Go to Post I'd be upset if someone threw away my robotics shirts. Because then I'd have no shirts. - evulish [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

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-12-2006, 22:31
aaeamdar's Avatar
aaeamdar aaeamdar is offline
Post-A-Holic
AKA: Paul Dennis
FRC #1719 (The Umbrella Corp)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 231
aaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant future
Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Dear Chief Delphi Community,

Re-reading the rule book, I came across the following rule in the 2006 Manual, Section Five:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Section_Five_Rulebook
<R71> Unaltered software modules developed during prior competitions may not be directly re-used. Just as designs for hardware COMPONENTS may be reused from one year to the next, software algorithms and designs may be reused. However, the specific lines of code must be customized for each robot each year.
This rule seems to be saying that you can't copy-paste sections of old code into your new robot's brain. My first question is, is that the way everyone else sees it? What do you think this rule means?

My second question is this: what constitutes violation of the spirit of the rule versus the letter of the rule, and is such a violation acceptable to *you*? It seems to me that you could follow the letter of this rule while easily sidestepping the spirit. In general, is it acceptable to dodge around a rule you simply don't like?

Thanks for your input,
Paul Dennis
Team 1719
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-12-2006, 22:42
AdamHeard's Avatar
AdamHeard AdamHeard is offline
Lead Mentor
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Atascadero
Posts: 5,525
AdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to AdamHeard
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Well.

My team has used the same PID algorithm two years in a row. But, it was pretty much a standard one we got out of a book anyway. All the implementation and the gains were different, but that was still the same. I don't see this as violating the rules because the only way around it would be to intentionally changing the algorithm just so we can use it.

Also, code that we used from someone else may have been used twice. I think we may have unintentionally violated this rule with Kevin W's code, but I'm not sure if that counts.


Really, in most situations it wouldn't even be possible to simply copy and paste previous years' code.
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-12-2006, 22:47
Alexander McGee's Avatar
Alexander McGee Alexander McGee is offline
Hoonigan
AKA: Alexander S. McGee
no team (no team)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Auburn Hills, Michigan
Posts: 392
Alexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond reputeAlexander McGee has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Alexander McGee Send a message via Yahoo to Alexander McGee
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

I don't see how it should be seen as acceptable for anyone to "bend" the rules, even if you do "get away with it".

Following the rules goes hand in hand with GP, so the answer seems pretty simple to me.

New year = all new code.
__________________
-Alexander S. McGee
Intellectual Property Attorney, Mechanical Engineer, Gear-head

Last edited by Alexander McGee : 03-12-2006 at 22:49.
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-12-2006, 22:51
CircularLogic CircularLogic is offline
Registered User
FRC #1546 (Chaos Inc)
Team Role: Leadership
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Baldwin
Posts: 38
CircularLogic will become famous soon enoughCircularLogic will become famous soon enough
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

This rule is written with no possible way to enforce it, so technical legal obligation are meaningless in this argument.

It seems that the spirit of the rule is to encourage learning and development by writing fresh software every year instead of having one good programmer write code that you can pretty much use every year.


My answer to the last question of "is it acceptable to dodge a rule you simply dont like" is yes. I do believe that too many people are into the cult of FIRST rather than the actual issue of the things they are supposed to teach, i.e. technical expertise, programming expertise, or actual robotics. Following this type of rule to the letter represents being too caught up with the organization of FIRST and not necessarily what it teaches.

Rule violations will always happen, unitentional and intentional. Things break, changes in the pit almost always leave with some type of violations, and some teams have to knowingly use a diffent gauge wire when they only have 3 minutes to fix it, but that not the point. The point of this program is not to pay incredible attention and respect the infallibility of FIRST, but to learn from it. When people are too caught up in the cult of FIRST, I feel that we miss the important parts of the program as in the actual robotics part of it.




Anyway, that was kind of off topic, but it is the observations of a person who was always into the team and into the robotics, but never really a huge fan of the FIRST cult.

p.s. I always copy and paste lines of code. Its quite annoying to have to write entire drive algorithms over again when you have the same drive train.
__________________
Team 1546 Chaos Incorporated
2005- SBPLI Rookie All Stars
2006- SBPLI Sportsmanship award.

