Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Richard
Kim, I think you have a valid point here, so I don't mean to slice this too thinly -- but don't we all agree that FIRST has never been about having "the Best Robot(s)"? I don't think there has ever been an award given for the the best robot. Some design awards recognize the best robot features, the tournament results recognize the best performance of robots as operated by their teams, and the RA, EI, and CA recognize the best team efforts toward our common goals.
|
Richard, you did slice it "a bit" too thinly... if you look at everything else in the world that I have ever said, I obviously dont believe FIRST is about the robot

I was just using it as a comparison piece... and frankly I was getting bored of everyone only seeing one side of the picture. Thats the only reason I brought it up.
When I started my post, I really believed there should only be one chairmans award winner... but I was determined to see the other side, the reason this thread was started... and give it a shot. By the time I was done... I really wasnt certain why we only have one winner... the whole idea of the chairmans winner is that the team is a role model team for all to emulate. We have all the hall of fame teams now, so why each year is there only one team that is good enough to be our role model? If you look at Karthik's thread, there are a lot of teams that are role models to other teams.
Quote:
|
"These teams are achieving First's ultimate goal of transforming the culture..." and "It takes a major and sustained effort that these teams have risen to the challenge."
|
And Al, not to nitpick, but the word above is "TEAMS" Not team, single, as one chairmans award would imply.
And this may take this thread in another direction (perhaps not a good one), but if teams can collaborate and build the same robot... why cant teams collaborate on the chairmans award? what would judges do if two teams gave the same presentation? **Im not at ALL saying I condone this... Im just bringing up food for thought**