[FRC Blog] Stop Build Day Survey Results

[Mark McLeod]

I cannot agree with you here Ed.
The middle choice, a 3 in this type of survey is typically the "I don't care either way" or "no opinion" choice.
Only 1 & 2 can be counted towards the eliminate bag day or sort of eliminate bag day attitude.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by tickspe15

This survey was clearly rigged.

But will you accept the results?

[Rachel Lim]

Originally Posted by Hitchhiker 42

On the contrary, that makes sense. If you already have the resources to build a second robot, why change the rule (other than money, but you already have that), whereas teams that don't have enough resources would more likely ask for no stop build day.

TL;DR High-resource teams in general favor the status quo which is understandable.

I guess I was thinking of it more like teams who build practice robots presumably have the time/resources to work through bag and tag (compared to some single-robot teams who may not be able to continue working even without bag day, or who will struggle to do so), and removing the bag could only help. But yeah, that makes sense too.

It is interesting to note that CD is over-representative of people on teams that build practice robots as well as those who prefer to end bag and tag.

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

But will you accept the results?

Only if my side wins.

[efoote868]

If you were to estimate the results by the tone of the discussion in here, I'd put it at 90% want to eliminate Stop Build Day. My takeaway from the survey results is that those on Chief Delphi are a very vocal minority.

[TJP123]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

Agreed. This would be a relatively non-controversial change; one that simply gives the advantage that district teams already enjoy (especially those who attend extra events) to everybody.

Would the district team get the same six hours weekly, and also the current six hours that's simply meant to level the field for not getting the third day at the regional? Or would regional teams lose access to their robots on Thursdays?

I can see that going over like a FIRST survey.

[Caleb Sykes]

Originally Posted by efoote868

If you were to estimate the results by the tone of the discussion in here, I'd put it at 90% want to eliminate Stop Build Day. My takeaway from the survey results is that those on Chief Delphi are a very vocal minority.

Already known.

[tickspe15]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

But will you accept the results?

I will keep you in suspense.

[marshall]

Originally Posted by tickspe15

I will keep you in suspense.

You've got the best words.

[nuclearnerd]

Originally Posted by efoote868

If you were to estimate the results by the tone of the discussion in here, I'd put it at 90% want to eliminate Stop Build Day. My takeaway from the survey results is that those on Chief Delphi are a very vocal minority.

Very true, but also consider that any petition for change will be heavily biased towards the status quo. People are always afraid of change until it happens. I would say the fact that this survey shows nearly half of respondents voting 1 or 2 is a significant result.

Also, you know, data trumps opinion, and I think there data is pretty clear that bag day is harmful.

[EricH]

Taking my best hack at future predictions...

1) I suspect that the Zondag System won't be in play in 2017. That would most likely class as a "major change" at HQ.
2) After the 2017 season wraps up, HQ will look more closely.

Given that there's a fair number of folks on the Stop Building side, more than the Don't Stop Building side, I rather suspect that Stop Build will stay in place for some time yet. I realize that that's going to be unpopular with the local vocals.

But here's the thing. There seems to be a fair amount of support for Don't Stop Building--getting up towards a decent tipping point, I suspect within the next few years. I don't think this issue will go away. At a best guess, there will be a change for 2018, and I would really strongly suspect that the Zondag System will be the original basis, but there will be some major changes that teams won't like.


There is, in fact, a precedent for the Zondag System. It's the FIX-IT Window, '05-'07ish, and it allowed teams to work on robot parts to be brought to their events even when other work was technically banned (and that was enforced by the robots being in a crate out of the teams' hands). There were a number of elements that teams didn't like, for a variety of reasons. Now taking bets on that system returning, with robot access instead of legal spare parts from after build as the primary benefit.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by EricH

But here's the thing. There seems to be a fair amount of support for Don't Stop Building--getting up towards a decent tipping point, I suspect within the next few years.

Out of curiosity, what makes you think there's motion on the overall attitude towards stop-build? I won't claim to know either way, but we had shipping to regionals through 2011, I think, with a slight overlap with Bag and Tag... that means there's been at least 5-6 years of wide spread bag and tag usage, and even longer of Stop Build day. I'm not aware of other surveys like this one going out to give us an idea of what the community thinks of the Stop Build deadline. I just don't see how we can infer any sort of trends from this single data point.

[tickspe15]

Originally Posted by marshall

You've got the best words.

Yeah I'm pretty much the greatest person ever. Only the best words for me

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Out of curiosity, what makes you think there's motion on the overall attitude towards stop-build? I won't claim to know either way, but we had shipping to regionals through 2011, I think, with a slight overlap with Bag and Tag... that means there's been at least 5-6 years of wide spread bag and tag usage, and even longer of Stop Build day. I'm not aware of other surveys like this one going out to give us an idea of what the community thinks of the Stop Build deadline. I just don't see how we can infer any sort of trends from this single data point.

I'd answer with "what makes you think there isn't motion", but obviously that isn't an answer.

You're right, I have no hard data. What I do have is that the discussions on the topic have had a nice uptick in more recent years--time was, Ship Day was an absolute. Ship, or don't compete (without a waiver). Nowadays, I'd say for the last 2-3 years especially, there's been a decided move towards "Hey, so why do we have to be totally hands-off the competition robot again?" I don't think that started before districts and their bags (and out-of bag time--yeah, I'm lookin' at you, MI!) in '09, and I'm still pretty sure that it didn't start before the regionals started using bags a couple years later. I don't think there was much of any serious discussion for a couple years even then.

So there's a bit of an uptick in the discussion activity. I would say that that means increased awareness. (HQ just sending out the survey probably meant that they'd become aware of the discussions, which means they're getting bigger, too--or else somebody asked directly.) Increased awareness will generate some discussion and some thinking. I suspect that several people will change their minds--or have changed them--during the discussions.

[bduddy]

Increased discussion where? I think one of the key things people should be taking away from this data is that discussions on CD do not reflect the larger FRC community.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by bduddy

Increased discussion where? I think one of the key things people should be taking away from this data is that discussions on CD do not reflect the larger FRC community.

That is true.

The thing is that CD tends to attract the mid-to-upper tier teams. And the vocal ones. The teams that tend to be at the forefront of testing out and thinking out new ideas.* You can bet that an awful lot of teams and team members that got the survey went "Huh?" Does that mean that discussion is not increasing? NO. On CD, discussion increased--witness the 2-3 threads besides this one on the topic. As a result of the survey, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of teams are going to be wondering "what was that about?"

If enough teams ask questions, things start happening. I don't see the discussion being fully revived until May, at this point, but I do think that HQ will be processing the results, and maybe asking better questions later on in a followup. I'd give it about 4-5 years before there's some sort of tipping point. Seems like that's how long it takes to make major changes like that.

Now starting a pool on which happens first (officially): video review, ending stop build day in some form, or moving Kickoff...


Now, this post does come with a bit of a reminder:
If the top X% of teams are able to drive a solution that works for them, without consideration of the rest of the teams--teams that maybe can barely play the game, in a good year--then I do not see that solution as being a good one. With all the discussion of "stacked events", those not-so-highly-performing teams are often overlooked pretty thoroughly. 6 powerhouses and a dozen mid-upper-tier teams don't make a regional... What about the other half to two-thirds of the teams?


*Did you know? The card system wasn't developed by HQ. IRI used it for years; FIRST HQ adopted it during 2010's soccer game. Districts were developed largely by teams in MI, at least initially--and so was bag-and-tag. Just something to ponder...