[beyondinspection] Website Release

[Samwaldo]

I for one loved reading the articles on this site. My favorite part was the 3 articles pertaining to specific teams and their robots (A little biased here since they were all NE teams that we competed with/against)

I'm always looking to find out more about robots, how they were imagined, built, and ESPECIALLY problems that occurred and how they would improve the whole robot. You delivered this exactly and MORE.

It was very obvious that the articles were very thoughtfully created, with A LOT of research and help from the actual team. Also obvious was the fact that the author(s) loved the topic they were writing about

THANK YOU

[Joe G.]

Originally Posted by EricH

A proposal: Allow authors to request anonymity (or publicity). Default is to make the author's name public, but author can request to be anonymous. "Sensitive topic" articles can be flagged as such, maybe, to indicate that it's a topic "about which honest persons can disagree" and hopefully keep the flames down, or even invite a counter-article from someone on the other side.

Or simply allow for people to write under pseudonyms or anonymous usernames, if they are kept consistent. This allows a reputation to develop around the name, provides greater context to individual articles, and will hopefully give flamers some pause before attacking a name that they generally find insightful, while protecting the identity of those who wish to do so. See Looking Forward for an example.

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by Joe G.

Or simply allow for people to write under pseudonyms or anonymous usernames, if they are kept consistent. This allows a reputation to develop around the name, provides greater context to individual articles, and will hopefully give flamers some pause before attacking a name that they generally find insightful, while protecting the identity of those who wish to do so. See Looking Forward for an example.

This, I think, would be ideal.

[themccannman]

Great idea, I see this becoming a great resource for teams of all walks. I also agree that author names should be shown (discretion left to the author of course), it's nice seeing familiar faces on these articles and knowing where they are coming from and what experience they have.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Basel A

I strongly agree. Even if the editors of the site are willing to vouch for the content they publish, that's nothing compared to actually knowing who those authors are. It also allows the authors to build their personal reputation (which is not a worthless thing). Further, while flaming is not nice, there's nothing wrong with maintaining some external accountability for the authors.

If an author wants their name attached to the piece, they can put it in. I'm just giving the logic behind defaulting to anonymity. I would think you could draw credibility from the fact that it's being published on here. I know Foss, he won't publish something that isn't adequately researched or an opinion by someone who he trusts.


The main reason the Robot posts appear to be written with the team is simply because they ARE. If you're interested in publishing a Robot Profile for your team's robot (historical or current) feel free to ping Foss or I and we'll get you the questions (for consistency reasons there's a ROUGH format) same with the People Profiles (Obviously, it helps if you're a known name for that one.)

Personally, I'd love to see Zach Orr do a profile...

[jwfoss]

As Andrew stated we'd love to have more people submit articles, just email the site or contact me directly if you'd like.

You'll notice that I went ahead and made some updates to the site, including adding the authors names to those article which the authors approve. We reserve the right to withhold authors names based on their requests and our own choices as site managers. I have also added a note to the top of the editorial article and will continue to do so on "controversial" content.

We hope you are enjoying the other content on the site.

[thedries]

Lots of great information here, I'm looking forward to future releases. Keep up the good work!

[pwnageNick]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

If an author wants their name attached to the piece, they can put it in. I'm just giving the logic behind defaulting to anonymity. I would think you could draw credibility from the fact that it's being published on here. I know Foss, he won't publish something that isn't adequately researched or an opinion by someone who he trusts.

While that is all true, you don't see any news source, magazine, online newspaper, etc. have the default be anonymous authors. I guess it is really just my opinion but I really don't see much logic in having the default be anonymity. The first thing that popped into my head after reading the first article I went to was, who wrote this? In my head it automatically didn't hold as much value because I didn't know who wrote it.

Of course Foss will only publish quality articles, sometimes (often IMO) it is good to see who wrote it to be able to think about the perspective they came from when writing it, not just credibility and accountability (although those are important as well).

Anyway, the site is fantastic. We immediately thought of it as kind of an online version of the design books that were made in '06 and '07, except the site has even more information about other things. Great job guys.

-Nick

[jwfoss]

Thanks again for all the feedback, please keep it coming.

With 2nd event registration right around the corner we put together a post on initial registration (the first 12 hours) and some general data on registration up to this point. Special thanks to Mark McLoed, and his thread: Registration 2015.

[SA] Registration 2015: First 12 Hours

[jwfoss]

It's the 30th, so as promised a new article for your reading pleasure. It seems fitting that this weeks article is about passing inspection. Special thanks to the author, Nate Laverdure (FRC2363 Mentor), for taking the time to write it up for us and the community.

[EA] How to pass Inspection

Please keep the offers for articles and the feedback coming.
Without the support of the community it will become difficult to provide value added content.

[jwfoss]

With the 15th falling on a weekend, we have chosen to release the new content a day in advance. This week we are releasing a double feature, two new articles from FRC1538 The Holy Cows. We appreciate their support. Please take some time to read about one of their successful previous robots and a mentor that does work with the team.

[PP] Holy Cows' PR Mentor: Cathy Schulz
[RP] Bringin' the Thunder - FRC1538 (2013)

If anyone is interested in being featured on the site or providing content, please send me a message or directly email the site. Thanks.

[Monochron]

I think the articles on specific robot design and methodology are really great. Seeing examples of successful techniques is incredibly useful.
The only thing I would like to see in addition to that though it maybe detailed pictures or CAD of the robots being described. For instance, I would love to see how the "motor inside roller" was set up and what that phrase actually means. The article on team 78 does a great job of this.

[jwfoss]

Hope everyone had a great holiday weekend, while you were out there eating your fill and visiting family we were thinking about some interesting robots from the past. Below is our new article about "Flop Bots", while not legal in recent years, they are a glimpse into alternative thinking in robot design, and in many cases it payed off.

[HL] Four Famous Flops

As always we'd love to hear what you think about our content, and please do not hesitate to send us ideas or volunteer to provide content. Thanks.

[Francis-134]

Wow, this article was a great trip down memory lane. I'll take flop bots and side-shields over sail bumpers and octagonal chassis any day!

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Francis-134

Wow, this article was a great trip down memory lane. I'll take flop bots and side-shields over sail bumpers and octagonal chassis any day!

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/25346 Nothing new under the sun.