Gracious Professionalism?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Tuba4

I have re-read my comments in this thread. I have never mentioned the regional, nor will I. I have never mentioned a team name or number, nor will I.

This is all well and good. However, you did give enough information that someone else was able to determine both the event and the team. This means that presumably they were at the event, or heard about it from someone who was.

I personally don't know the event or the team. I could probably make some simple deductions and take a reasonable guess at both the event and team(s) involved. However, I will not do this. I prefer not to know some things.

And now that accusations of libelous comments are starting to be thrown around: I presume that you all know where your house doors are. There's some nice weather outside, or has been. Go! Enjoy it! Come back in a day or two and resume this discussion with clearer heads!

[Mike Starke]

Originally Posted by Tuba4

I have re-read my comments in this thread. I have never mentioned the regional, nor will I. I have never mentioned a team name or number, nor will I.

The fact that your team number is on your profile and very visible when you make a post, people can simply look up what regional your team was at this weekend, and find out what team you are talking about. You we're trying to be "discrete" about this "not so innocent" team, with out actually being discrete.

To truly protect the identity of this team, a much better approach would be completely objective and just bring up the topic of a team possibly being un-GP, and lightly describe the situation, without saying "the regional WE were at, and MY team" etc... because now the idenity of this team has been severely compromised. And now people may form thoughts and biases against this team for things that may or may not have happened!

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by Tuba4

I have re-read my comments in this thread. I have never mentioned the regional, nor will I. I have never mentioned a team name or number, nor will I.

You opened with:

The following is a recap of an incident I witnessed at a recent regional. The names have been omitted to protect the not so innocent.

My team was on the bubble of being an alliance captain. If one or two alliance captains were picked, we would move up and select.

Given those pieces of information, all it takes is 30 seconds on usfirst.org or thebluealliance.com... You attended Pittsburgh, where you were 8th seed and thus guaranteed to be an alliance captain, and you attended Buckeye, where you were 11th seed and thus "on the bubble of being an alliance captain. If one or two [sic: three] alliance captains were picked, [you] would move up and select."

You are accusing 3015 of dishonestly colluding with 340 and/or 1507, and I'm not sure how you think that wasn't blatantly obvious.

[Grim Tuesday]

Maybe it's time to revive the moderated discussion board.

[meaubry]

Not sure who lives in a glass house, but perhaps some constraint would be in order before this one goes too much further.

Seems odd to me that the name of the thread has demonstrated so little of it.

Discussions are good, accusations are bad - and there is a way to hold a discussion in a civil manner (if you really try).

Now, can we all just chill a little and remind yourself why you are here (in the ChiefDelphi community) in the first place?

Thanks,
Mike

[Seth Mallory]

This thread brings up a very good point that I try to teach. It is not what you say but what you are heard to say. This is why at times I ask for a summery of what I have just instructed someone. The problem could be between fellow team members and the misinformation is spread of as the message is given to other teams. Or a team may hear it differently. People hear differently. At FIRST you can have hurt feelings. Where I work you get sued or fired. This is a good lesson to learn from.

[Chris Fultz]

A few years ago we had an incident with behavior from another team towards one of our students.

I instructed our students to "keep it off of CD". Instead, I found the team website and made contact with the lead mentor. We had some email exchanges and resolved the concerns. The mentor and rest of the team had no idea of what had happened but addressed the situation and we all moved on. Right now I don't even remember the team involved - so our discussion closed the issue. Had there been a debate on CD I am sure there would still be open wounds.

So, my point is, in these "situations", have a team mentor contact a mentor from the other team and have a discussion to get a clear understanding. The true story is usually somewhere in between.

[rees2001]

Can we please stop all of this now! I have been following this thread all day and finally feel ready to post my thoughts and not my feelings. I hope this thread becomes a lesson in where to start a thread about an issue with a team. If you feel you have been wronged bring it up in a moderated thread with anonymity. It is way too easy to affect the reputation of teams, even if not intentional. As it has been stated, there were no precautions taken to hide true details about the origins of this issue.

I say this because MY team may be perceived to be guilty by association. We are not, I can assure you that we did not and would not encourage the actions posted above. I hope it was never an intention to imply that there may have been some collusion. Our team has worked hard to build the reputation we have and I would not let anything jeopardize that. I have also known 1507 for many years and in my experience with them they would not risk their reputation on the chance to win a 2nd blue banner of their year.

As for the issue at hand. If research had been done about the team in question, it would have been discovered that they had to be replaced in the final match of the finals at their previous regional because of the issues listed above in this thread. If scouts had watched matches played by them in the recent competition it would have been noted that they were having technical issues with their robot. So much so, that they sat motionless after hybrid as late as Saturday morning.


I will do my best to not let this thread and the rumors about what happened tarnish the happiness I have for my students and my team winning the Buckeye Regional.

[Swan217]

I'm kinda astonished that nobody's brought up the most important issue, which is scouting/strategy communication.

Let's say I'm team 817, and I know that team 3113 is instrumental to our strategy, more than any other team. First of all, I know that they are, because I've scouted every single match, and know exactly what they're capable of. I also know that if there's an issue with their robot, it didn't take place on the field, because there's no scouting data on it. So unless they fried their electronics, I'm going to assume it's a fixable issue. Or if they did have an issue with their flux capacitor in matches 32 & 48, I know what it is. So the most Gracious Professional thing I could think of is to track down 3113's mentors and ask if my 817 mentors could help fix their robot before eliminations.

And getting back to scouting, I wouldn't be trusting the word of a student to know what's fixable or not. He could've overheard other 3113 students or mentors talking and misunderstood. I never give pit scouting credence. I tell all my students, "If someone comes up asking about the robots capabilities, tell them to watch the matches." I may even believe myself that my robot can score 10 balls in auton & balance in 5.3 seconds, but unless it translates into QPs, it doesn't mean squat what I say.

Take it as a lesson learned about scouting & next time, ask not what your alliance picks can do for you, but what you can do for your alliance picks.