Poll - Legalities

[Jaine Perotti]

Before I contribute one of my monster posts to this thread, I have a question for Steve.

Does your poll apply for ALL rules (including the laws of our country)? Or does it just apply to the rules within FIRST?

[Dan Petrovic]

Steve W, are you trying to make roboticsguy1988 feel guilty about smuggling in a pack of Mountain Dew into an arena?

Yeah, I understand what you are saying about how if you break a rule, you shouldn't be announcing it on Chief Delphi, where authorities around where you live can check to see if you have done anything wrong.

I think there is a bit of biased judgement here. Not too long ago this thread was up and everyone could see it. Tytus is clearly breaking a rule that's far more dangerous than kids smuggling Mt. Dew into a convention center, and then posting it on Chief Delphi. Sure, he wasn't intending to post a picture of him doing 85 MPH, but it's still there.

Tytus is a mentor
roboticsguy1988 is, or recently was, a student. (If I am not mistaken. I'm judging his age based on the "1988" on the end of his username)

[Steve W]

I believe that is up to the individual to decide. I have been charged with placing a biased poll and that is not my intent. I would just like a cross section of views (and stands) on peoples thoughts. The questionnaire does not post names so that people can be honest without others condemning them. Interpret and vote as you feel led.

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by InfernoX14

Steve W, are you trying to make roboticsguy1988 feel guilty about smuggling in a pack of Mountain Dew into an arena?

Yeah, I understand what you are saying about how if you break a rule, you shouldn't be announcing it on Chief Delphi, where authorities around where you live can check to see if you have done anything wrong.

I think there is a bit of biased judgement here. Not too long ago this thread was up and everyone could see it. Tytus is clearly breaking a rule that's far more dangerous than kids smuggling Mt. Dew into a convention center, and then posting it on Chief Delphi. Sure, he wasn't intending to post a picture of him doing 85 MPH, but it's still there.

Tytus is a mentor
roboticsguy1988 is, or recently was, a student. (If I am not mistaken. I'm judging his age based on the "1988" on the end of his username)

As for Tytus and his post, a great many people already had mentioned the fact of his breaking the law and showing it. I did not post as I had nothing more to add.

As for Roboticsguy1988, we have had a few PM's going back and forth and I believe that we are cool. If he wishes to share that is OK with me. I did not post to make him feel bad about "smuggling in a pack of Mountain Dew into an arena" but rather to bring up the fact that we should not be breaking rules.

I will expand a bit on our discussions. It seems that there was no rule about no soda. By the thread title it was perceived that the soda was "smuggled" in which only would be done if not legal. The fact was that the title was to attract attention to the picture not to flaunt a wrong. Both he and I have learned from this exchange and I know that I have benefited from it.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by InfernoX14

Steve W, are you trying to make roboticsguy1988 feel guilty about smuggling in a pack of Mountain Dew into an arena?

Yeah, I understand what you are saying about how if you break a rule, you shouldn't be announcing it on Chief Delphi, where authorities around where you live can check to see if you have done anything wrong.

I think there is a bit of biased judgement here. Not too long ago this thread was up and everyone could see it. Tytus is clearly breaking a rule that's far more dangerous than kids smuggling Mt. Dew into a convention center, and then posting it on Chief Delphi. Sure, he wasn't intending to post a picture of him doing 85 MPH, but it's still there.

Tytus is a mentor
roboticsguy1988 is, or recently was, a student. (If I am not mistaken. I'm judging his age based on the "1988" on the end of his username)

Tytus was a student when he posted it.
It's no excuse and Tytus has even apologized for careless mistakes he has made that had caused him grievous injury (the awful potato gun incident).
I have learned with kids is that they are prone to bad decisions (thus the need for rules) and as mentors we have to steer them in the right direction so they don't have disaster befall upon them or post their mistakes on CD.

[Dan Petrovic]

Originally Posted by Steve W

As for Tytus and his post, a great many people already had mentioned the fact of his breaking the law and showing it. I did not post as I had nothing more to add.

