A plead to FIRST, anyone else agree?

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

What the heck is up with so many kids and adults if FIRST being obsessed with the word nerd. Nerdlove is not something to be proud of, the fact that you're so proud of acting like FIRST is a little cult of nerds is so frustrating and annoying.

The best mentors I know in FRC are intelligent people, what the heck constitutes them as nerds? The majority of the students on Team 11 are varisty and junior varsity athletes. Our captains are also athletes. I can name a lot of teams who are the same way. The kids on 3553 are mostly from the football team as well.

What do you really even know about other teams and other people?

So really, this pisses me off (as you call tell by this post).

Have fun with treating FRC like a little cult of nerds.

And you're saying the term "Nerd" is to be taken offensively? To me and my team, "Nerd" happens to be a compliment! It is used to mean respect! One day, "Nerds" will be ruling this world! Why are you acting like it's a bad thing? It's like a a jock saying their not a jock! And for the record, we had a member on our team who was varsity captain of the football team, and he had the word "Nerd" specifically printed on his uniform. I don't see how you can think being a "Nerd" is bad. I can't speak for everybody, but I'm proud to be a "Nerd"!!!

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by RoboTigers1796

I say, we all come together and boycott until they promise a new never before seen exciting game that makes the playing field even for all teams veterans and rookies..

If you think that is a good solution then perhaps you should do that...

Just to get this straight, this thread is about the way FIRST makes its games each year, and what we'd like to change. If you'd like to debate if being called a "Nerd" is a bad thing, please start another thread.

Thank you.

[EricDrost]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

And you're saying the term "Nerd" is to be taken offensively? To me and my team, "Nerd" happens to be a compliment! It is used to mean respect! One day, "Nerds" will be ruling this world! Why are you acting like it's a bad thing? It's like a a jock saying their not a jock! And for the record, we had a member on our team who was varsity captain of the football team, and he had the word "Nerd" specifically printed on his uniform. I don't see how you can think being a "Nerd" is bad. I can't speak for everybody, but I'm proud to be a "Nerd"!!!

The word "nerd" denotes: "an intelligent but single-minded person obsessed with a nonsocial hobby or pursuit".

Being single-minded and obsessed is not exactly healthy. Variety is the spice of life.

Acting like FIRST is, to use Akash's words, a cult of nerds is counterproductive to FIRST becoming accepted in mainstream culture.

Originally Posted by Purple

The word "nerd" denotes: "an intelligent but single-minded person obsessed with a nonsocial hobby or pursuit".

Being single-minded and obsessed is not exactly healthy. Variety is the spice of life.

Then let's change the definition of "Nerd"! "Nerds" used to be frowned upon, but then one day they created the cell phone, the computer, and every useful machine currently known to man! If it weren't for the "Nerd", then we might as well be living in caves! There might as well be no medicine, cars, or technology at all!

[rcmolloy]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

What the heck is up with so many kids and adults if FIRST being obsessed with the word nerd. Nerdlove is not something to be proud of, the fact that you're so proud of acting like FIRST is a little cult of nerds is so frustrating and annoying.

The best mentors I know in FRC are intelligent people, what the heck constitutes them as nerds? The majority of the students on Team 11 are varisty and junior varsity athletes. Our captains are also athletes. I can name a lot of teams who are the same way. The kids on 3553 are mostly from the football team as well.

What do you really even know about other teams and other people?

So really, this pisses me off (as you call tell by this post).

Have fun with treating FRC like a little cult of nerds.

Honestly, I always thought that the true meaning for nerd was an intellectual badass.

Originally Posted by rcmolloy

Honestly, I always thought that the true meaning for nerd was an intellectual badass.

rcmolloy, I love you now! New definition of "Nerd": Intellectual badass!!!!

[R.C.]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

And you're saying the term "Nerd" is to be taken offensively? To me and my team, "Nerd" happens to be a compliment! It is used to mean respect! One day, "Nerds" will be ruling this world! Why are you acting like it's a bad thing? It's like a a jock saying their not a jock! And for the record, we had a member on our team who was varsity captain of the football team, and he had the word "Nerd" specifically printed on his uniform. I don't see how you can think being a "Nerd" is bad. I can't speak for everybody, but I'm proud to be a "Nerd"!!!

Ok look,

I will have to totally agree with Akash. Nerd may be "Cool" for you and your group of kids. But Nerd gives off a negative connotation, your not gonna win over many people, especially not the people FIRST is currently aiming at. The General Public.

FIRST isn't nerdy, its one of the coolest things I've ever been apart of. If we (the FIRST community) are not ready to change our own perception, how will we change others?

