Look at the Big Picture

[Lil' Lavery]

Over the course of the season I have seen a growing attitude and tones of many of the posts on these forums. Much of it is rooted in true sentiments and logic. But a large portion is naive and, frankly, immature.
I'm specifically talking about the complaints about the rules this year.

Am I a fan of all the rules? No. I have been quite outspoken about at least one of them, and am one of the offenders of this post myself.
Could the rules be better? Always.

But, as a whole, are the rules bad? Absolutely not.

If you read these forums, you wouldn't get that impression though.
I don't mean to pick on anyone in particular, but this post was what set me off specifically. That thread already had several comments that displeased me, but that one went further.

Many people on these forums have had experience with other robotics/design/engineering competitions. But a majority have not. Let me tell you, there are competitions with FAR worse rules than FRC.

I'll enlighten you with an example out of my own experience.
Last year, I competed in an ASME student design competition. The basic premise was to create an automated window cleaning device.
Eleven schools registered for our particular event. Eight showed up with completed devices. Of those eight, only three passed the equivalent of "inspection." Of those three, two were later (after they had competed), ruled illegal designs.
To reiterate, of the eleven teams, only one had a "legal" design.

And this was not because of the team's failure to read, understand, and attempt to comply with the rules. The rules were poorly worded, the judges had a terrible understanding of them, and they were enforced differently at each event.
My team had based a design modification for our device on the team that had won a competition the weekend before. Our, however, was ruled illegal (only after we had competed, and registered the highest score).

If anyone thinks FIRST's rules are that bad, they are mistaken. A vast majority of FIRST teams will be have passed inspection by the beginning of qualification rounds. Of the minority who don't, I'm willing to bet almost 100% of them will make it onto the field by the end of Friday. And a majority of those violations will be things like weight and size infractions.

Is this a perfect scenario? No. But it is one of the best, easily.
Do we have a right to complain about rules we don't like? Yes, of course.
But when those complaints get out of hand, sometimes becoming borderline personal attacks, you have to step back and look at the big picture.

[Akash Rastogi]

That specific post was in very bad taste and it seemed a bit too harsh for the circumstance.

Rules are rules and complaints are complaints, if someone really does feel the need to complain about something, at least do it in a gracious manner (and no I'm not saying GP). Be kind and be conscientious of whom you are referring to in your post.

I'm not advocating that people should "complain" but if you do, have it be constructive criticism instead of just outright disrespectful criticism.

Thanks for voicing this Sean.

[smurfgirl]

The more time I am involved in first, the more I realize this is a recurring trend. Every year around this time in the season, there are lots of overly harsh and whiny posts, and then someone makes a thread about it to remind people that FIRST is run by volunteers, and that Chief Delphi is normally a wonderful place because it's users don't act like this (and usually this helps keep people in check for a bit.) I think everyone's tired after six plus weeks of hard work and crunch time, but this is no excuse. People should remember to think about what they're saying an extra time before they hit post during this time of year. Also, we should all remember to thank everyone who has volunteered their time to make FIRST as awesome as it is.

[JackN]

It seems every year something FIRST does causes normally rational people to lose their mind and post things like "OMG FIRST HAS LOST THEIR MIND THEY ARE KILLING FUN!!!!!!!!". This will continue until the end of time or the end of Chief Delphi. I know I have gotten fired up about rules that i disagreed with in the past. Sometimes people need to think before they post. Every year FIRST comes up with a new game with rules that are completely different. They are continually trying to improve everyone's experience. Look at some of the great changes this year, the withholding allowance, the Michigan district structure, and many more. Some times people need to step back and take a breath before pressing the submit reply button.

P.S. I bet we have a similar discussion next year

[Kyle Love]

I find your original post to be very one sided and bias towards FIRST (which is expected here). I know it's in your own opinion and I can respect that. I don't quite understand why this thread needs to exist, we are all tired, irritated and not in the best of moods after the long build. Everyone needs to just chill out for a couple weeks. I do get the main meaning from the original post, but I know this will cause a big stir amongst the CD community.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Kyle Love

I find your original post to be very one sided and bias towards FIRST (which is expected here). I know it's in your own opinion and I can respect that. I don't quite understand why this thread needs to exist, we are all tired, irritated and not in the best of moods after the long build. Everyone needs to just chill out for a couple weeks. I do get the main meaning from the original post, but I know this will cause a big stir amongst the CD community.

I'm a little surprised by this post. I thought I justified my post pretty well, even with a specific reference to the issues that drove me to create it.

In case it wasn't clear enough, I'll try and say it in a different manner.

This is essentially a reminder that everyone in FIRST is human, and that they will react to what you write. Yes, sometimes you will disagree with what FIRST decides. But when you voice your disagreement, do so in a constructive and gracious manner. And keep in mind, it can be much worse.

As for my bias towards FIRST. Ask some of the people who talk to me outside of CD about any "bias towards FIRST" I may have. But in terms of rule writing, they do a much better job than most other competitions I have been involved with and seen. But as will all things, experiences may vary. Perhaps you have competitions that you are in that have outstanding rules, and if so, please share with the rest of us.

