[sanddrag]

Before I begin, let me say the point of this post is not to bash FIRST, it is to provide feedback, because I have a theory that they aren't aware of our views, because we have not voiced them, so here goes.

I bet it took a lot for Paul to come out an reveal his feelings toward this. I bet he thought about it a long while before doing so. What does this tell me? That there are several other mentors out there who have simple become "fed up" that we haven't begun to hear from yet.

You've heard from me before, and let me step up to the podeum again.

I agree with Paul here. Am I going to leave FIRST because of it? Most likely not. I've tried, but I can't find a better replacement for my time. Would I like to leave FIRST because of all the unexplained and mysteriously illogical rules? You bet. We live in a world of explanation, reason, and logic. FIRST has become a world in which these great assets of our population are diminishing before our eyes, under direction of FIRST HQ. What is engineering about? It is about solving the design challenge, and doing so safely. But it is also about being able to communicate and prove your points. Even more so, I once had an engineering professor give a question on a test, worth only 2/100 points if we got right, buy we were gauranteed to fail the test if we got it wrong. The question was "What is the most important consideration in engineering?" The answer was "meeting the customer requirements." This is important. You can design the fanciest pneumatic rivet gun, suspension bridge, spacecraft, or organization (pause), in the whole world, but if you aren't meeting the customer requirements, it is of no value. I've said this before and I'll say it again. We are the customers here. Without us customers, FIRST doesn't exist. Does the operation of FRC cost a heck of a lot more than every team pays? You bet. But, we shall not overlook the fact that $6000, $10,000, $11,000 is NOT pocket change for the majority of the teams involved. FIRST can say all they want that we get more than we pay for, and we can never argue against this, because it is true. But, they need to realize the loops we have to jump through to get enough money to even enter, and the big risk schools take by spending so much on these programs, the constant ciriticism they find themselves under forspending so much money on these programs and simple fact that we need to make sure we get every bit that we pay for.

I want to see a general attitude of "let's explain this better" coming from FIRST, because, right now it the atmosphere from them seems a bit like "we know you love our program, you couldn't leave it if you tried. we know you are here to stay, and we know you will adapt to whatever we give you"

On the topic, I believe the pit spaces are too small for many things to happen in the pits. This is not the fault of anyone. It is dictated by venue size. This year, many of the robots easily become much larger than the pit area. It is not uncommon to have up to 10 people even in the pit area at once. It is just plain crowded, which makes it inherently unsafe in some circumstances. BUT, don't ban the tools altogether. Let them be used away from the chaos in a calmer and more spacious enviromnment other than a 10x10 pit square. I see a lot of "solutions" coming from FIRST to problems that simply don't exist. They need better problem identification and analyisis.

For my personal story, had we not been able to use a drill press last year, team 696 most likely would not have won the innovation in control award.

For the past few years (and even longer really), safety has been one of the key points emphasized in FRC. To me, this ruling says to the students, "you aren't smart enough, you aren't careful enough, you aren't good enough to use powerful and/or sharp things, and plain and simple, we don't trust you not to screw up." I have seen FRC teams where their students are fully capable of running 20 horsepower 700+ inches per minute quarter of a million dollar CNC machines, unsupervised. I have seen teams who's mentors are barely capable of operating a hack saw. But this is exactly my point. It is up to each team to determine their own comfort zone. Putting a blanket rule isn't helping anyone here. And finally, with such a big emphasis on safety, and so many people watching, you can't get away with ANYTHING. This is a good! Should any dangerous condition even begin to arise, someone, student, mentor, or FIRST volunteer will shut it down. Don't ban the safe for fear of the dangerous.

Mentors take great pride in instructing their students on proper and safe tool usage. The mentors on each team. It is not FIRST's job to tell a team that their students (and even mentors) are not good enough to perform fabrication safely. This ruling is an insult to everyone who has gone the extra mile to ensure safety.

We are skilled people. Let us show you that.

And my final point. FIRST Robotics has cost hundreds of teams hundreds more dollars this year, than in any year previously, due to what are in my opinion, poor and illogical decisions on the part of FIRST. In the first week of regionals, FIRST cost teams their matches, and more or less gauranteed that certain teams would have no chance of winning. FIRST has taken away our money, they have taken away our fair and randomly paired matches, they have take away our real time clock, and this week, they take away our machinery, and for many teams, this "last straw" will take away their hopes and dreams. What will they take away next week?

FIRST makes a big deal out of how few people are on their payroll. But how many thousands of people actually work for them each and every day. Look in the mirror folks. You are the people that make FIRST great, every minute of every day. I have never before seen a company or organization run by so few, giving membership to so many, that does not listen to it's people.