We still need people to sign our Petition

[archiver]

Posted by Kyle Fenton at 05/09/2001 1:54 PM EST


Student on team #121, Islanders, from Middletown High School and NUWC.



To all FIRST members,

Team 121 is still looking for people to sign our petition. We want to restore 2v2 and to expand the parts list beyond what Small Parts can provide for us.

There is about 32 Petitions signed already.

Please support what you believe in. Please sign our petition.

[archiver]

Posted by David Kelly at 05/09/2001 4:36 PM EST


Student on team #234, Cyber Blue, from Perry Meridian High School [IUPUI] and Rolls-Royce/ NEC/ NASA KSC/ Peregrine/ Trilithic.


In Reply to: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by Kyle Fenton on 05/09/2001 1:54 PM EST:



Kyle,

I, personally, don't believe in signing petitions against the actions of FIRST. I think we should let Dean and his staff plan the games that they wish to. FIRST and robotics is unlike any other sport in the world and I think we need to keep it that way. We need to make an image for all kids in the United States and the whole world. When you work in a huge corporation you are not going to be directly fighting and competing against other employees or employers. You are going to be working together and merging to make a better product.

Although 2 vs. 2 may be a lot more fun, I think alliances are the new WAVE of the future.


David Kelly
Student Captain/ Webmaster/ Driver
CB Team 234


: To all FIRST members,

: Team 121 is still looking for people to sign our petition. We want to restore 2v2 and to expand the parts list beyond what Small Parts can provide for us.

: There is about 32 Petitions signed already.

: Please support what you believe in. Please sign our petition.

[archiver]

Posted by Ian Mackenzie at 05/09/2001 6:00 PM EST


Student on team #188, Woburn Robotics, from Woburn C.I..


In Reply to: Re: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by David Kelly on 05/09/2001 4:36 PM EST:



Here is my main reason for supporting a return to 2 vs 2:

I agree that it is important for all the teams in FIRST to cooperate. However, I don't think that it is necessary to have 4 vs 0 to do so. Indeed, I think the great strength of FIRST is that all teams work together and help each other even when they are not forced to.

I see 4 vs 0 as almost a sort of gimmick which screams "Look at us! We're cooperative!", while not actually promoting any more cooperation than 2 vs 2. In the 'real world', competition and teamwork are both important; I believe that FIRST had found an excellent balance between the two with 2 vs 2 and has now overshot it with 4 vs 0.

-Ian Mackenzie
Team 188

[archiver]

Posted by Mike Corliss at 05/10/2001 2:47 PM EST


Student on team #419, Rambots, from BC High and .


In Reply to: I signed the petition, and here's why
Posted by Ian Mackenzie on 05/09/2001 6:00 PM EST:



I think i would rather 4 on 0 than 2 on 2. First off,
one alliance is more in the spirit of first, 'cuz we
know how they love cooperation. It does indeed
promote cooperation, because you don't have a choice.
you could say 2 vs 2 is cooperation, but the way they
set it up, you didn't really need to cooperate with
your team. The way they have the 4 vs 0, alot of
tasks require the assitance of the other teams.

I think they should find a middle ground, more
competative than 4 vs 0, to satisfy our more animal
tendancies, but more cooperative than 2 vs 2, to
maintain the spirit of first.

Mikey in the mi

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Patton at 05/10/2001 9:27 PM EST


Engineer on team #65, The Huskie Brigade, from Pontiac Northern High School and GM Powertrain.


In Reply to: I signed the petition, and here's why
Posted by Ian Mackenzie on 05/09/2001 6:00 PM EST:



Ian, I think your point is 100% on target. It gets at the heart of the issue - the fact that we can cooperate without being told to. 2v2 provides the right balance between excitement and unpredictability (i.e., a little "D&quot, yet allows teamwork (i.e., a little "GP&quot.

Ken


: Here is my main reason for supporting a return to 2 vs 2:

: I agree that it is important for all the teams in FIRST to cooperate. However, I don't think that it is necessary to have 4 vs 0 to do so. Indeed, I think the great strength of FIRST is that all teams work together and help each other even when they are not forced to.

: I see 4 vs 0 as almost a sort of gimmick which screams "Look at us! We're cooperative!", while not actually promoting any more cooperation than 2 vs 2. In the 'real world', competition and teamwork are both important; I believe that FIRST had found an excellent balance between the two with 2 vs 2 and has now overshot it with 4 vs 0.