As for Roboticsguy1988, we have had a few PM's going back and forth and I believe that we are cool. If he wishes to share that is OK with me. I did not post to make him feel bad about "smuggling in a pack of Mountain Dew into an arena" but rather to bring up the fact that we should not be breaking rules.

I will expand a bit on our discussions. It seems that there was no rule about no soda. By the thread title it was perceived that the soda was "smuggled" in which only would be done if not legal. The fact was that the title was to attract attention to the picture not to flaunt a wrong. Both he and I have learned from this exchange and I know that I have benefited from it.

Alright, I understand your views.

It seemed to me that you were trying to "make him feel guilty" by creating a poll about legal matters and such. I had a similar situation involving FIRST, but it's not like we were breaking any rules or anything, still I avoided posting it on Chief Delphi due to matters similar to this one. People assuming I broke the law, and thus leading to some huge discussion about stuff that doesn't matter.

I'm just going to stop talking because I've already added more to an discussion I don't think is necessary.

[Kims Robot]

I dont really think I can honestly answer this poll either. While I do try my best in most cases to follow rules & laws, I cant say I always do. Usually it isnt out of blatant disregard for rules, but out of common sense & moral judgement like most have mentioned in this post. We broke a venue rule this year because we didnt want to have to pay $15 per kid for enough water to keep the drive team from dehydrating and passing out. We broke the venue rule of bringing food in because our pit crew had to work until 8pm and they closed the food stand at 4pm. We knew the rules and broke them. I knew the rules and allowed my team to break them, so I dont feel that I can pass judgement that all other FIRSTers should NOT break rules. Personally, I dont think it has to do with getting caught. For me, its safety. I know that my drive team cant afford to pay for the $3/bottle venue water for the whole day, I know that my pit crew is too dedicated to leave the venue to go eat when we really need to get something done. They are self sacrificing and I refuse to let them obtain physical harm because of it, nor am I going to let the whole team down to force "mothering" onto them.

Funny thing is, I would never let my team break a FIRST competition rule. I am able to see the point behind all of the rules, and none of the FIRST rules will cause physical harm to my team. I dont let them work outside the windows, I wont encourage them to ram another team if a judge isnt looking, I wont let them add weight after they have passed inspection (without reweighing). But FIRST is a game, it isnt real life, a rule in the FIRST game isnt going to make one of my team members pass out.

As for rules/laws in general I end up with the same aspect as venue rules. Do I go 5 miles over the speed limit? Yeah, I feel safe driving at that speed. Do I go 50 miles over? No... its definitely NOT safe to do that. Do I use a handsfree device? 95% of the time yes, have I not been able to find it and picked up my phone? Yes if Im in a place where it wont cause me to get in an accident. Did I do things in HS & College that werent legal? Yes, but I did it with safety in mind. Does that make it right? No. But can I preach that others should still uphold in that case? I dont feel I should. I dont like the "do as I say not as I do" statement. Would I tell a kid never to get in a car with someone who has been drinking? Heck yes... that isnt a law, but its common sense & safety. Do I have a Stop DWI magnet on my car? Yes, because I feel it is unsafe. Again, I dont say that its right for me to break any laws or rules, but Im going to live my life by judgement and common sense.

Originally Posted by Jane

There is also a system in place to question the rules, asking for further explanation or consideration. Regarding FIRST, I believe in following the rules and in mentoring students in FIRST to not only follow the rules but to respect the rules and the people of FIRST who have carefully thought about, developed, and implemented them.

I realize the team forums are a place we can question rules, but it seems that there are some rules that they wont answer about. For example, how is it safer to have a team lug 100lb toolboxes down steep stairs into a venue instead of letting them go into the loading dock? How can a venue ban food, but then close their foodcourts 4 hours before the close of the venue? How can a venue not allow teams to bring in water bottles so they can charge $3 per pop? We actually did ask FIRST officials to give us permission to bring food in when our pit crew was starving, but it took them over 40 minutes to give us approval (I had already sent parents out to get food by then). I think honestly the answers are that FIRST has gotten too big and too corporate to have control over these things. Insurance and venue restrictions kick in. When they could hold it in a HS gym, no one cared where teams loaded in as long as they were safe about it, no one cared if they brought in water bottles or food, as long as they picked up after themselves.

