[dlavery]

It's illegal. But I want to protest the "Illegal! The Magnolia Regional should put an * next to the Bluateam win" option. I think that is too limiting. I want an option that says "Illegal! Bluateam is staffed with a bunch of cheaters! They should be stripped of their title from the Magnolia Regional, cast out into the public square, shackled for a fortnight in the stocks while being forced to listen to Anthony Newley records over and over again, and then given forty lashes with the Cat-o-nine-tails before ever being allowed to set foot into a competition venue again."

OK, maybe not. But this does bring up one point that has been completely glossed over in the YMTC discussions. We have all been discussing various ways to split hairs to determine if "Action XX" violates "Rule YY" or not. But what happens when it is determined that a team HAS violated the rules? We all understand that one of the basic precepts of FIRST is to inspire students by exposing them to professional [engineering] practices and behavior. In the real world - and in the real engineering profession - there are consequences when you violate the rules, and those consequences are sometimes severe.

FIRST has usually specified what happens when you violate a game play rule during a match (i.e. a penalty flag is thrown, your robot is disabled, etc.). But what about the rules that impact our behavior OFF the field? If a team builds their robot in an prohibited location, or keeps working on robot parts after the robot ship date, or engages in just plain unsportsmanlike conduct in the stadium stands, or builds the robot with an illegal part and intentionally disguises it so that it won't be found by inspectors, what should happen to the team? Is it enough for all the other teams to stand around and express their disapproval and say that they didn't behave with gracious professionalism? Or is something more concrete required? Should the engineers involved (for the moment, I am considering violations where most or all of the team were involved or at least aware of the situation) have to publicly acknowledge a lapse in ethics and their failure to provide appropriate examples for the students on the team? Should the team have to sit out one season of competition (or their next planned competition event)? Should they return any awards that may have been won as a result of the violation? Is there an appropirate consequence that is not a meaningless slap on the wrist, but also not so draconian that it drives a team away from the competition. Ideally, it is a consequence that is turned into a learning experience for the team, and ultimately it becomes a demonstration of ethical behavior (i.e. "we violated the rules; we have to acknowledge the violation; accept and serve any penalties; then recover, become better and wiser, and move on"). But what possible penalties are appropriate and suitable?

What do you think?

(no matter what, I still think that they should have to listen to the Anthony Newley recordings)

-dave