ChampionSplit: A Historical Perspective

[popnbrown]

Apologies, EricH. I know you're trying to draw the conversation to a positive conclusion...I couldn't resist.

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

They only do so on a consistent basis when we given them the correct INCENTIVES to do so.

I'm likely naive and ideal, but I think this is too blanket of a statement. Perhaps a true generalization but not a fair one. I think some people, especially many of us here, do things not for a very clear and understood incentive. Perhaps some of us got involved because of a clear incentive but it is not why we continue to be involved.

For example: Teams that have won World Chairman's continue to do the work of a role model FRC team, even though they do not have the chance to win the award for another 5 years. Why is this?

An additional point that I've made before: We already have other organizations that promote STEM through less or non competitive activities.

In addition to what you've said above and previously, I think you're implying that FIRST's most unique feature is it's competitive feature. I politely disagree, it is not what drew me (robots were just cool..and all my friends did it) and it is not what continues to draw me (I'm just trying to get my students to write good e-mails ) to FIRST.

In my experience, Science Olympiad was more competitive than FIRST was.

I can understand it's what attracts certain people, but it is not universal.