Quote:
|
Originally Posted by T. Hofman
By the way, notice how the gap in the poll has recently increased significantly in favor of red! Woohoo! Vote for red!!!! We have cookies!!!
|
Hey! No fair bribing the voters! (besides, for eveyone that votes for Blue, I have Krispy Kremes....)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeDubreuil
One word: consistency A referee will never have to determine if a robot is ever supported by a tube. If there's a ringer underneath a lifters robot than for consistency between referees the bonus points do not count.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tristan Lall
On the other hand, maybe we should ask ourselves whether it is a bad thing for the referees to make the determination of support a judgement call. They're already relied upon to judge 4" and 12" bonuses (it's a judgement, because they often can't directly measure the robot, only the edges of the not-necessarily-flat object supporting it). The referees could examine the particular mechanism, and decide for themselves whether the toroid was supporting, or not. As long as the rules made clear that this determination was being made at the head referee's discretion, I don't think anyone would have a substantial problem with it (assuming that the referee was halfway competent). It's certainly far more practical than introducing some solid-mechanics-based criteria for determining support.
|
OK, you guys are on the right track here. Just take it a step or two further.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by T. Hoffman
... maybe I'm just crazy ...
|
Travis, there is absolutely NO WAY that I am going to touch that line with a ten-foot pole!
-dave