Thread: Winning twice?
View Single Post
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 06-04-2006, 18:49
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,640
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: Winning twice?

Would you like to be the one who has to tell a team who spent the last 2 months of their life working their rear end off to build the best robot feature that they can't win an award for it because they won an award for it last week?
If a team creates something truly THAT innovative that it deserves to win two regional awards, so be it.
And even if you were to impliment such a rule, many of the technical awards are similar enough in fashion that a team could, and would likely, just win a different award. A team winning Motorola Quality could easily just win GM Inudstrial Design next week. So, do we say, you win one technical award, and then you're done?
And dealing with the Championship invites, I think that should be decided by the team. That team, having already earned an invite for Championship, should be the ONLY people with the power to determine if they compete for another championship slot by competing for that award again. Plus, if you make that type of decision for them, where do you stop? Only let teams win the on-field event once so other teams can get a spot at Championship? Only one technical award so more teams have a chance to be published in the book?
My vote, let the team decide whether it should win the award again or not.
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.
Reply With Quote