Dangerous precedent set by Q&A 461: Loaning Parts/Assemblies to other teams

[George Nishimura]

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

the "problem" this Q&A is addressing was foreseen by a number of well known, experienced mentors I spoke within hours of the kickoff. With empathy and imagination, these kind of things can and should be foreseen and avoided.

Was it not possible to highlight the problems then, or is there an issue that there is no means of communicating or highlighting these problems? Or did they ignore any communication?

There are six weeks of team updates to the rules addressing any edge cases, mis-wordings and misinterpretations left in the manual. I haven't followed everything so closely this season, but we know Frank reads CD, the GDC reads the Q&A and they're both probably reachable through email.

I like to think of the manual being in beta during build season. As users, we can contribute by filing bugs/issues. If that's not possible, then I think we should think hard about making that possible. The GDC aren't ominiscient.

If they ignored any warnings, then I would feel more compelled to blame GDC.

I realize there are some issues that cannot be solved post-reveal, but I don't believe the ramp/cangrabber loan issue the original question was addressing is one of them. It's regretful that this discussion is only happening now, and seems to be a point of confusion still.

Side point: I agree wholeheartedly with your points about the unhealthy behaviour.