Quote:
Originally Posted by xenicator
I seem to recall the word "innovation" prominent in the acronym of FIRST. Creativity in interpreting the rules where no robot is being harmed seems, on the contrary, to be IN the spirit of FIRST. I have noticed that Gracious Professionalism has started to be increasingly used to discourage innovation rather than maliciousness. Is it ungracious to hope that there is a slight loophole in the rules which makes this game based on technology rather than simply driver control and quickness of wit? Without these loopholes what is this game but another sporting event, something that is opposing the spirit of FIRST and promoting the “Rich and Famous” as an ideal lifestyle rather than commitment and hard work.
|
To quote Dave Lavery
"Lawyers find loopholes. Engineers find solutions. For which would you rather be known?"
The rules are constraints. If you decide to become an engineer, you are going to face constraints. If you find that the guidlines your employer gives you offer you a loop hole which will make your life easier but you will be creating a product that is not at all what your employer wants then when you present the product your boss wont laugh and say "$@#$@#$@#$@# you got me" they will as a best case senerio send you back to do it right.
If you want the game to be based on technology (It is a robotics competition how can it not be?) then build an arm that is faster, a drive train that is stronger, an autonomous that is perfect and then tell me that you need loop holes. I was talking to Dave from 121 today and he pointed out that every year on Einstein the teams that win are the teams that can score the best. Focus on scoring, if you can do that then you dont need to waste your time and ringers on the other alliances robot.