I guess in close, I wish I could say that FIRSTers should always uphold rules, but I feel more that they should always act morally. If we raise them right, they will have a conscience, and if they go by that, they will do what is right. I want my kids to think for themselves, and if that causes them to break a rule every once in a while, then I know they are human, and I will forgive them for it.

[Alekat]

If anyone's beliefs truly violate "the rules" then they will break those rules without question. For example, a person who goes back in time to kill Hitler would likely be sent to prison, maybe for life, but his or her beliefs were obviously strong enough for them to handle the consequences. As far as getting away with breaking the rules goes, nobody escapes justice. Perhaps if you're "feeling picked on" this can be related to a violation of one's moral grounds.

[Cyberguy34000]

Rules/laws are contracts between those in authority and those under control. They are created to make life more predictable. Nothing more, nothing less.

Explination:
Following them is a choice, if you "break the rules" on something, just know that you had better be careful because if something goes wrong you are fully responsible for the consiquences if something goes wrong. Breaking rules not wrong, but very foolish in many cases. When you work "outside the rules" you are pretty much putting yourself into the hands of whatever authority figure happens to be in charge, and whatever they are feeling at the moment.

Before they came up with the ideas of laws, rulers did whatever they wanted, and people did whatever they wanted. If the people crossed the rulers or his wishes, they were subject to whatever he felt like doing. This generally worked out ok, except for the cases in which people were put to death because they annoyed the rulers.

When you break rules, you are reverting to a more primitave system of control. In some situations this is fine, many don't care, in others this can be very dangerous. The degree in which you break the rules will also entail the degree of the freedom those dealing with you have in assigning the consiquences. When you are working outside the rules, punishment can also be outside the rules.

Some rules are meant to be broken, just today you've probibly violated a few dozen obscure laws and regulations written down somewhere. (Like Hachiban VIII was saying about a law about annoying lizzards in a park). And all that means is that you are leaving more of your personal freedom in the hands and feelings of those that created those laws. In most cases, they just don't care. But if there is some city cop who is hell-bent on avenging those annoyed lizzards, be careful because he's got the full weight of the law behind him.

Morality:
As for the moral comparisons with breaking rules against murder and such. Those go along a similar thread, but you've got to establish a lot of things with morality and such before you can discuss that. Morality is inexplicably tied in with religion and discussions of God, and is difficult to discuss without going there. It is a very important part of this arguement. But is a very very long post, which I'm not sure I'd like to delve into.

Your guy's choice whether or not to take the thread in that direction.

Conclusion:
Rules/laws are merely contracts between those under control and those in authority. Breaking those rules/laws, places you into a more primative system of emotions and whims of those in control. Which can be ok, but can also be very foolish.


Following the rules is a choice, not a moral obligation.




BTW: Within the context of FIRST, games are only fun so long as everyone follows the rules, so I fully advocate for the full enforcement of clearly written rules to the tiniest detail. Within the context of venue rules and choices, (no internet???!!!), I don't have nearly the same respect for arbitrary regulations.

[Martinez]

I absolutely absolutely absolutely HATE that statement and how it can be used by people for unethical activites. Rules exist for a reason. They are created with a purpose. You may or may not agree to that purpose. This gives people two choices: Knowingly abide by the rule or willfully break it. If you break it, then fess up and take responsiblity for your consequences.

One could make this into a philosophical arguement along the lines of if a tree fell in the forest, does it make a sound. Regardless of if you believe in a higher power such as god or retrubution for your actions, the simple fact is that YOU know it happened: the tree has fallen. Such a statement is about avoiding consequences and your right, people are going to not get caught. You are still guilty of the deed. To me the deed, the action, the intent, the modivation are all far more important than the consequence for they measure the type of person you are.