[eugenebrooks]

I am going to have to back you up on this one, Sean.

The battery fracas, and then shredding the posts of anyone
who tried to project some reason into the discussion, was
among the worst displays of posting behavior I have
seen on CD, notwithstanding some of the other fine examples
that I won't point out for anyone to go read.

Lets get a grip guys and gals, but shred this if you will.

I still stand on my offer to carry the battery cables in for
any team that is over their 40 pound limit at San Jose.
If this is ruled illegal, drop by the Team 1280 pit and
we help you make replacement cables.

Lets stop the post shredding and go have some fun!

Eugene

[EricH]

Sean, I know kind of what you've been through with ASME. I compete in the SAE Collegiate Design Series, specifically the Aero Design Competition.

There, the 60 pages or so of rules are pretty clear. (No comment on the number of questions that could be answered by simply reading the rules. Ratio is probably much higher than here.) However, this year, for the annual rule change, the rule changed was: No carbon fiber or fiberglass. Several teams went for basalt fiber as an alternative. After a few months, a team that was making sure that basalt was in fact legal managed to get clarification on what counted as fiberglass. Basalt counted. Teams had already made parts out of basalt and had to redesign.

Here, in FRC, the rulebook is what, twice that length? There are really only two--now three--rules that have people scratching their heads/annoyed. The bumper rule, <G14> (mainly for the reasoning behind that), and now the ruling that a battery with leads isn't exempt from the withholding allowance are the rules that are most annoying/least clear.

Could FIRST have done better? Possibly. 8-10 people with inside knowledge of intent can't fully anticipate 15,000+ people without that knowledge, though. No matter how hard they try, they can't make the rules completely, 100% clear for the large group. That's why Q&A exists. In effect, ALL of the FRC teams that post questions are GDC advisers. They tell the GDC, through questions, what isn't clear. The GDC then has a chance to make their intent clear, and change/clarify the rules accordingly.

Will they learn from this? Probably. We can expect that they won't make the same "mistakes", if such the annoying rules are, again. They may even fix the one they can before competition. Remember, they're human. Humans have a tendency to learn. In fact, it's often the case that a "failure" is a bigger learning experience than a success.

Let's all take the rest of the weekend off. Chill out. Come back Monday or Tuesday and talk a bit more.

(BTW, this post is written by someone who is under some minor stress due to having 4 R/C planes to complete in 11 days, plus making their payload plates and the molds for said plates. And no, the planes aren't close to done. Maybe 50%.)

[waialua359]

hehe.....the mandatory batteries in the past being shipped in the crate is the least of our worries. Our crate, cart and robot weighs 360 pounds BEFORE packing tools, spare parts, and everything else.
This year we went light. A manini-sized 691 pounds total as opposed to 1000+ in the past.
Why so much?

For all of you that attend local events or drive to a nearby state, lucky that you can bring everthing else to the event separately.

Our Hawaii regional event would be an advantage for us, if we didnt attend a mainland regional first.

[GaryVoshol]

As I posted elsewhere, the GDC really does a pretty good job. Of the literally hundreds of rules and definitions, how many of them are we stressed about? A half dozen?

Just as your robot is never done because it's not perfect, the rules are never perfect. That doesn't mean the GDC shouldn't strive for perfection. Part of moving toward that goal is valid constructive criticism. Things will get overlooked in the design process, whether robot or rules. Things will have to be corrected. Things will have to be pointed out when they are adversely affecting teams, especially late in the season.

Every year we have some sort of rules floo-fla. The most complaints come from flip-flops, when things that were ruled legal a week after kickoff were ruled illegal after ship, or when things that were illegal in W1 events were made legal for W3. This battery thing impresses most people as a flip-flop, because it goes against previous practice - even if the rules are the same as in previous years, they didn't seem to be enforced or mentioned then.

I've worked on rules committees, and there are two extremes of going about it. You can make the rules general, and then have those enforcing the rules make all the interpretations needed. Or you can make the rules very specific and restrictive leaving no room for interpretation.

The first is good if everyone doing the official interpretation - referees, judges, inspectors, etc - are on the same wavelength. But we've seen cases in the past where an interpretation was made, misconstrued by people hearing that interpretation, and there was great debate and consternation. It can lead to inconsistancy. The OCCRA rules committee generally follows this path, but it works because the same group of people write the rules, interpret and answer questions on the rules, and enforce the rules as inspectors and referees.

The restrictive method is often used in government regulations, insurance, other highly-bureaucratic organizations. Rules can't be fixed, even when the results of a rule are unfair.

FRC attempts to take a partial middle path, and sometimes veers too far to one side or the other for some people's tastes. They attempt to allow some interpretation by giving guidance to those who will be making the interpretations - e.g. inspector and referee training, testing and conference calls. But there is also the place for the GDC to make definitive rulings, even if people don't like those rulings.

We don't excuse the GDC because "they're doing the best they can." But at the same time, we should not harshly criticise the GDC, because "they are doing the best they can." I firmly believe that - those committee members I have met, even briefly, certainly have a passion for what they are doing and want to give teams and students the best possible experiences.

