Quote:
Originally Posted by Koko Ed
Oh boy. Here we go again. 
The collaberation threads on CD are like the religion threads on RT. 10+ pages of hardline stances and staredowns that lead to the same conclusion: we don't see eye to eye on the situation and thus we just wasted bandwith to find that out.
What's the point? |
I couldn't agree more. In addition I would add that Collaboration will happen no matter what, and if people (who aren't on the rules committee) insist on trying to make unwritten rules about who people can or can't work with or demean those teams with above average means who work together (triplets or any other possible combination of teams) it will only reinforce their ties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipsterjr
If you ask me, this is not in the spirt of FIRST. There is a huge difference between helping a struggling team with their bot and turning out identical copies. What if every team did this? It's no fun. Why doesn't first just give every one the same blue prints in the kit then?
|
If you don't like what has been happening since 2004 and earlier in some cases then either build a better robot or find someone you like to work with. By the way, this is not me defending 254 just because I was a member of that team for two seasons. There’s nothing wrong to “defend.” If all you’re trying to do is just rant and rave because you think this is unfair, then like Billfred had originally said QFT and suck it up. As has been said so many times it's impossible to count, life isn't fair and FIRST isn't about fair, either. If it was about being fair then all teams would be limited to hand drills and hacksaws, if even those tools, since not all teams have access to machine tools. This idea doesn't sound very inspirational to me.
<edit>
Might I add.... IBTL (In before the lock)
</edit>