Quote:
|
One embodiment of the invention is a system and method for creating cooperation and gracious professionalism during a competition. According to one embodiment of the invention, a first participating player, team, or alliance is motivated to cooperate with a second participating player, team, or alliance by rewarding the first participating player, team, or alliance for assisting the second participating player, team, or alliance to achieve a higher score than might otherwise have been the attainable. One particular embodiment of this invention is to award the first participating player, team, or alliance that obtained the highest number of points during competition with a score comprised of the number of points obtained by the first participating player, team, or alliance plus twice the number of points obtained by the second participating player, team, or alliance.
|
A hypothetical team helps a second team by building their robot for them. Upon having success at their events, the second team receives much false praise for their "accomplishments", as in reality, they contribute little of their own efforts to the process. The first team carries them along, and they receive acclaim for what they have done to bring "success" to the second team. However, the second team no longer exists because they were never forced to stand on their own two feet - they were never encouraged to become an active participant in the process - and they believed the false hype handed to them by their benefactors and the FIRST community at large.
I view scoring for the opposition when the opposition is less capable in exactly the same manner.
However, I view "ammo sharing" among competitors as a valid application of the patent language.
Quote:
|
As I have said before, I am against collusive agreements between alliances. However, I feel that an alliance deciding, on their own, to cooperate for their opponent either in the form of 6v0 or in the form of only scoring a few goals to increase seeding points in a win is not only not against the spirit of FIRST and GP, but is exactly what the patent describes.
|
It is not impossible for Dean Kamen to make a mistake in judgment, nor is it impossible for him to overlook rather important side effects of the game mechanics he has patented.