: -Ian Mackenzie
: Team 188

[archiver]

Posted by mike oleary at 05/11/2001 1:55 PM EST


Student on team #419, rambots, from bc high and...oh wait just bc high and hmmm...sponsors...thats a good idea.


In Reply to: Exactly!!
Posted by Ken Patton on 05/10/2001 9:27 PM EST:



i agree...take this comparison:
4v0 is sort of like golf (any golfers out there dont take that the wrong way - i play it myself and work at a golf course)...its pretty boring to watch because theres really no direct competition, with defence and offence and all of that...or maybe synchranized swimming...basically choreographed, with little or no room for improvisation and you really never need to respond to something an opponent did
2v2 might similarly be compared to hockey, which in mho is the best sport out there, at least as far as watching it goes. each team consists of a group of players...and each line at least starts out as a semi-random group of 5 players who have to work together against a similar group of 5 players...eventually you can figure out what groups of 5 players are effective and which arent...in the same way by the time you get to the drafting point for alliances, the teams know to some degree who they can and cant work effectively with...and then they go and develop a gameplan. but you can never see the same match twice because so much depends on what the other alliance does...so that you end up with another pretty random and unpredictable factor
mike, very pro-2v2

: Ian, I think your point is 100% on target. It gets at the heart of the issue - the fact that we can cooperate without being told to. 2v2 provides the right balance between excitement and unpredictability (i.e., a little "D&quot, yet allows teamwork (i.e., a little "GP&quot.

: Ken

:
: : Here is my main reason for supporting a return to 2 vs 2:

: : I agree that it is important for all the teams in FIRST to cooperate. However, I don't think that it is necessary to have 4 vs 0 to do so. Indeed, I think the great strength of FIRST is that all teams work together and help each other even when they are not forced to.

: : I see 4 vs 0 as almost a sort of gimmick which screams "Look at us! We're cooperative!", while not actually promoting any more cooperation than 2 vs 2. In the 'real world', competition and teamwork are both important; I believe that FIRST had found an excellent balance between the two with 2 vs 2 and has now overshot it with 4 vs 0.

: : -Ian Mackenzie
: : Team 188

[archiver]

Posted by Andrew Kostka at 05/13/2001 10:22 PM EST


Student on team #419, Rambots, from B.C. High.


In Reply to: I signed the petition, and here's why
Posted by Ian Mackenzie on 05/09/2001 6:00 PM EST:



I agree completely. That is how the real world works. Also with 2v2 you have to make your robot more durable because of interaction with robots that you're not working against. In the real world, if you design something, it had better not be flimsy. If it is,
you won't be sucessful. This year people got away with making flimsy robots that would break if they got bumped. We need more confusion because the world is a confusing place.

: Here is my main reason for supporting a return to 2 vs 2:

: I agree that it is important for all the teams in FIRST to cooperate. However, I don't think that it is necessary to have 4 vs 0 to do so. Indeed, I think the great strength of FIRST is that all teams work together and help each other even when they are not forced to.

: I see 4 vs 0 as almost a sort of gimmick which screams "Look at us! We're cooperative!", while not actually promoting any more cooperation than 2 vs 2. In the 'real world', competition and teamwork are both important; I believe that FIRST had found an excellent balance between the two with 2 vs 2 and has now overshot it with 4 vs 0.

: -Ian Mackenzie
: Team 188

[archiver]

Posted by Libby Ritchie at 05/10/2001 10:46 PM EST


Coach on team #393, Full Metal Jackets, from Morristown Jr/Sr High School and NASA/KIPT, Inc..


In Reply to: Re: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by David Kelly on 05/09/2001 4:36 PM EST:



David, I have to disagree with you this time. I have to say that I'm not sure that I agree with signing a petition against FIRST, but I don't agree with you on the competition thing. You will compete the rest of your life! Your company will compete with other companies for business. You will compete with others to get the job. You will compete in many different ways throughout the course of your career and there is nothing wrong with competitiveness. There is a good and bad side to competitiveness, but it is a fact of life.

[archiver]

Posted by Kyle Fenton at 05/12/2001 1:48 PM EST


Student on team #121, Islanders, from Middletown High School and NUWC.


In Reply to: Re: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by Libby Ritchie on 05/10/2001 10:46 PM EST:



Libby Ritchie,

The goal of this petition is not to go against FIRST,
but meiarly tell them that a lot more people like
2v2. People like 2v2 for a lot of reasons. For
example, is gives the game more interesting feel
to it. It makes all robots work together to complete
a goal. I know a lot of people that didn't like 4v0 just
because 2 robots were doing it all while 2 were
just parking in the endzone.
Also for the parts list. It is the same thing. We are
not going against FIRST and Small Parts, we just
saying that a team with a tight budget can buy parts
from other third party vendors, and more money
can be put to travel, than just operating costs.

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Taylor at 05/12/2001 6:09 PM EST


College Student on team #461, West Side Boiler Invasion, from West Lafayette High School and Purdue University .


In Reply to: Re: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by Kyle Fenton on 05/12/2001 1:48 PM EST:



Kyle, where are you going to get a better deal than the 50% off small parts gives teams with SPARK?

[archiver]

Posted by Kyle Fenton at 05/12/2001 10:36 PM EST


Student on team #121, Islanders, from Middletown High School and NUWC.


In Reply to: Re: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by Joe Taylor on 05/12/2001 6:09 PM EST:



Joe,
Yes, Small Parts Inc generously donates $200
free credit, but only gives 50% of on the first $1000
or so that you spend. And for the majority of the
teams they spend way more than the $200 they
proviide for free, and the 50% credit of the rest of
the $1000. I mean they charge an arm and leg for
stuff like sporckets, or victors, spikes, silcion
paste, etc. It is like retail time 3. And remeber
shipping is not free. Shipping one time was up to
$30, for a single item. If a team is not carefull they
could run up a large bill. Well, becuase engineers
need those things from small parts, and they need
it fast, and don't worry about the expeneces until
later.
I am not disgourage Small Parts, heck I
really love Small Parts, I just don't want to be all
Small Parts. I am sure that you can get a munch
better deal with other third parts vendors.

[archiver]

Posted by Nate Smith at 05/13/2001 12:21 AM EST


College Student on team #66, Frostbite, from Willow Run High School and GM Powertrain.


In Reply to: Material Lists
Posted by Kyle Fenton on 05/12/2001 10:36 PM EST:



Just a note: the Victors(speed controllers) and Spikes(relays) aren't SPI, but rather coming from Innovation First, who developed them specifically for this competition. I don't think you're going to see FIRST straying from using those any time soon...

Nate

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Taylor at 05/13/2001 1:48 PM EST


College Student on team #461, West Side Boiler Invasion, from West Lafayette High School and Purdue University .


In Reply to: Material Lists
Posted by Kyle Fenton on 05/12/2001 10:36 PM EST:



Kyle,
If you check out some of the other 3rd party vendors that sell similar products (such as Grainger or McMaster-Carr) you'll see that the prices small parts offers us aren't much, if at all, higher. For example, a 32 tooth 3/8" pitch sprocket costs $15.06 in small parts, and $21.04 from mcmaster. when you figure that in addition to this, small parts is giving us a 50% discount on our first $1000, I just don't see where your getting these cost savings from. You have to realize that FIRST teams are buying parts in extremely small quantity compared to the industrial companies these companies are designed to serve, and consequently the cost is much higher. We also have to take into consideration the fact that only small parts has provided us with specialized items, such as the wheel hub kit for the skyway wheelchair wheels, or the drill motor shaft coupling kit.

[archiver]

Posted by Andrew Kostka at 05/13/2001 10:07 PM EST


Student on team #419, Rambots, from B.C. High.


In Reply to: Re: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by Kyle Fenton on 05/12/2001 1:48 PM EST:



I think what people are trying to say by this petition is not trying to undermine or go against anyone, but to simply let FIRST know how the kids that they create these games for feel about their decisions. It's letting FIRST know how people feel in response to what they have done. I personally feel that it should be a letter, not a petition. Go ahead and tell Dean, Woody, and the others how you feel and let them make their decisions. But they SHOULD know how we feel, since they're doing it for us.

: Libby Ritchie,

: The goal of this petition is not to go against FIRST,
: but meiarly tell them that a lot more people like
: 2v2. People like 2v2 for a lot of reasons. For
: example, is gives the game more interesting feel
: to it. It makes all robots work together to complete
: a goal. I know a lot of people that didn't like 4v0 just
: because 2 robots were doing it all while 2 were
: just parking in the endzone.
: Also for the parts list. It is the same thing. We are
: not going against FIRST and Small Parts, we just
: saying that a team with a tight budget can buy parts
: from other third party vendors, and more money
: can be put to travel, than just operating costs.

[archiver]

Posted by James Jones at 05/10/2001 4:52 PM EST


Engineer on team #267, The Demolition Squad, from North Broward & St Andrews and Motorola.


In Reply to: We still need people to sign our Petition
Posted by Kyle Fenton on 05/09/2001 1:54 PM EST: