OK Jess, since you offered...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Covey41
Dave, since you know so much, how about posting the actual contract between FIRST and IFI, and let everyone on Chief Delphi decide?
If there is nothing to hide, it should not be a problem.
|
How about letting everyone on Chief Delphi decide that the actual contract between FIRST and IFI is none of their business? We are customers of FIRST. As such we can expect, and deserve, quality service and a quality product. When we don't get either, we can - and should - make our displeasure known in a reasonable and professional manner. However, just because we don't like something that the organization is doing does not mean that we, as customers, automatically get to peruse through the internal business documents of the organization. Asking to do so is inappropriate, just as asking about the salary of a particular FIRST engineering intern would be.
Earlier Cody made an analogy between FIRST and a bus company. As he noted, if the bus provides a good service and gets you where you are going, as a customer you appreciate the service. But if it breaks down one day and you are late to work as a result, you are justified in being disappointed because you have paid for, and expect, a certain minimum level of service. To extend the analogy, in such a case you are free to comment on the (lack of) service, and even write a letter of complaint to the owner of the bus company. But just because you aren't happy with the bus company does not mean that you get to look at the internal contracts between the bus company and their providers. Their internal business papers are their business and not yours. Whether they have "something to hide" or not is irrelevant and a specious argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Covey41
How do you know? As I said before, if there is nothing to hide, why not post it.
How would you feel if you found out that if 25% to 50% of your $6K reg. fee went to paying IFI? Don't you wonder why every year we need new OI & RC?
|
If a significant chunk of my registration fee went to pay IFI (it doesn't) then - based on the quantity and quality of the service that they provide to FIRST and the community of teams - it would not bother me. At least, it would not bother me nearly as much as knowing that a significant chunk of my registration fee went to pay a certain unqualified vendor for the previous three years disastrous scoring systems. But that aside, the reality is that the largest chunk of the registration fees goes toward paying for FIRST operations and the functions provided by the capable people in Manchester. And for the services that they provide to the teams and the FIRST community, I do not begrudge them that portion of my registration fees (and none of this is secret information - all you have to do is look it up in the annual FIRST financial report).
We get a new OI and RC each year because the teams insisted on it. Back in the day when FIRST owned all the control systems and teams had to return them to FIRST at the conclusion of each competition season, teams complained bitterly about not being able to keep the control systems. There were endless requests to be able to keep the control systems that they needed to be able to demonstrate their robots and use them during the off-season. When the new IFI controllers became available, FIRST sought out a lot of feedback from the teams on this topic. In response to the teams' request, FIRST adjusted the price of the registration fee specifically to account for the teams' purchase of the RC and OI so they could keep the old ones and get new ones every year. So let's just drop the whole concept of this being some FIRST-IFI plot to screw the teams for more money. It isn't, and to imply so is just inane.
-dave