|
Re: The Triplet Challenge
One factor of collaboration that may not have been taken into account by those encouraging it is its effects on the inspiration of those who are members of other teams. If nothing else, this thread has proved that there are many out there who believe collaboration provides an unfair advantage, whether or not it really does. This could easily lead to teams that were beaten by an alliance of collaborators feeling that they have been cheated. That can make it much more likely for these teams to drop out of FIRST.
This leads to the question: are the collaborating teams responsible for the damage their collaboration does to other teams they compete against, even if they didn't intend it? The answer to this is definitely yes. Whether it is intentional or not, teams must take responsibility for their effects on others. If a collaboration of two teams (which has actually only grown FIRST by one team, because the collaboration founder was already participating) drives three teams out of FIRST the next year because they are convinced it isn't fair, it is actually a net loss for the organization.
Finally, we must ask if collaborations have a moral (in the FIRST sense) right to exist if they do not cause a net gain in the number of teams. No! Collaborations that are non-profitable to the goals of the competition should not be allowed to remain collaborative. This will only hurt FIRST further.
__________________
Oh, maybe I shouldn't have pushed that...
|