[Swan217]

Originally Posted by Don Wright

Maybe there are other circumstances involved that he may or may not know about, and that he may or may not be sharing here.

And that is the great travesty that has occurred here. If the person being blacklisted has no idea of the reasons that they are being excluded (or the reasons are invalidated by the facts of the situation), and has no chance to rebut the accusations, then how can this be interpreted any other way than a witchhunt?

Originally Posted by Don Wright

I am not saying they need to handle things differently.

I am. I am saying that this is a childish and unprofessional manner in treating volunteers. I am saying that administrative bureaucrats have absolutely no place in the FIRST volunteering system. I am saying that it has long been FIRST policy to keep administrative bureaucrats out of the volunteering process for just this reason, and that the final decision is supposed to lie with the Volunteer Coordinator.

Originally Posted by Don Wright

And, in general, (this is not directed at Dan)...yes, volunteers should be treated with respect, but not all volunteers should be given the same authority. The level of maturity, emotional control, and overall attitude need to be taken into all accounts. Sure, the volunteer could be the most devoted FIRST person in the world, but it doesn't mean they should be in charge of a key position at a competition because of it.

I heartily agree. This is why high school students have traditionally not been offered roles that could affect the outcome of matches, especially ones that would affect their teams. This is why the Head Referee is usually a position of gravitas and someone who has shown his/her ability to be fair and impartial. That is why the MC is traditionally someone who has a large amount of knowledge of teams and carries a long history and amount of respect. One can debate until the pigs come home on whether or not one's local "key roles" are being filled to this standard.

Originally Posted by Don Wright

But, how do you tell them that?

You tell them by treating them like adults and explaining the standard which they're judging volunteers by, and if you think that they're unqualified give the reasons WHY you think they are unqualified and allow for a chance for explanation.

Since I am qualified to only speak for my own record, I will use myself as an example:
3 years FLL Announcer
6 years FRC Offseason DJ (Wrote the book on DJing as well)
5 years Regional Robot inspector
3 years offseason scorer, 1 year Regional Scorer
5 years team mentor
6 years Regional Referee, 3 years FRC Offseason Head Referee

In addition, the Head Referee at 95% of the regionals that I've reffed can vouch for my skill at refereeing. The FLL committee of the regional I announced can vouch for me. The committees of the offseasons that I've DJed can vouch for my excellent playlist skills (even if volume may be an issue. I'm working on that). Any head robot inspector can vouch for my inspecting abilities (Thanks Al!), and I have NEVER heard a criticism of any of my abilities in any of my positions that I didn't immediately remedy. If anything, I am my biggest critic in the positions I've been in. As for emotional control, I think that from January through Thanksgiving, I have maintained a level of dignified maturity that far surpasses what should be expected of someone in my situation.

The problem is that I REFUSE to be bullied like this. I had enough of bullying as a geek in High School and I refuse to be bullied by strangers that don't even know me. The fact that myself and others have been forced out of the roles that we have the most experience in without any regard for respect or explanation is a travesty that must be remedied. I and the others may go on and volunteer our services to regionals that still have respect for their volunteers that Michigan lacks, but it's a shame that the state that we call home would stoop to this level.