Appropriate penalties for off-the-field ethical/behavioral violations

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Mike Ciance

you also must consider the group of people that are on the road vs the group of people involved in FIRST, and the difference in situation and objective.

on the road, people speeding is life-threatening, and any accident, even minor, has a bad impact on the experience of everybody else on the road because it slows traffic, crippling the objective of driving, which is to get places faster. in FIRST, a team getting a slight advantage is not life-threatening. it may have an impact on how the placement of teams in the outcome, but that is not the true objective of FIRST. FIRST is about learning. i have yet to see a situation where one team cheating has significantly hindered the learning of another. as long as some form of disaproval is shown from FIRST, and some action is taken to counter the advantage, such as point deduction or a late start during subsequent rounds, the main objective of FIRST is still being very much achieved. in fact, everybody will learn a little from one team's mistake. in the end, everybody can still compete, the team who commited the foul goes home with some shame little animosity towards FIRST, and most importantly everybody has had the valuable learning experience. we need to get rid of all the hostility and concentrate on what why joined FIRST to begin with.

I don't disagree with your statement but you have yet to show me where you get your "facts".

[Aignam]

Originally Posted by Arefin Bari

We all have been saying what the penalties might be for the cheaters and also what is our opinion in general. now lets state the problem...

"What do you feel is appropriate and how should this be enforced? Who who do the enforcing and should there be any limits to the penalties." - Steve W.

few respective members said that we should penalize teams, and few other respective members said that we should just let it go, because we dont want to lose teams. most of us said that FIRST should be enforcing these and few said that there should be limits (they posted the limits that we should have). (PLEASE correct me if i am wrong).

Here is a question for all of you (it was mentioned before, but i didnt see any response)..

"How would you know if a team is cheating? and if you do know, how would you prove it?"

as I mentioned earlier in my other post, that is when "Honesty" comes into play.

-Arefin

More rigorous inspections---

You'd be surprised at how dramatically the results of each year's games might've changed had there been a device to test a robot's current, and I don't think it would be incredibly difficult to enforce bringing illegal parts into the pit area, as has been previously mentioned. If someone were to monitor what goes in and out of the pit, surely the game would be made significantly fairer. Of course, if this were to be enforced, we should institute some more lenient rules relating to such, as it would be a shame to have a team which was incapable of competing due to such a strict rule.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

I am encouraged that the majority of the responses thus far tend to be lenient. No one is calling for the public block and whipping. I agree with the majority that FIRST and GP requires a different remedy than general cheaters are subject to in similar life situations. I have witnessed team dynamics and find that when a team discusses a rule violation, the final decision is usually one person or a very small group pressing the rest to follow along. Those teams that get GP use it regularly as a valid argument in these types of discussions. Each year, as I meet more people from more teams, I am encouraged to find teams that I would trust to do right. Occasionally, a newcomer will briefly express a desire to skirt the rules and will receive heavy opposition from the rest of the team.
As to retribution, I lean towards the offenders being given a chance to right the wrong. Some of you have suggested a period of time when the team may not enter the pit area, removal of the offending system etc. I like these alternatives as it allows the team to make a correction, it allows other teams to make their own decisions under their interpretation of GP and it doesn't beat the team members so badly that they want to leave the program.
I believe we need to reward the hard GP decisions as much as the teams that easily follow rules and succeed in competition. Should a team still refuse to take one of these GP alternatives, then it is their own decision. I am an optimist, but I don't think there is a team, now or in the future, in this organization that would choose the wrong path.

[Mike Ciance]

Originally Posted by Aignam

Lest we forget that some joined FIRST to experience something unlike anything else---a competition without that brutal contact sport-esque competetiveness. Cheating undermines the entire concept of FIRST. How can you defend cheaters---the antithesis of this organization? There's nothing inspirational about cheating, there's nothing gracious about cheating...Sure, extremely harsh penalties may seem out of place in FIRST...but we're all about preparation for the real world, aren't we? And in the real world, real cheating has bigger, harsher consequences. I think getting disqualified would be a better lesson than learning that you can get away with anything if you play your cards right. We're fostering science and technology, not white-collar crimes.

well as i said in an earlier post, teams who often break rules should recieve stricter penalties. mild punishments dont encourage cheating, but hars punishments discourage participation and learning. if a team learns it's lesson from a mild punishment, i see no reason why any more action should be taken. i am sure that for most teams the sheer loss of pride that a discovered rulebreaking would cause would be enough in itself to encourage reform. like a few have said, there are some situations in which a minor rule-breaking can make the difference between a team having a normal season and a team not having a season at all. surely no more than a chastizement should be given for situations such as these. like i said, we need to consider how much of a problem the cheating actually causes.

