View Single Post
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-03-2010, 22:13
gblake's Avatar
gblake gblake is offline
6th Gear Developer; Mentor
AKA: Blake Ross
no team (6th Gear)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,940
gblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The Update, it fixes nothing! (AKA: why is everyone so excited about Update #16?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pfreivald View Post
... The rulebook says that the goal is to win, ...
pf - You aren't the only one who leaned on this broken crutch, you are simply the most recent.

The rule book says two almost diametrically opposed things. In an introductory section it says you should attempt to outscore your opponents in each match. In what I think (my opinion) is a more important section it says:
Quote:
The purpose of the qualifying matches is to allow each team to earn a seeding position that may qualify them for participation in the elimination matches. The purpose of the elimination matches is to determine the Event Champions.
In related section the rules describe how to earn these seeding points.

Maximizing your wins will certainly help you comply with the introduction. Maximizing your seeding points will help earn a trophy from the folks who run the event. One of these seems more important to me. Your mileage may vary (obviously - just read the comments in this thread).

One group of folks wrote the rules - all of the rules. I find it odd that some readers will embrace the introduction; but will reject the connection between the seeding points and the title of event Champion. Maybe those sections use different fonts (one for the good rules and another for the bad rules)and my PDF reader is unable to show me the difference?

Weren't both sections of the rules produced by the same committee?

Blake
PS: Is this a case of evolve or die?
__________________
Blake Ross, For emailing me, in the verizon.net domain, I am blake
VRC Team Mentor, FTC volunteer, 5th Gear Developer, Husband, Father, Triangle Fraternity Alumnus (ky 76), U Ky BSEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Kentucky Colonel
Words/phrases I avoid: basis, mitigate, leveraging, transitioning, impact (instead of affect/effect), facilitate, programmatic, problematic, issue (instead of problem), latency (instead of delay), dependency (instead of prerequisite), connectivity, usage & utilize (instead of use), downed, functionality, functional, power on, descore, alumni (instead of alumnus/alumna), the enterprise, methodology, nomenclature, form factor (instead of size or shape), competency, modality, provided(with), provision(ing), irregardless/irrespective, signage, colorized, pulsating, ideate

Last edited by gblake : 15-03-2010 at 22:16.