Gotta hand it to the straight line autonomous mode, the most effective defense out there.

Proud beyond belief of the accomplishments of the second year, 20th ranked, 6 wins and 6 losses Chaos Incorporated.
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-12-2006, 23:29
Mike's Avatar
Mike Mike is offline
has common ground with Matt Krass
AKA: Mike Sorrenti
FRC #0237 (Sie-H2O-Bots (See-Hoe-Bots) [T.R.I.B.E.])
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Watertown, CT
Posts: 1,003
Mike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander McGee
I don't see how it should be seen as acceptable for anyone to "bend" the rules, even if you do "get away with it".

Following the rules goes hand in hand with GP, so the answer seems pretty simple to me.

New year = all new code.
"Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are."
-Franklin D. Roosevelt

The rules aren't always right. Respect the intent, not the letter. Etc. etc.
__________________
http://www.mikesorrenti.com/
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-12-2006, 23:43
Donut Donut is offline
The Arizona Mentor
AKA: Andrew
FRC #2662 (RoboKrew)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Goodyear, AZ
Posts: 1,308
Donut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond reputeDonut has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

I see this as saying you can't copy paste entire control systems from a previous year, not a section (since copying a section and then adding new stuff to it would be classified as "altering" it in my opinion).

If you were to say using any previous year's code was against the rules, that would mean you really couldn't even use past years as reference, since you would invariably end up having at least 1 line in common with it. I think they just want you to figure out how the program works from the past and add your own style to it, rather than importing whole files for drivetrain, arm control, etc.
__________________
FRC Team 498 (Peoria, AZ), Student: 2004 - 2007
FRC Team 498 (Peoria, AZ), Mentor: 2008 - 2011
FRC Team 167 (Iowa City, IA), Mentor: 2012 - 2014
FRC Team 2662 (Tolleson, AZ), Mentor: 2014 - Present
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 00:09
Gdeaver Gdeaver is offline
Registered User
FRC #1640
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: West Chester, Pa.
Posts: 1,370
Gdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

I thought cut and paste programing was a standard practice. Just let the lawyers haggle over the Intellectual Property stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 01:41
Bharat Nain's Avatar
Bharat Nain Bharat Nain is offline
Registered User
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 2,000
Bharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond reputeBharat Nain has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Bharat Nain Send a message via MSN to Bharat Nain
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CircularLogic
This rule is written with no possible way to enforce it, so technical legal obligation are meaningless in this argument.

It seems that the spirit of the rule is to encourage learning and development by writing fresh software every year instead of having one good programmer write code that you can pretty much use every year.

p.s. I always copy and paste lines of code. Its quite annoying to have to write entire drive algorithms over again when you have the same drive train.
I can agree with that one. Software engineering isnt exactly the same thing as hardware engineering. I also think its kind of hard to use the exact same code for every years robot so the rule is self surviving. Although, if you're talking about simply mapping inputs to ports which is even done in the default code, copying and pasting isnt really a big deal.

I think the rule is geared towards more complex software. Maybe a personal software for camera? I don't know. The rule doesnt entirely make sense right now but maybe it will in the future.
__________________
-= Bharat Nain =-

Whatever you do, you need courage. Whatever course you decide upon, there is always someone to tell you that you are wrong. There are always difficulties arising that tempt you to believe your critics are right. To map out a course of action and follow it to an end requires some of the same courage that a soldier needs. Peace has its victories, but it takes brave men and women to win them. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Reply With Quote
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 01:50
Joel J's Avatar
Joel J Joel J is offline
do you..
no team
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,445
Joel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond reputeJoel J has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

I think the rule is terrible, and the reasoning given for its creation is nice to listen to, but reaches a flawed conclusion.



Tangent about rules: the worst thing (in my opinion) about rules that have to be followed is the effect they have when they steer you to the edge of a cliff, and then tell you that you have to jump off. Absolutely painful to endure. This software reuse rule isn't that bad, but with all the bad rules being enforced in my daily life, this tangent was a must-take for me.