[Arefin Bari]

Originally Posted by Aignam

More rigorous inspections---

You'd be surprised at how dramatically the results of each year's games might've changed had there been a device to test a robot's current, and I don't think it would be incredibly difficult to enforce bringing illegal parts into the pit area, as has been previously mentioned. If someone were to monitor what goes in and out of the pit, surely the game would be made significantly fairer. Of course, if this were to be enforced, we should institute some more lenient rules relating to such, as it would be a shame to have a team which was incapable of competing due to such a strict rule.

mind pointing out how you are going to keep track of 1000 teams who are involved in FIRST? like someone in this thread said before that, We are family and we have to work together.

[Aignam]

Originally Posted by Arefin Bari

mind pointing out how you are going to keep track of 1000 teams who are involved in FIRST? like someone in this thread said before that, We are family and we have to work together.

Every team goes through an inspection...make it a tad bit lengthier, a tad bit more rigorous, and a tad bit more inclusive. Cheaters are still FIRST students, so you can be sure that when/if they cheat, it's going to be creative and well-concealed. Make it harder to cheat and kill the problem at the source. I don't really see the problem...

[Arefin Bari]

Originally Posted by Aignam

Every team goes through an inspection...make it a tad bit lengthier, a tad bit more rigorous, and a tad bit more inclusive. Cheaters are still FIRST students, so you can be sure that when/if they cheat, it's going to be creative and well-concealed. Make it harder to cheat and kill the problem at the source. I don't really see the problem...

So are you saying that you can just look at a part of the robot and say when it was manufactured? during inspection, whatever a team takes to the table and lets the inspector inspect the it and if they pass the inspection, you cant do anything about it. like i said before, that is when Honesty comes in play. there is NOTHING in this world which is perfect.

[Aignam]

Originally Posted by Arefin Bari

So are you saying that you can just look at a part of the robot and say when it was manufactured? during inspection, whatever a team takes to the table and lets the inspector inspect the it and if they pass the inspection, you cant do anything about it. like i said before, that is when Honesty comes in play. there is NOTHING in this world which is perfect.

That's not the only way to break the rules. Just because one rule is unenforceable does not mean that we should stop trying to perfect the system. If that were the case, we wouldn't need referees, because the teams could decide the calls on their own, and who needs judges---whomever really deserves the award would step forwards and the other teams wouldn't even attempt to receive it...

You can't settle for trust and honesty because there will always be untrustworthy and dishonest people, and we can't let them ruin FIRST.

[Swampdude]

I just gave a suggestion on how to control this matter here

Also my wife suggested we just require everyone to put all spares in your shipping container. Then the only thing allowed into pits is raw materials and standard products. No assemblies. But shipping would be a little more.

Anyhow, I don't see the need for this whole discussion unless your dealing with a flagrant in your face violator. Which I just can't fathom. I think it makes a lot more sense to put a system in place to check the wrongs before they happen. It's in place in every other aspect except this spare parts rule. So I think it's actually a simple answer. Provide the check and balance. And as far as the scale of the effort, I think it could be manageable if made a spot check system. Like Aerfin said, you can't prove anything unless you've got a system in place. It's not good to have a tattle tail system instead.

[MissInformation]

A lot of these posts are focusing on rules that level the playing field, such as the amount of money spent on a robot, but don't forget the rules that address safety concerns, such as modifying certain parts. If FIRST says do not modify the thing-a-ma-bob and a team says but if I cut this away and play with this, the thing-a-ma-bob will be so much more powerful and faster so let's ignore that rule and they they do so, then they have just endangered not only themselves but others. The people who inspect the robots for safety do a great job but as humans they are fallible.

A team cheating may or may not hinder another team's learning, but I think FIRST would be less inspiring if cheating was treated as lightly as just deducting a few points. Heck, if the advantage was great enough, losing a few points or starting late wouldn't matter at all to the team that cheated. And a team cheating can have more consequences than placement. A team cheating could win awards it doesn't deserve along with scholarships that a team that didn't cheat could have won.

