Quote:
Originally Posted by dtengineering
The second argument, I agree, bears perhaps a bit more weight in that the definition of "incapacitated" and who makes the determination of incapacitated is not specific. It does not, however, require a referee to make the decision that a robot is incapacitated.
|
I believe that lword was put in there to specifically prevent a team or alliance from blocking the field and pressing the E-Stop. Otherwise, why would it be there.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jgannon
Look at the examples again
|
Just because it's not in the example doesn't mean blueabot can't be considered as causing the penalties.
Heck, if we go on that theory, then my other argument bears even more weight. I don't see losing a tread in the examples of what makes a robot incapacitated.
I agree that the cause and effect here is a lot less clear than a robot pushing another backwards. The way I look at it is this. If blueabot didn't break then redabot wouldn't have taken a penalty, therefore, I can argue that bluabot caused the penalty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtengineering
...if I were in Redabot's shoes, put forward the same ones.
|
If I were in Blueabots shoes I would call my arguments weak. But these threads or no fun if everyone agrees.