If you have old useful code that you will have to rewrite from scratch, then please be careful! Its really easy to make a mistake..
__________________
Joel Johnson

Division By Zero (229) Alumni, 2003-2007
RAGE (173) Alumni, 1999-2003

Last edited by Joel J : 04-12-2006 at 02:03.
Reply With Quote
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 02:27
KarenH's Avatar
KarenH KarenH is offline
Mrs. ChrisH
FRC #0330 (Beach 'Bots)
Team Role: Parent
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Posts: 415
KarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond reputeKarenH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CircularLogic
My answer to the last question of "is it acceptable to dodge a rule you simply dont like" is yes. I do believe that too many people are into the cult of FIRST ...When people are too caught up in the cult of FIRST, I feel that we miss the important parts of the program as in the actual robotics part of it.
Your answer reminds me of what an acquaintance said when asked what was his definition of a cult: "A cult is any religious group I don't like."

I see a serious problem with your answer, however. When people "dodge" a rule they "simply don't like," the results are often damaging to society. Political scandals, felonies, skyrocketing teen pregnancy rates, automobile fatalities--these are often consequences of people breaking rules they "simply don't like." Calling the party that sets the rules a "cult" (or any other label) does not justify breaking the rules--particularly if you participate in that group voluntarily. The only ethical grounds for deliberately breaking a rule is when the rule violates a higher standard.

People with long experience in FIRST know that sometimes the rules could be more clearly written, and there is often room for interpretation. But breaking rules merely for personal convenience is more than a failure in exercising Gracious Professionalism--it is an attitude that can lead to anarchy, a society in chaos.
__________________
Karen Husmann
Ex Robo-widow
Reply With Quote
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 07:35
aaeamdar's Avatar
aaeamdar aaeamdar is offline
Post-A-Holic
AKA: Paul Dennis
FRC #1719 (The Umbrella Corp)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 231
aaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant future
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KarenH
I see a serious problem with your answer, however. When people "dodge" a rule they "simply don't like," the results are often damaging to society. Political scandals, felonies, skyrocketing teen pregnancy rates, automobile fatalities--these are often consequences of people breaking rules they "simply don't like."
Karen,

There's a difference between breaking a rule that you see as simply an inconvenience and breaking a rule that you know you shouldn't break. For example, we all know it's wrong to steal from people - massive violation of this rule would result in the anarchy you describe. But how would breaking this rule lead to anarchy?

Confused
Reply With Quote
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 08:10
Unsung FIRST Hero
Al Skierkiewicz Al Skierkiewicz is offline
Broadcast Eng/Chief Robot Inspector
AKA: Big Al WFFA 2005
FRC #0111 (WildStang)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Wheeling, IL
Posts: 10,798
Al Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CircularLogic
This rule is written with no possible way to enforce it, so technical legal obligation are meaningless in this argument.

My answer to the last question of "is it acceptable to dodge a rule you simply dont like" is yes.
Would you like to review your answer now that you see it in print? There is no way it is acceptable to violate a rule you don't like or that you don't believe. This one isn't even that hard to implement. Just retype... One thing all team members must understand is that the rule book is what draws us all together by making us follow the same path. When we accomplish great things by following the same rules as everyone else we show everyone that it is possible. If you don't like the rules then consider them a false set of real world constraints, like gravity. By avoiding the rules you are telling your students it is acceptable to violate any rule they don't like. There is no 'almost right' in this question, there is no 'it's alright if I don't like it' to this question. And there is no 'if no one knows then it's alright' to this question. A violation of the rules is a violation.
__________________
Good Luck All. Learn something new, everyday!
Al
WB9UVJ
www.wildstang.org
________________________
Storming the Tower since 1996.
Reply With Quote
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 09:33
Steve W Steve W is offline
Grow Up? Why?
no team
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Toronto,Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,523
Steve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond reputeSteve W has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CircularLogic
My answer to the last question of "is it acceptable to dodge a rule you simply dont like" is yes. I do believe that too many people are into the cult of FIRST rather than the actual issue of the things they are supposed to teach, i.e. technical expertise, programming expertise, or actual robotics. Following this type of rule to the letter represents being too caught up with the organization of FIRST and not necessarily what it teaches.

