Bumpers On Sale for $50 only! FROM TEAM 2070

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Molten

Anyone buying them could make whoever makes them honorary members. As far as I know, there is nothing against a person being on 50 different teams. Outrageous as it may be, this may be a viable solution to this overly confused drama. Also, perhaps they sold them over eBay?

Before I get a load of complaints, the above is my weird way of pointing out a loophole as a joke. I advice against anyone actually using this. Besides, the bumpers are not to hard to make. Just remember, it is easier to follow a rule then it is to find a way around it.

Actually, there is a rule against a person being on 50 different teams. Or to be more precise, there is a rule that says a student may only be on one team. That "loophole" was closed by FIRST back in the fall.

-dave


.

[jgannon]

I'm thinking that this would be allowed under whatever justifications legalize collaboration... that is a clear-cut case where one team is allowed to use fabricated parts that were fabricated by another. I don't know why the exchange of money would make it any different. In any case, I'm curious to see how this plays out. We bought the on-board autonomous mode switch manufactured by team 1629 last year, and as far as I can tell, the vendor rules have not changed since then... I'm hoping that wasn't a violation of the rules.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by jgannon

I'm thinking that this would be allowed under whatever justifications legalize collaboration... that is a clear-cut case where one team is allowed to use fabricated parts that were fabricated by another. I don't know why the exchange of money would make it any different. In any case, I'm curious to see how this plays out. We bought the on-board autonomous mode switch manufactured by team 1629 last year, and as far as I can tell, the vendor rules have not changed since then... I'm hoping that wasn't a violation of the rules.

In my mind, the exchange of funds makes all the difference in the world. As soon as you start paying for the service, there is no longer any possibility of claiming it is just a collaborative relationship between the two organizations. It is now a business relationship, based on an exchange of funds for services rendered. There is now an implicit contract between the two organizations, and expectations of performance on both sides. In the real world a partner organization and a vendor are treated differently, and the expectations are different. Within the FIRST realm, the same should hold true.

-dave



.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by dlavery

In my mind, the exchange of funds makes all the difference in the world.

I wasn't saying that there is no difference in a philosophical sense... I was speaking with respect to the 2008 FRC rules. The current rules make no provisions for the legality of a fabricated part to be determined by whether or not you paid for it (so long as the fair market value is less than $400).