[FTC]: Ducktape

[TheIndian771]

any one know if ducktape is allowed in this year's FTC competition?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by TheIndian771

any one know if ducktape is allowed in this year's FTC competition?

Psst... The FTC manual has your answer. I don't see duct tape on the allowed materials list. Do you?

[Molten]

Originally Posted by EricH

Psst... The FTC manual has your answer. I don't see duct tape on the allowed materials list. Do you?

Always referring to the manual...typical EricH.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by ethan_orion

Sarcasm is the utility of the weak and pathetic. If you feel so important over publicly documented information, then don't take your own self-pity out on other people who are simply trying to expedite their learning. If empowering yourself by devaluing the learning and experience of another person is critical to your self-worth then I encourage you to reach out and grow through other means.

I for one, will not stand to listen to arrogant hormonal contributors who prioritize elitism over support and learning - despite what may seem to be a 'stupid question'. It's just not productive except to bolster your own sense of importance through an artificial medium.

So...

Yes, read the FTC manual but please continue to post questions that others may have a quick response that will support and enhance your experience with FTC.

Ethan

Ethan, if someone doesn't know how to find information, they need to learn. CD won't always be here. In this case, the information was right there, if the time had been taken to look for it. No indication that that time had been taken was present. This is a "do my homework for me" situation. My response is to either give the answer with the method or to give the method. The question at the end was to confirm that I had in fact read the FTC rules correctly--and to encourage the OP to read them himself.

The other reason that I give the "how to find" methodology--and try to encourage people to read the manual--is because many times over the years, somebody has posted a question that has already been answered in the rulebook, or comes here to get clarification on a rule. CD is not an official FIRST site, and as such, ALL rules questions that are answered here need to have a basis in the rules and/or Q&A for the competition in question for the answer to be close to official.

What would happen if CD suddenly shut down, and the FRC/FTC/FLL/VRC teams suddenly didn't have a quick reference to find their answers? Would they be able to look at the appropriate sources and get the answers they needed? Sometimes I wonder...

Also, it generally isn't a good idea to make unfounded assumptions about what is going on in other people's minds and then state those assumptions publicly, especially in an "internet tone" similar to the one used. People tend to get annoyed.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by ethan_orion

Sarcasm is the utility of the weak and pathetic. If you feel so important over publicly documented information, then don't take your own self-pity out on other people who are simply trying to expedite their learning. If empowering yourself by devaluing the learning and experience of another person is critical to your self-worth then I encourage you to reach out and grow through other means.

I for one, will not stand to listen to arrogant hormonal contributors who prioritize elitism over support and learning - despite what may seem to be a 'stupid question'. It's just not productive except to bolster your own sense of importance through an artificial medium.

So...

Yes, read the FTC manual but please continue to post questions that others may have a quick response that will support and enhance your experience with FTC.

Ethan

Note how nobody besides yourself referred to anything as a 'stupid question.'

Feel free to take your foot out of your mouth next time you post. If EricH wished to be rude in his post, I'm sure there are more critical ways of saying "read the manual again." For example, if anyone wants to be rude, they could gladly say GRTd*M- go read the darn* manual.

[ethan_orion]

Fair enough. That was late night post that was not thought out or warranted. I apologize for feeling compelled to assume what I did. I've deleted the original post as it was garbage.

I agree with you EricH in your follow up comments. Let me rephrase what my original concern was that I wrongly felt compelled to inflame into an entirely irrelevant point.

Wouldn't the first half suffice?

Psst... The FTC manual has your answer

Is it necessary to ask a rhetorical question to which you know the answer is no, simply to hammer home your point?

As you've posted thousands of times and have been on this forum for several years, I can imagine their is an initial frustration at those that do not do their "homework" before posting.

And so maybe that's the point, to really turn the question back upon the poster to prevent a plethora of posts to which answers can be found without needing to waste time of those on the CD forum.

So in conclusion, I apologize for me asinine post. Please excuse my brash comments as I was not thinking properly.

-Ethan (trying to remove foot from mouth)

[Molten]

Originally Posted by ethan_orion

Wouldn't the first half suffice?

Sort of, it would have gotten the message of "read the manual" accrossed. But it really wouldn't answer the initial question.

[ethan_orion]

But wasn't find the solution in the manual, the point of EricH's post? To encourage the poster to read the manual to find the solution and not rely on members of the forum to answer his question for him.

TheIndian771 ultimately didn't need to read the manual because the answer was provided.

So ultimately,

Psst... The FTC manual has your answer.

does achieve the intended goal. To have the poster find the answer on their own and not bog down CD with posts about questions that could easily be answered through reading the FTC manual.

[TheIndian771]

sorry this question has cause some many problems. We were just making sure that we didn't over look anything in the manual. We read the manual several times and just wanted to make sure we weren't missing something

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by TheIndian771

sorry this question has cause some many problems. We were just making sure that we didn't over look anything in the manual. We read the manual several times and just wanted to make sure we weren't missing something

I thought your question was perfectly reasonable. Have a great time doing robots!

[ethan_orion]

Your question did not cause any problems. I caused the problem. I had fire in my belly and spit it out on this topic for which I apologize.

Unless compelled otherwise I think it best if this post fades into the past as I, for one, have more important things to focus on - transferring balls to and from our launcher to our hopper.

Thanks for the redirection and all the support that happens on CD

-Ethan

[wendymom]

I actually thought you meant FTC team Duct Tape!! They are awesome and good friends of ours......whew, you had me worried