Rule violations will always happen, unitentional and intentional. Things break, changes in the pit almost always leave with some type of violations, and some teams have to knowingly use a diffent gauge wire when they only have 3 minutes to fix it, but that not the point. The point of this program is not to pay incredible attention and respect the infallibility of FIRST, but to learn from it. When people are too caught up in the cult of FIRST, I feel that we miss the important parts of the program as in the actual robotics part of it.

p.s. I always copy and paste lines of code. Its quite annoying to have to write entire drive algorithms over again when you have the same drive train.
FIRST is not just about robotics. I believe that it has a higher standard. Gracious Professionalism is just part of it. There have been many threads about following rules. I will state again here that a rule is a rule. It is meant to be followed. It is there for a reason. It can be changed if the powers that be deem that you have a valid point. It is wrong to intentionally break a rule. It is a violation even if it is not intentional. If you break rules then you must live with the consequences.

It is also your responsibility to pay attention to all of the details. If you don't in the real world then you won't last long. As for people being caught up in the "cult" of FIRST, that is not a bad thing. Being caught up on ones self and putting them self above all others is.

I am glad to see that you admit breaking the rules. This will make it easier for the inspectors to find those who intentionally break the rules.

Is it a good rule? Probably not but it is still a rule. It holds the same intent and validity as only 4 CIM motors.
__________________
We do not stop playing because we grow old;
we grow old because we stop playing.
Reply With Quote
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 10:30
Jack Jones Jack Jones is offline
Retired
no team
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 964
Jack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve W
I am glad to see that you admit breaking the rules. This will make it easier for the inspectors to find those who intentionally break the rules.
Note to 2007 inspectors: Be on the lookout for Poof Ball shooting robots!

Seriously, we need to follow the rules – even this one – in order to show respect and fair play toward the competition. If we succeeded in breaking a rule and later succeed in wining a match or three, then what have we won? None of us should want to cheat our way to hollow victory. It is way better, win or loose, to have played fair.

Acting up about this rule isn’t like the Founding Fathers tossing tea into Boston Harbor, or Rosa Parks sitting where she pleased. This is not about tyranny or oppression; it’s about honesty and fair play. Feel free to speak up against it, but respect us all enough to follow it.
Reply With Quote
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-12-2006, 13:17
aaeamdar's Avatar
aaeamdar aaeamdar is offline
Post-A-Holic
AKA: Paul Dennis
FRC #1719 (The Umbrella Corp)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 231
aaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant futureaaeamdar has a brilliant future
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz
This [rule] isn't even that hard to implement. Just retype...
Do you really think that simply re-typing the code would satisfy the rule? If so, that's fine. I respect your interpretation of the rule; I'm just looking for some clarification. How would re-typing the same thing be better than copy-paste?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz
One thing all team members must understand is that the rule book is what draws us all together by making us follow the same path.
If the rule book is really what draws us together, then FIRST is a sad organization indeed. Thankfully, I don't believe that our FIRST credo and over one-thousand teams can be summed up into one hundred pages of rules, from non-functional decoration to pneumatics. Is it possible you meant something different from this and I'm reading too much into what you said?

To all those who are saying that following this rule constitutes fair play (and there seem to be quite a few such people), imagine a rule saying that before every meeting, teams must do the chicken dance. Would you still make a "fair play" argument? I suppose that there's some time gained or lost in not doing/doing the chicken dance (as there is in re-using old code directly or re-typing it, as Al S suggests), but is this really what the rule is about?

What do you guys see as the purpose of this rule, and what would be the purpose of a violation? Many people seem to think the intent of a violation is to cheat to get a leg up on hard-working teams following the rule. Is this the case?

Still confused,
Paul Dennis
Team 1719
Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Robot Ethics? negfrequency General Forum 33 01-06-2006 18:55
Does anyone else NOT use a long arm to place a tetra on top of the Goal? mad_cloversc General Forum 29 08-03-2005 00:44
Accelerometer Use Doug G Programming 2 15-12-2004 09:06
can we use? Allie Kit & Additional Hardware 5 13-02-2002 15:54


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33.

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