Personally I like what Amir (frc1717) told people at various events, we have to sell this program as the "New Cool". Many of the kids on 1323 are athletes or cheerleaders, most will even ditch practice and come to robotics because its "Cool". My kids never like to be called nerds and will promote the program as cool.

I've met a wide range of people and not one of them coming to a FIRST event for the FIRST time described it as Nerdy. Instead they called it "The Best Kept Secret".

This isn't promoting "The New Cool", but I truly believe the book and FRC1717 are on the right path and we should hop on that bandwagon instead of complaining about FIRST.

-RC

Originally Posted by R.C.

its one of the coolest things I've ever been apart of.
-RC

I completely agree with this statement! FRC IS cool! Can we please just leave it at that?

[acrease77]

i agree with the third part, and also i was really mad this year that this year's game was almost EXACTLY like 2007 and like one of the games from the 1990s (i think '97) Hang a tube during auto, and make rows of tubes during teleop to get max points. I know how hard it is to make a robotics game, but still, there have been 3 hanging end games, 3 games hanging tubes on racks, a bunch with the octagon shaped goal things (like in 09 and 02), and i just feel like all teams had to do this yea (besides teams formed after 07) was to look at their robot from 07, see what they could do better, and see what robots were really good that year, so i really feel like the games are becoming more and more repetitive and repeats of previous years.

[Vermeulen]

First, I somewhat disagree with number 1. While I think that it can get a bit grating for FIRST veterans, It does a great deal of good for new members. It shows the newbies that this isn't battlebots, and that we have expectations that we act professionally. For me, it's more annoying to hear new people ask things like "why don't we put something on the robot to damage other ones" than hearing about gracious professionalism and coopertition. With that said, though, I think that a lot of people who haven't had much experience with FIRST don't know what those mean.

As to number 3, I agree that the FIRST splash page was needlessly awkward. It seemed to me as though they greatly overplayed the appearance he made at kickoff.

And at number four, I disagree. We don't recruit saying "Are you a nerd? Join all the nerds here!". We say "Hey, you can build these cool robots, no experience required, and here are XYZ reasons why it's good for you to do this." I don't think robotics is for nerds at all. I think that robotics is for people who want to learn, and be inspired.

[Ray T]

I have mentored FRC and FLL teams for ten years and I have to agree with the original poster's comments regarding FIRST and the message it shares.

Whether or not nerdy is nice or nasty is not entirely relevant. Broadcasting that you're not nerdy is a pretty sure way to highlight your nerdiness.

The games have become overly complicated for easy consumption by the general public. We study the game for 7 weeks before we actually play, only to find out that we don't understand all of its nuances. Ask yourselves how much time you spend explaining the game and the competition structure (randomized qualification matches, ranking points, coopertition points, alliance selection, etc.) to visiting relatives, let alone the other guests in the hotel lobby (the folks you're really trying to attract in order to "spread the word").

FIRST has created an amazing program for promoting interest in the field of engineering. It spans the globe. The competitions are exciting. Everyone - students, mentors, sponsors, guests - is inspired by the ideas and solutions developed by others. The enthusiasm is contagious. The only way that can happen is by FIRST promoting itself to potential sponsors, but I think FIRST has gone overboard in its promotion.

In our rookie year we were fortunate enough to qualify for, and attend the Championships. The competition was fun and exciting. Then we sat through the closing ceremony - for a long time. Our other mentor, myself and all of our team's parents felt like we had just sat through a pyramid-marketing convention. Aside from presenting teams their respective awards, the speeches were about how important FIRST is in encouraging students to pursue careers in science and technical fields. The speeches weren't about inspiring or encouraging youth toward those fields; they were about FIRST. Over the course of the last several years I have heard the phrase "...the message of FIRST..." more often than I have heard the actual message. That is shameless self-promotion. I believe the constant repetition that FIRST is about this, or FIRST is not about that, only serves to detract from the mission of most of the program's participants: inspiring young people to exceed everyone's expectations.

Largely as a result of our experience, we do not advertise ourselves as a FIRST team. To be sure, we are a robotics team that competes in FIRST, but we are primarily a team that shows kids that, when challenged, they can rise above themselves; that problem-solving is rewarding; and that they have the power and the ability to succeed.

[FRC4ME]

I have a couple of things to add to this thread:

1. Competition vs. coopertition: this has come up every year that I can remember (that would be 2007 and onward) and people are always complaining about rules, penalties, and seeding systems that discourage defense and "take the competition out of the game," so they say. "On the field you should play to win." Of course you should play to win! FIRST wants you to play to win; in 2010 GDC altered the seeding system after Week 1 to specifically clarify that teams are supposed to play to win.

