Collaboration..

[Carlo]

If I can just propose that this discussion end, I would much appreciate it. The majority of us agree with what is going on in regards to the thread being shut down, and we are patiently awaiting FIRST's final words. Let us not waste our time replying to posts within this thread, as more than likely we will not agree with them. I am asking this thread be shut down, as it is not important to the robotics realm.

Sorry if I'm speaking out of turn, but I felt this was an unnecessary portion of Delphi's forums to read. I refuse to comment on the above arguments however, as I feel they could be taken on with private messages versus an open debate.

We all make mistakes at times, and slip with things that we say. Lets just move on and forget about this instead of turning it into another lengthy thread. Lets not drag this out.

-Carlo Jr.

[Kris Verdeyen]

Originally Posted by Carlo

I am asking this thread be shut down...
...Lets not drag this out.

Why is it that whenever a thread starts to get interesting, it is shut down? I understand the balance between the right to free speech and an editor or moderator's responsibility to maintain an appropriate atmosphere, but it seems like there have to be better ways to handle it than to lock down a thread.

I see nothing wrong with moderating a specific thread, not to weed out ideas, but to establish an appropriate tone and curb offensive behavior. Another option would be to forbid people from posting in a thread or posting without review if their behavior is unacceptable. This is not censorship in any meaningful sense, especially if the moderators are of the caliber we've seen around here. It's a time out, which won't be so bad if the thread stays open. It gives those who get too excited a chance to cool off, and find a way to express themselves in a manner in tune with the community that they're a part of.

Something like this has to be going on already - for the thread to be shut down there has to have been many deleted posts that were over the line. Most of the stuff in there is good discussion.


/edit: a defnintion that was useful to me:

vituperative - marked by harshly abusive criticism; "his scathing remarks about silly lady novelists"; "her vituperative railing"

[Amanda Morrison]

Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen

Why is it that whenever a thread starts to get interesting, it is shut down? I understand the balance between the right to free speech and an editor or moderator's responsibility to maintain an appropriate atmosphere, but it seems like there have to be better ways to handle it than to lock down a thread.

First, that isn't always true. There are arguments here on CD that do have a tendency to get out of hand, off-topic, or altogether just go bad. Also, if you look back, there are quite a few threads that have pushed many limits without actually being shut down. The necessity of discussion about certain topics is evident, however these forums are kind of like this year's game: Expecting everyone to understand and not test the limits of gracious professionalism. There is a lot of activity on these forums (and throughout FIRST) that ISN'T always positive, doesn't always follow any kind of graciousness towards others, and does not maintain a professional aura. Especially on the 'gracious' and 'professional' end - do you think Ben is going to ask his boss to "lighten up and chill out a little"? Or try telling your co-workers that you hate them and the way that they make the work atmosphere. That will take any kind of reputation 'points' you have in reality and certainly flush them down the toilet.

Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen

I see nothing wrong with moderating a specific thread, not to weed out ideas, but to establish an appropriate tone and curb offensive behavior. Another option would be to forbid people from posting in a thread or posting without review if their behavior is unacceptable. This is not censorship in any meaningful sense, especially if the moderators are of the caliber we've seen around here. It's a time out, which won't be so bad if the thread stays open. It gives those who get too excited a chance to cool off, and find a way to express themselves in a manner in tune with the community that they're a part of.

This would be a great option, but unfortunately not very feasible. For example, when moderators were trying to edit the 'Robot Collaboration' thread, most of the posts had been coming at them rapid-fire and it's hard to keep up with them. This kind of system could delay posts at a day or more, depending on the topic; you can't just pick out certain people because not every post by a certain person may offend, just one or two. It's much easier to edit the post, PM the person, and say 'I edited/Can you please edit your post to make it sound more gracious and less offensive. If you have any problems with this, please contact me and we can talk about it.' Along the lines of that thread also, many people were posting specifically TO one person or a group, posting offensive material, posting replies to their friends... posting without thinking about things and simmering down. A lot of apologies and responses were recieved by moderators after the thread was closed, thanking them for not letting things get too out of hand (from both sides of the argument).

But that's just one thread, one argument, and these are expansive forums. Like Brandon's post said, by posting on these forums, you agree to certain rules. I'm going to post the following, and hope this brings a refresher to all users (in violation or not).

