Go to Post Time flies when you're freaking out. - Koko Ed [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
View Poll Results: What do you think?
Teams should only be allowed to attend 1 regional. 13 6.40%
Teams should be allowed to attend as many regionals as they want. (status quo) 114 56.16%
We should strive to have every team attend at least 2 regionals. 76 37.44%
Voters: 203. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-04-2005, 00:40
dlavery's Avatar
dlavery dlavery is offline
Curmudgeon
FRC #0116 (Epsilon Delta)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Herndon, VA
Posts: 3,176
dlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Should teams be allowed to attend multiple regionals?

How is it that, of the four people I know that want to limit the number of regionals that a team can attend, three of them are from Texas?

First off, I have an issue with the basic premise. The question "Do you believe that this money could be better spent in the interests of achieving the goals of FIRST if the money was not spent on attending an additional regional event, but on engineering outreach instead?" is problematic. The construction of this sentence requires that you subscribe to the precept that funds expended on ANY engineering outreach activities will be more effective at achieving the goals of FIRST than attending a regional event before you can answer in the affirmative. This is an absurd assumption, and I must hope that was not what was intended.

But therein lies another problem. Ever so many people have spent so very much time over the past weeks pointing out that when trying to understand written communications (e.g. game rules, Q&A answers, etc.) it is nearly impossible to determine the authors intent unless it is made exactingly clear with nearly endless narrative. We have been forced to the conclusion that using personal intuition, logical understanding, and just plain common sense is inappropriate when discussing anything to do with FIRST. Thus, I must put my hopes aside, and be forced into a strict interpretation of the exact words that have been provided. So we will stick with the absurd assumption and see what happens.

Simply put, there are LOTS of ways to spend team funds on activities that could be called "engineering outreach." A minimal standard of quality for any such activity has not been defined for us with this problem, so we have to run through a few examples to determine how they might affect the logic of the problem. Engineering outreach could include everything from creating a new mini-engineering expo open to the public, to printing "Enjiners R Kewl" on 186,292 buttons and handing them out at the shopping mall. Some of these activities will be worthwhile, and others clearly will not. Providing an exciting, detailed, professional quality introduction to engineering achievements and the FIRST program would likely be a worthwhile activity. Stabbing random people with the pointy ends of poorly fabricated buttons imprinted with misspelled propaganda probably would not be as successful at inspiring them. Given these two examples, we make the assertion that there exists a set of activities which satisfy the criteria to be called engineering outreach, but are ineffective at achieving the goals of FIRST.

Once it has been established that such a set of activities exist, then the initial problem statement quickly collapses. If the money is spent on an activity from this set, then it will logically be an ineffective use of the funds. We further assert that use of the team funds to attend a regional competition is an effective mechanism for achieving the goals of FIRST (if this were not the case, then why would so many teams sign up to attend a second event?). Given the surrounding context of the problem statement, we can equate spending funds in the interests of achieving the goals of FIRST as simply "money well spent." By substituting these qualitative valuations into the original problem statement, the problem is simplified into the question "do you believe money could be better spent doing something that is known to be effective, or something that only has a chance of being effective?" Unles you are a former top executive at Enron, the implicit answer to this question must always be "invest in the known effective solution."

Of course, all of this is academic because none of us ARE former top executives from Enron, and we are all able to do whatever we dang well please with our team funds. And that is just the way it should be.

-dave

p.s. and if you think that ANY of this discussion is really about the question that was asked, then you have missed the point.
__________________
"I know what you're thinking, punk," hissed Wordy Harry to his new editor, "you're thinking, 'Did he use six superfluous adjectives or only five?' - and to tell the truth, I forgot myself in all this excitement; but being as this is English, the most powerful language in the world, whose subtle nuances will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' - well do you, punk?"
- Stuart Vasepuru, 2006 Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest



My OTHER CAR is still on Mars!!!
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Entry Fee Increase---hurting teams Tonya Scott 476 General Forum 50 21-10-2004 08:30
Challenge to West Coast Teams for 05 Regionals D.J. Fluck Regional Competitions 29 16-08-2004 17:30
Robot Collaboration Karthik General Forum 153 18-02-2004 03:40
About the regionals....(please read) archiver 2000 1 23-06-2002 23:59
Second test launch of newsletter! Ken Leung CD Forum Support 3 19-10-2001 04:29


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:59.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi