What questions will you ask in the Q&A?

[GaryVoshol]

Matt, see Team Update 1

[darkChozo]

<G24>
Handling EMPTY CELLS – ROBOTS may be in POSSESSION of a maximum of one EMPTY CELL, or may HERD a maximum of one EMPTY CELL at one time. A ROBOT may not be in POSSESSION and HERD EMPTY CELLS at the same time. A violation will cause a PENALTY to be assigned.

Will penalties assigned due to <G24> take into consideration the apparent intent of the pilots? For example, how should the following scenarios be ruled?

1. A robot driving around a field with many (90+) orbit balls bumps into 2 empty cells several times (but does not direct it towards airlock, visibly attempt to control its motion, etc.)
2. A robot possessing an empty cell drives around a field with many (90+) orbit balls and hits an empty cell several times (but does not direct it towards airlock, visibly attempt to control its motion, etc.)
3. The above two scenarios, except there are few (<10) orbit balls on the field
4. An opposing robot throws an empty cell onto a robot and it gets stuck. The robot then herds or possesses another empty cell
5. An opposing payload operator throws an empty cell onto a robot and it gets stuck. The robot then herds or possesses another empty cell.
6. In the course of a match, two empty cells get stuck on a robot by opposing robots/payload operators
7. A robot is driving past the opposing outpost when the payload operator quickly pushes two empty cells through the hole. The empty cells enter the robot's feed mechanism (assume that it was done fast enough that the robot could not have easily avoided given the low traction, pilots' reaction time and pilots' ability to see what is going on).
8. The above four scenarios, except allied robots/payload operators are causing the possible offenses.


I might think of a couple more examples, but I think you can see where I'm going with it.

[EricH]

What is the order of precedence between the Manual, the Q&A, and Bill's Blog?

I can't ask this (no account), but it would be great if someone else would.

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by EricH

What is the order of precedence between the Manual, the Q&A, and Bill's Blog?

I can't ask this (no account), but it would be great if someone else would.

The manual and updates are and always have been the ONLY official rules. The Q&A can be used as guidelines for inspectors or refs on the interpretation of rules and for making judgment calls. Bill's blog hasn't been done before. It isn't really official at all, nor does it publicly represent the entire GDC, but probably falls under the category of "input from GDC members" that head refs are allowed to use when making calls.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Nuttyman54

The manual and updates are and always have been the ONLY official rules. The Q&A can be used as guidelines for inspectors or refs on the interpretation of rules and for making judgment calls. Bill's blog hasn't been done before. It isn't really official at all, nor does it publicly represent the entire GDC, but probably falls under the category of "input from GDC members" that head refs are allowed to use when making calls.

Understood. However, at times, it seems that Q&A is used to make the rules.

Also, it isn't "official writ" what the order of precedence is. FLL is quite clear as to theirs in their rules.

FRC, on the other hand, has the "traditional" order of precedence, which is exactly what you say. But this is nowhere formalized. The main thing is: Where does Bill's Blog fit in (i.e. equal to Q&A, lower than Q&A, etc.) and what is the relation of Q&A to the Official Rules as modified by the Updates (i.e. judiciary: constructionist or traditional?)?

[Matt H.]

I'm also very interested in the order of precedence esp with Bill's Blog.
I find his comment about vacuum systems enigmatic--it seems to imply that if you could design a vacuum system which would not damage the field it would be legal.
Both the vacuum question (Is a suction device which does not damage the field legal) and the order of precedence question need to be asked.