Another Culture Change

[mahumnut]

I posted this as a comment on the "haters" article, but I thought it would be better spread on CD

I agree with most of what you said, however your striving for excellence being equated to a desire to win seemed a little off to me when you later commented on how your team is founded on the learning/growing experience and fueled by student commitment (which I whole-heartedly support).
I came across this post from your culture change article which I completely agree with, however, I believe a lot of the problems you described arose out of the competition centered mentality that FIRST currently employs, something I gleaned from this post of yours. Within FIRST, as a competition, I would say it's hard to disagree that teams with more members/resources/mentors do have an upper-hand; this being said however, in the aspect of FIRST that I believe should be the predominant focus, building the best robot you can while learning and growing as much as possible along the way, members/resources/mentors really don't have any influence, it really does all boil down to the student's eagerness to learn and commitment to the program. Because of this, when I read that your team members are actively involved with your mentors and do put in the time, I am overjoyed, and your feats of engineering really are stunning each year, however, when I read that you are fueled out of a desire to win, especially right after reading your culture change article, I can't help but be a little disappointed .
So maybe instead of your goal being a "winning robot" maybe it should be "the best robot we could build" with the "winning" part being an indication or reward that follows because of this goal being employed.
Note that I agree/support everything else you wrote about

[artdutra04]

Originally Posted by BandChick

... Politely, my alliance captain on the field declined the offer - and got booed for it. ...

Was it a "boo!" or more of an surprised "ohh?!"?

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by artdutra04

Was it a "boo!" or more of an surprised "ohh?!"?

There are a lot who boo and I heard it at WPI.

I could never decline and offer because there was better teams! That is amazing that you would do that!

[Cory]

Originally Posted by mahumnut

when I read that you are fueled out of a desire to win, especially right after reading your culture change article, I can't help but be a little disappointed .

Why should you not want to win?

Why do we celebrate mediocrity as a culture?

Why do we look down on people who have competitive drive?

FIRST is a lot of things, but at it's heart it is a robotics competition. When we are at a competition we're there to win. There's a lot of other great things we get out of the actual competition like meeting other teams, learning about other teams robots, etc, but it IS a competition and if you aren't there to compete and try to win, why bother?

A desire to be the best you can at everything you do should be what all teams strive to teach their students, in my not so humble opinion.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

You mean the same robot that they cheered when it tipped over in auton? That was... not a proud weekend for FIRST imho.

Our team recorded that match on video, and unfortunately for a few people audio was taken as well. I am STILL pissed at those who were cheering, every time I think of it. It's pathetic. I don't care whether we were facing them or not, and I'm glad they beat us in that match, because we didn't deserve to win. There was the same issue earlier when the Joke Update was announced. I just don't have the words to describe my intense disdain for those individuals...

[Elliot191]

Originally Posted by Cory

Why should you not want to win?

Why do we celebrate mediocrity as a culture?

Why do we look down on people who have competitive drive?

FIRST is a lot of things, but at it's heart it is a robotics competition. When we are at a competition we're there to win. There's a lot of other great things we get out of the actual competition like meeting other teams, learning about other teams robots, etc, but it IS a competition and if you aren't there to compete and try to win, why bother?

A desire to be the best you can at everything you do should be what all teams strive to teach their students, in my not so humble opinion.

This comment saddens me. What many people are failing to see is that the competition is a byproduct of the mission of FIRST. To even question why a team would build a robot for anything other than competition, who to imply that every team should be driven by an insatiable need for winning is feeding into the attitudes which FIRST is against.

Let me reiterate. It's not about the competition. FIRST is simply about spreading interest in science and technology . the competition is a byproduct, one of many tools employed by the organization. But competition is not at the heart. If a team builds a robot to field, even builds a robot that won't move, they've all won, because they are all taking part in the solution. If a group is working to inspire students to go into science and technology, then how they do in the competition is dust in the wind, because it's the building and long hours to accomplish a collective goal that are going to stick with them, not the scores of their 3rd qualifying match at FLR.

Also, how can you imply that if a team isn't winning, they are mediocre? any person involved in building a FIRST robot is far from mediocre. The advanced systems, design techniques, teamwork etc. is far from what society would consider mediocre.

That being said, I'd love to win. Anybody would. But in the long run, winning and losing are the same thing. At the end of the day, every team in FRC has accomplished something amazing in the sculpting of the next generation of leaders.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Basel A

I just don't have the words to describe my intense disdain for those individuals...

I did... and I proclaimed them... not a proud moment. Don't learn those words.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

There are a lot who boo and I heard it at WPI.

That was IMO an "ooooh", especially considering how reactive it was. Large crowds can't impulsively decide to "boo" that quickly, and the tone is a lot different.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Elliot191

This comment saddens me. What many people are failing to see is that the competition is a byproduct of the mission of FIRST. To even question why a team would build a robot for anything other than competition, who to imply that every team should be driven by an insatiable need for winning is feeding into the attitudes which FIRST is against.

Let me reiterate. It's not about the competition. FIRST is simply about spreading interest in science and technology . the competition is a byproduct, one of many tools employed by the organization. But competition is not at the heart. If a team builds a robot to field, even builds a robot that won't move, they've all won, because they are all taking part in the solution. If a group is working to inspire students to go into science and technology, then how they do in the competition is dust in the wind, because it's the building and long hours to accomplish a collective goal that are going to stick with them, not the scores of their 3rd qualifying match at FLR.

Also, how can you imply that if a team isn't winning, they are mediocre? any person involved in building a FIRST robot is far from mediocre. The advanced systems, design techniques, teamwork etc. is far from what society would consider mediocre.

That being said, I'd love to win. Anybody would. But in the long run, winning and losing are the same thing. At the end of the day, every team in FRC has accomplished something amazing in the sculpting of the next generation of leaders.

You're completely misrepresenting my position. I specifically said when AT the competition, we are there to win, because it is indeed a competition.

I never said that the whole point of our team is to win. Those are two totally different things.

[CassCity2081]

Originally Posted by Cory

You're completely misrepresenting my position. I specifically said when AT the competition, we are there to win, because it is indeed a competition.

I never said that the whole point of our team is to win. Those are two totally different things.

I have to agree here. FIRST is a great organization that has had an amazing impact on most of our lives. We are all familiar with FIRST's real message.

On that note, we are still at a competition and should not settle for anything other than our best. Just because a team wants to win a regional or see themselves on Einstein doesnt mean that they have missed the true message of FIRST.

[Mr. Van]

I see that this discussion has drifted to become another "mentor built vs. student built" thread. I'm sure that this is not what John was talking about.

I believe that at the heart of the matter is what FIRST is about.

Inspiration.

Sometimes people are inspired by that which is incredible. Other times they are discouraged. Once I saw 148's video, I must admit that my first reaction (after "WOW!!) was "how can we compete against that?"

And then came the questions: "how did you...?" "Is that a....?"

And then cam the answers. Detailed answers. Things that I started saying "humm... we can try to do that next year". (And my regard and respect for people like JVN continued to go up.)

I was being inspired.

But getting over that hurdle can be difficult if you focus on the competition. This may be part of what some people these so-called "haters" are feeling sore about. There is a clear if indeed fine line between mentors who make their program about winning a robotics competition and mentors who make their program about inspiring and changing the lives of their team members and others. The fact that the latter can be accomplished by making it seem that you are doing the former is one of the great things about competitive robotics. It is why many of us keep doing what we do.

I will once again put the idea out there. If you are part of one of the teams that others "hate on" then YOU go out and change their mind. It might be a greater challenge than building a blue-banner robot, but it can be just as rewarding - perhaps even more so.

-Mr. Van
Coach, Robodox

[KelliV]

Fantastic post John.

I think that something we should try to do with our students is not ignore this thread by simply saying "this isn't my team, we would never do that" and moving on, but rather, print up a copy of JVN's post and show it to your students and discuss not only proper behavior, but TEACH them how respond to people booing and talking poorly to people around them in a positive manner.

I will be discussing proper behavior with my FLL kids tomorrow night and hope that the rest of the FIRST community goes over it as well.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

That was IMO an "ooooh", especially considering how reactive it was. Large crowds can't impulsively decide to "boo" that quickly, and the tone is a lot different.

And then there's moos. I had no idea a large crowd could moo so loud and so quickly.

It was one of those Holy Cow moments.

Jane

[George Nishimura]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

That was IMO an "ooooh", especially considering how reactive it was. Large crowds can't impulsively decide to "boo" that quickly, and the tone is a lot different.

I was an alliance captain, and I'm pretty sure it was an 'ooh' in total jest. A decline always heightens the drama a little bit. Plus it stopped a 177-40 alliance, whether it was going to happen or not....

[Akash Rastogi]

NJ when 1089 declined an alliance I heard boo's. That pissed me off quite a bit because people think it is supposed to be insulting or something if you decline.