[JohnBoucher]

The big picture is that FIRST is a program to promote engineering and technology as career choices for high school students.

Think back to when you were starting out on a team. Remember the excitement you felt. Do you have that excitement on your team now? This is about getting students thinking and interested in career choices, about changing the way we collaborate with others.

Is this is going on now? Do you see that excitement?

Try running a team. You need to keep everyone happy. You need to attract talent onto the team and you need to keep your older students excited. Have an honest talk with your team leaders about what they have to do and why they do it. Ask them what their big picture is. Share with them what your big picture is. Is everyone on the same page?

Let's get the excitement back. How do we do that?

[Alex Cormier]

Originally Posted by JohnBoucher

The big picture is that FIRST is a program to promote engineering and technology as career choices for high school students.

Think back to when you were starting out on a team. Remember the excitement you felt. Do you have that excitement on your team now? This is about getting students thinking and interested in career choices, about changing the way we collaborate with others.

Is this is going on now? Do you see that excitement?

Try running a team. You need to keep everyone happy. You need to attract talent onto the team and you need to keep your older students excited. Have an honest talk with your team leaders about what they have to do and why they do it. Ask them what their big picture is. Share with them what your big picture is. Is everyone on the same page?

Let's get the excitement back. How do we do that?

There was a huge problem with those factors this year amongst a few teams here in Rochester. I heard from several teams that the kids were not as excited and willing as previous years. This is not from just one team with a lot of money, but form a team with little money, a team with a lot of mentors, and such. I can't nail it to one specific reason why so many teams didn't have the push like previous years, but it's different. Maybe we need some changes next year?

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

But as will all things, experiences may vary. Perhaps you have competitions that you are in that have outstanding rules, and if so, please share with the rest of us.

To answer this question: the Vex Robotics Competition. I think they are as good as FIRST's GDC, as a rule, but that's no surprise given who is at IFI (Jason Morrella, Karthik, JVN, etc.)

The battery ruling strikes me as odd, and I'm not fond of the cutesy names given to some of the game elements of this year's FRC game, but I wouldn't pillory a group that has the long-term track history of the game design committee. In my book, the GDC is one of the great treasures of FIRST.

Perhaps it's time to eliminate the traditions of the "build season" and shipping the robot in a sealed crate. I left FRC a couple of years ago to build a team focused on FTC, and now on the Vex Robotics Competition. Without the pressure of the build season and its attending hoo-haw, the students on our team are able to spend more time trying ideas, doing spiral design, and generally refining their machines.

This thread is about "how should we respond to elements in the game rules that some people don't like" and not one about comparing different robot programs, so I don't want to go there. I am suggesting that the six-week build and ship adds what might be an unnecessary level of rules and hassle. Just saying...

[rees2001]

I have pretty much sat back & just listened/read the gripes all season. Most of the time I would just think to myself, if they read the rules more carefully or checked the FIRST forums they would realize their design is not legal. The problem is many teams took their questions here, to the CD community. I have also not felt the need to post because I have no problems with ANY of the rules.

I think this is where our big deal is made. People that have problems bring them here & make their voices heard, over & over again. People that don’t have a problem don’t need to speak up. If we don’t speak up the people that complain think everybody feels the same as them because that is all they read/hear. I think it was about time some of us stood up & said that we don’t have a problem with the rules. I applaud you for staring this thread to stand up and say that the GDC is doing a fine job.

After a little digestion, I don’t think every rule makes complete sense but I can live with all of them. Let’s take the effort we are putting into pointing out the problems & find a way to make our collective regional competitions the best they can be.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

This thread is about "how should we respond to elements in the game rules that some people don't like" and not one about comparing different robot programs, so I don't want to go there. I am suggesting that the six-week build and ship adds what might be an unnecessary level of rules and hassle. Just saying...

As more and more talented students graduate and move into promising careers and mentors become interested in started new ventures, it seems to me that FIRST is moving along its intended path of getting the folks out there in the fields of science, technology, and math. There may come a time when the robotics field is saturated with competitions that are run by folks who have their own vision or a vision modeled after the different FIRST programs but modified to fit their goals. Year after year teams return, mentors return, and new students join teams or form teams for the FRC program. It is natural for folks who have been around for a few years to have a deeper understanding of how the program runs and how to run a team well. Those folks will have opinions, ideas, thoughts to contribute to the program that they think will help run it more smoothly and more efficiently. There are opportunities and ways to contribute their suggestions without publicly criticizing the GDC in such rude and ugly ways. ChiefDelphi is a generous contribution of FRC 47, Chief Delphi, that requires a lot of work, money, and effort on the part of the team and its devoted members. I think sometimes we forget that generosity and misuse it in ways that detract from the reasons we've joined the FIRST program in the first place.

There are lots of options for robotics competitions. I hope some day that there are lots of options for helping humanity and our beautiful planet, making use of the skills and knowledge obtained while going to school acquiring degrees in the areas that so desperately need attention and committed dedication. The competitions are a vehicle that can carry the passion deeper into the global needs. Sometimes I wonder if we forget that along the way as well.