Do not confuse rules against defense with rules against winning. It becomes more and more obvious to me each year that FIRST wants us to do one thing: build a robot that achieves the scoring challenge. It's that simple. We should play to win by scoring points, not by stopping other teams from scoring points. How do you beat a top-notch scoring team? Build something that can score better.

FIRST are not a bunch of hippie communists for wanting us to do this, but they simply encourage scoring for two reasons. First, GDC spends months developing a unique challenge for us each year; they want to see more teams tackling that challenge rather than building a brick on wheels. Second, this is how it works in the real world. What can you do if your competitor is beating you? Pretty much one of two options: (1) design a better product or (2) do something to hamper the effectiveness of your competitor's product. Option (1) leads to better technology for everyone; option (2) usually leads to an antitrust lawsuit. I'm glad FIRST is training future engineers to choose option (1).

Of course, for the competition itself to be fun it must involve some defense. I don't think recent games have gone so far as to prohibit this. Design a robot to play the game, and you have no penalties to worry about. Play defense when necessary, but be aware that it is risky - just as in the real world - and don't make it your primary focus. Above all, have fun, and remember that the competition season is only a small part of the FRC experience.

2. Do you think an average FRC game has more convoluted rules than American football, basketball, and baseball? Not even close. Yet those three sports are immensely popular. Many - probably a majority - of spectators who watch those sports do not understand the nuances of all of the rules, yet they still seem to enjoy watching the games.

FIRST doesn't need to dumb down the challenge to make the game fun to watch.

[mwtidd]

Originally Posted by FRC4ME

2. Do you think an average FRC game has more convoluted rules than American football, basketball, and baseball? Not even close. Yet those three sports are immensely popular. Many - probably a majority - of spectators who watch those sports do not understand the nuances of all of the rules, yet they still seem to enjoy watching the games.

FIRST doesn't need to dumb down the challenge to make the game fun to watch.

Well first one key difference between the rules of most sports and first is scoring.

Multiplicative scoring is absurd. It didn't make sense in 05 or 07 so why try it again now.

In every sport scoring is summation based. In basketball and football, you have the opportunity for extra points, but for the most sports your score a goal, you get x points for it.

In football, you may not understand all the penalties, or even the scoring, but you can quickly be told the goal and understand the basic idea.

Logomotion, not so much.

The problem is the way FIRST games are played. I understand the reason for autonomous / teleop / end game, but undertsanding this means to describe the basic format of the game, you have to describe 3 games each uniquely distinct, with distinct rules.

I would like to see all 3 of these incorporated into a single task making the game one game, but incorporating all of these elements, autonomous, teleop, and bonus.

I know nearly everyone would disagree with me, but end game takes away from the "game" aspect. No other sport or game has a concept of the end game. I will say that end games are very exciting for spectators, but maybe there is an alternative way of incorporating endgame in a field goal type manner. A fieldgoal / 2pt conversion doesnt break the flow of football, its not like its a completely different task than typical football play. I think having the endgame a natural extension of the game would be a cool idea. I think lunacy had something like this and overdrive did this very well. Also I'd like to see autonomous incorporated into the game, create a dead zone or something, where robots can only accomplish certain goals using autonomous, rather than having an autonomous period. Image the 2x ball in 04 only being able to be acquired using autonomous. This way autonomous would give you a distinct advantage, but during a match we wouldn't have 15 seconds of 1/3 of the robots moving. I think it would create an interesting dynamic to autonomous, that doesnt currently exist. Also then matches could be 3 minutes long, no 2 minutes with a different game at the beginning and the end.

Basically sports have crazy rules, with many outliers, but the basic idea is easy to understand, and you catch on to critical outliers very quickly. I think FIRST can learn a lot from sports, and not detract from the challenge in doing so. Also linear scoring is important too...

but knowing first, next year we'll see binary or exponential scoring

[cyberjoek]

Originally Posted by lineskier

A fieldgoal / 2pt conversion doesnt break the flow of football, its not like its a completely different task than typical football play.

Actually this was exactly the example I was going to go for but as the opposite proof.

For 95% of the game of American Football teams do not want the ball to touch the ground and they use their hands to carry or throw the ball towards pre-marked zones at each end of the field.

In the other 5% a specialized player enters the field to put the ball on the ground then send it through specially marked Vision Targets (also referred to as Uprights).

Each competitive teams needs one or two people who can perform the specialized action in order to win (in some games the majority of points comes from the specialized action).

The difference is in FIRST we move all the field goals to the end of the game and it's not an iconic standard thing that has been there since the beginning of time.

-Joe Kavanagh