This past fall we had a little mini-bot competition (pieces of plywood with wheels, powered by drills). One of the objects in this game was to remove a soda can from a cinder block. Now, seeing as how the cinder block could damage things if it was knocked over, a rule was made stating that teams would lose points if they knocked the block over. One of the teams, mistakenly thinking I'm such a cool adult that I would find it funny, told me that they were planning on knocking the cinder block over anyhow, just to show how strong they could make their mini-bot. Personally, I think it would have been funny to see, but I really wanted the kids to get the idea that during the game, they couldn't bend or break the rules that way, so I conferred with some of the adults and we made a new rule up that stated that any team that intentionally knocked over the cinder block would have to clean up the meeting room by themselves for the rest of the pre-season meetings. Needless to say, the cinder block remained upright. If the penalty had been too harsh, such as scrubbing the entire shop down with toothbrushes, I have no doubt that block would have tumbled. So there's a good example of finding a penalty that was not too lenient and not too severe. If only FIRST's problems were this easy to solve...

I think everyone is doing a great job in this thread in pointing out the different sides. I think I've changed my mind quite a few times today because of the points made. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I've been amazed by the people who can't believe anyone in FIRST would cheat. I may not be an expert in human nature, but I have enough experience with different groups (girl scouts, little league, ice-skating, Relay for Life, etc.) to know that competition can bring out the worse in some people.

Heidi

[Arefin Bari]

Originally Posted by Swampdude

I just gave a suggestion on how to control this matter here

Also my wife suggested we just require everyone to put all spares in your shipping container. Then the only thing allowed into pits is raw materials and standard products. No assemblies. But shipping would be a little more.

Anyhow, I don't see the need for this whole discussion unless your dealing with a flagrant in your face violator. Which I just can't fathom. I think it makes a lot more sense to put a system in place to check the wrongs before they happen. It's in place in every other aspect except this spare parts rule. So I think it's actually a simple answer. Provide the check and balance. And as far as the scale of the effort, I think it could be manageable if made a spot check system. Like Aerfin said, you can't prove anything unless you've got a system in place. It's not good to have a tattle tail system instead.

Thank you Dan for finally saying what i have been waiting to see throughout this whole thread. the best way to solve the problem is to ship everything that you got on the ship date amd you can take raw materials with you at the competition and go from there...

[Phil 33]

Make it harder to cheat and kill the problem at the source. I don't really see the problem...

If you make it harder to cheat, people will still cheat. They'll just have to go about it in a more clever way.

For instance:
1. Instead of sneaking parts out of the pit during a competition to work on them - a team will fabricate parts before the season even begins. Try to stop them.

2. If you inspect everything that comes into the pits - then teams will simply sneak the parts into the pits. There are always multiple ways to get into the pits. Plus FIRST just doen't have the resources to inspect everything. If a team brings in two carts loaded with bins and toolboxes to a competition, it would be very easy to bury something in the bottom of one of those bins.

In order to kill the problem at the source, you have to stop it from happening in the first place. How to go about this is anyone's guess. If you simply set up a system to catch cheaters, you're not stopping cheating. Sure you'll catch a few cheaters, but it's not going to end. If cheating is happening at all, there will be people getting away with it, becasue you can't design a perfect system to catch cheaters.

Stoping cheating from happening in the first place is the only way to stop cheating. Like Arefin said, I guess this is where honesty comes into play. But how do you keep people honest? I suppose you could set up a system to catch cheaters that would theoretically deter people from cheating. Wait, didn't I just say that such a system wouldn't stop cheaters? Looks like we're in a catch-22 situation....

[Ben Lauer]

I think we are straying from the purpose of the thread.

We were asked to discuss different penalties for teams caught breaking the off field rules. Assuming that we can catch these violations, What should the consequences be? Consider what others have said about probation, restricting envolvement in finals, etc. Do you agree with this? Disagree? and what would you like to suggest.

[nparikh]

Wow, it seems that this thread is spreading into so many different directions that I don't really know which issue to respond to. I just wanted to note on something brought up earlier; the punishments. I don't think that we can have concrete punishments for something like cheating. I agree with Mike in that the circumstances and the extent to which the cheating occurs matters. If we always give out the same punishment to all cheaters is that really fair? Like what was said before; is a rookie team putting ties on worn down tires as bad as a team who purposely and knowingly does something like bringing in a new robot for competition? Not to say that a team is bad, but the extent of what has happened is completely different. My suggestion to FIRST is why not form some kind of "official" board that handles it all on a case by case basis; and after reviewing the facts, makes a decision. That way, appropriate punishment, in my belief, is delivered.

[Aignam]

Originally Posted by nparikh

Like what was said before; is a rookie team putting ties on worn down tires as bad as a team who purposely and knowingly does something like bringing in a new robot for competition?

There should definitely be a graduated system of penalties---but the fact that a team is a rookie team should not exempt them from any rules. We're all responsible for knowing and following the rules in order to compete.