Originally Posted by ChiefDelphi Rules

ChiefDelphi.com reserves the right to remove a post which does not relate to the topic being discussed in the forum. In addition, ChiefDelphi reserves the right to reorganize discussion forums in order to best serve the majority of our members. (ie: topics may, at a moderators discretion, be relocated to a more appropriate discussion forum, or deleted entirely)

ChiefDelphi also reserves the right to prohibit or delete discussions that are thought to violate applicable law or that may be harmful to other members. Please remember, you are representing not only yourself, but your team and its sponsors, as well as what FIRST stands for. Please try to practice gracious professionalism at all times.

The owners of the ChiefDelphi Forums have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

If you have a problem with any of those rules, need clarification, or would like to make a suggestion, please PM one of the moderators of the forums (their names are located at the end of the page of each forum).

[Madison]

If someone is going to behave in a manner that is either unprofessional or disgracious, I do not believe that they deserve to have moderators cleaning up after them. Their behavior should speak for itself and, whether we'd like to admit it or not, is representative of that person. We all have moments when we make poor decisions, but it seems disingenuous and fake to try to erase those moments or otherwise pretend that they do not exist.

I don't think that having a moderator edit someone's post is going to teach them very much about their behavior. It will show them that they did something inappropriate, yes, but it will do absolutely nothing to make them understand why it is inappropriate or whom considers it inappropriate. Those lessons can only be learned by experiencing the repercussions of their actions, uncensored and unshielded.

[trev2023]

I don't know if anyone's seen this, but...this may perhaps bring an end to the arguments:

FIRST's Official Words

Q: If high school students on my team make parts for another team, does the team receiving the parts need to bill out our high school students at a typical labor rate as part of the $3,500 limit?

A: Gracious professionalism, "coopetition" and collaboration are some of the hallmarks of FIRST. We have all been amazed at the level that FIRST teams aid each other - not just at competitions, but throughout the year. By working together, we have increased our effectiveness inspiring youth and recognizing the value of science and technology. For the case when one team assists another team, this is viewed as "coopetition" - teams helping each other inspire youth. Of course, teams that work together must adhere to the FIRST Rules. In this case, several rules are directly / indirectly related to your question: <R09> Teams must fabricate and/or assemble all custom parts and assembled mechanisms on the robot by the 2004 team after the Kickoff; <R68> Additional Parts must be generally available from suppliers such that any other FIRST team, if desires, may also obtain them at the same price (a specific device fabricated by a team from non-2004 Kit materials does not have to be available to others, however, the materials it is made from must be available to other teams). <R73> The cost of all non-2004 Kit parts and materials used in the construction of a robot must be recorded (in US$) by the team, and a list of all such items and their costs made available during robot inspection. <R74> All costs are to be determined as explained in the cost determination section. 5.3.2.2 Cost Determination. To account for the value of cases when one team donates material to another team, if the donating team members or sponsors do the work without any associated labor costs, that labor is not considered as a cost to the team receiving the donated material. The cost of the raw materials must however be accounted for by the team receiving the material. If the donating team does pay for outside labor, the cost of outside labor must be accounted for by the team receiving the material (along with the cost of the raw materials). We are trying to create a community where working together helps us collectively achieve our goal of inspiring and recognizing science and technology.

and...

Q: Is collaboration between 2 teams acceptable and encouraged by FIRST?

A: Absolutely. Teams are encouraged to share their knowledge, experience, and innovations with each other on and off the play field, as well as before, during and after the competition season. Without inter-team collaborations, many of the central elements of the FIRST philosophy - such as distribution of technical innovations, team workshops, shared designs, software code-sharing, teams mentoring teams, team-run off-season events, etc. - would all be impossible. The whole concept of "coopetition" is based on the idea of teams helping each other to compete.

This was taken from the Q&A section 5.3.2.2 in case anyone wants to know

[Jeff Waegelin]

Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen

Why is it that whenever a thread starts to get interesting, it is shut down? I understand the balance between the right to free speech and an editor or moderator's responsibility to maintain an appropriate atmosphere, but it seems like there have to be better ways to handle it than to lock down a thread.

Threads get shut down because what some people call "interesting" other people call "out of control." There have been many threads I would consider genuinely interesting. There have also been many that I would consider genuinely out of control. Unfortunately, in many situations, people feel the need to post opinions flaming someone or something, and when that happens, things tend to get out of hand. Such matters tend to snowball until they get out of control, at which point, a lock is about the only way to cool things down. It's not perfect, and we hate doing it, but sometimes, it's just the only solution.