Show some back bone, display maturity and own up to your actions. All ways always remember that those actions will have the direct influence on others, even if they never become aware of it. Do I bend, break, or not stand for the rules every moment of life? Of course not. Yet that does not matter, nor is it hypocritical, because it is the idea (and living true to that ideal) that matters. For me personally, it is also a issue of personal honor which is something that seems soarly lacking in this modern age.

A friend of mine argued with me what is the point in being honorable conciously knowing that the other person will not be so: that is puts you at the disadvanage and for it you will lose. Well I'm sorrying, if winning is that important to you then that is your problem. Losing with dignity is not losing, at least in my mind. There are more important things than winning such as being a better person for that is winning at life. And yes, I feel this applies at all levels be it the small day to day rules or life and death situations.

There was an example I glossed over about Slavery and the Civil Rights Movement. There are and were morally unethical rules on the books. Those people choose to break the rules !and accept the conquences for them! in order to promote social and political change. The point was to break the rules and get caught so that people would have to deal with issues at hand. Dr. Kings freely accepted resposiblity for his actions which latter resulted in one of his greatest papers coming from jail. The movement was not about shirking responsiblity, it was about awareness in a peaceful fashion.

So after such a long rant, I'm sure the question that needs to be answered is do I speed? Yes, abslutely on a near day to day basis. However, I drive with control and feel as though no ones life is in danger. I am willfully breaking the law to make my life easier. Its a very selfish thing to do. Nor have I been caught. The important difference that I am trying to make clear is that when I am caught, I am not going to haggle with the police officer. I'll take my ticket, pay my fine, and do it with a semismile for these are the results that ultimately I have chosen for myself.

[KenWittlief]

I gotta play devils advocate on this one.

If you break the rules, and nobody can tell / you dont get caught, then what difference does it make?

We are talking about rules that were created by humans - I am also a human with an equal capacity for discernment and intelligence. The people who wrote/created the rule used their best judgement at the time. When I am in a situation where following the rule is a problem, I may have specific information, or be in situation they did not consider.

To put it another way, Jesus said "The Sabboth was made for man, man was not made for the Sabboth". Rules exist for our benefit, in general situations. When a situation arises where that same rule is going to do more harm than good, then we are intelligent beings, we should do the right thing based on our knowledge and assessment of the situation

not based on what someone wrote on a piece of paper at some point the past.

[Richard Wallace]

Those who'd rather read than post may enjoy the classic, ancient take on the timeless question, "what is justice?"

[Steve W]

Many have posted that it OK as long as you feel it is and are willing to pay the penalty. Some said that they would never break a FIRST rule. What makes the difference between a FIRST rule and any other? If it is because it's a game then doesn't that make it less important than real life? If you become good at breaking some rules, won't it be easier to break others? Does the fact that you are knowingly willing to break rules have a negative impact on those that we are trying to change?

If you know me then you know that I have a few slight flaws (please no comments). You will also know that I fight hard to get rules changed if I do not believe in them. I do however at some point concede to the "Law Makers" and play under those rules. I have enjoyed the input so far. I may not agree but that is OK too. That is one of the great things about FIRSTers and CDers. We can discuss, debate and still remain friends.

[Eugenia Gabrielov]

Originally Posted by Steve W

...Many have posted that it OK as long as you feel it is and are willing to pay the penalty. Some said that they would never break a FIRST rule. What makes the difference between a FIRST rule and any other?...

Yes, the outside world affects what happens in this organization, but the game is much simpler than real life. The manual for our game is long, but the manual for the game of life is infinitely longer, and infinitely diverse between people and cultures. Though FIRST and the real world are comparable, they are not identical.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Steve W

Many have posted that it OK as long as you feel it is and are willing to pay the penalty. Some said that they would never break a FIRST rule. What makes the difference between a FIRST rule and any other? If it is because it's a game then doesn't that make it less important than real life?

A game's rules are artificial. To a large extent, the game only works if the rules are followed. Because nobody can think of all possible ways someone might cheat, not all rule-breaking has defined consequences. If one breaks a rule in some games, the game itself fails, and everyone loses.

Real life has natural rules which automatically enforce natural consequences. Legislated rules have legal consequences. That makes a big difference.