!
I'll assume that it will be okay to add - on a new send home device during the competitions that are left and at the nationals.
|