Quote:
Originally Posted by squirrel
Yes, I do have my own idea of what a robot is. I expect that you do too. And the rules don't say whether or not my idea is right or wrong, or whether or not your idea is right or wrong. I think that's the point. You have to actually think about what a robot is, and come to some reasonable conclusion. Unfortuntely Ken came to a different conclusion than the GDC did.
And Ken, I understand that you don't agree with the ruling, but I also get the idea that you can see what they mean about you having two robots.
I also don't think the GDC was implying mal-intent or complete lack of common sense on your part, but I can see why you think so. You had a really neat idea, but it turns out that implementing it as you did gives the appearance of trying to circumvent the rules. As I mentioned before, if you had somehow incorporated the small drive base into the big robot, it would most likely have been acceptable.
|
EDIT: After reading Al's post then mine again I have decided to replace it with a more succinct GP version.
If the rules don't clearly say who is right and wrong, and therefore whether the design is legal or not, don't we have to give the team the benefit of the doubt and allow them to compete?