I Kept Quiet for far too long. This. Is. WAR!!!

Dan,

Thank you for bringing events like this to the attention of the FIRST community. I completely sympathize with you, and think volunteers, especially or your status, should be treated with as much respect as possible.

To those of you who do not think this belongs, in CD, I strongly believe you are wrong. CD is a place for members of the FIRST community to communicate and spread ideas and information. Dan is doing exactly that, informing us of his ordeal.

I also think that ignoring the political correctness in others' posts would be a great idea, so spread this far and wide.

Those are my 2 cents, take it or leave it.

[Don Wright]

I would just like to remind everyone that we are only getting one side of the story here.

I know Dan a little from my experience from FIRST. I know some of the people I believe that he is attacking (WAR) very well and I respect them highly.

I am not saying they need to come on here and represent themselves. I am not saying they need to handle things differently. I am just saying that we, here on CD, are only getting Dan's point of view. Maybe there are other circumstances involved that he may or may not know about, and that he may or may not be sharing here. I don't know.

And, in general, (this is not directed at Dan)...yes, volunteers should be treated with respect, but not all volunteers should be given the same authority. The level of maturity, emotional control, and overall attitude need to be taken into all accounts. Sure, the volunteer could be the most devoted FIRST person in the world, but it doesn't mean they should be in charge of a key position at a competition because of it. But, how do you tell them that?

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Arefin Bari

... wait volunteers have consequences? Since when? The worst case scenario is you are just not chosen as a volunteer.

It is very easy to say that FIRST has changed. That is a no brainer. It is also easy to cast stones in CD and other places. It is far harder not to. It is far harder to keep looking at the bigger picture and contributing positive efforts towards understanding the bigger picture. Contributions can be made in the way of volunteering, in mentoring, in participating, in supporting, in being a wise and helpful contributing member of ChiefDelphi, in understanding the process of change and its impact.

Volunteers have a responsibility to the event. From where I sit in the stands (when I'm not volunteering) - I can see the weight of responsibility that is on the shoulders of an emcee, an announcer, a head ref and his/her crew, an FTA, a VC, and the list goes on. I can also see how the connection of that volunteer to a team, a region, a program - can impact those that the volunteer is connected to, directly or indirectly. We often discuss that impact here in ChiefDelphi, stating that how we conduct ourselves and what we say will reflect on our teams and our supporters. It can also impact on the events where we volunteer. It would be irresponsible to think that because one is a volunteer, that there are no consequences involved with that gift of time and effort. There are always consequences. Whether those consequences are helpful or hurtful will be dependent on the wisdom, integrity, and mature decisions made by the volunteer, on the field and off the field.

[Swan217]

Originally Posted by Don Wright

Maybe there are other circumstances involved that he may or may not know about, and that he may or may not be sharing here.

And that is the great travesty that has occurred here. If the person being blacklisted has no idea of the reasons that they are being excluded (or the reasons are invalidated by the facts of the situation), and has no chance to rebut the accusations, then how can this be interpreted any other way than a witchhunt?

Originally Posted by Don Wright

I am not saying they need to handle things differently.

I am. I am saying that this is a childish and unprofessional manner in treating volunteers. I am saying that administrative bureaucrats have absolutely no place in the FIRST volunteering system. I am saying that it has long been FIRST policy to keep administrative bureaucrats out of the volunteering process for just this reason, and that the final decision is supposed to lie with the Volunteer Coordinator.

Originally Posted by Don Wright

And, in general, (this is not directed at Dan)...yes, volunteers should be treated with respect, but not all volunteers should be given the same authority. The level of maturity, emotional control, and overall attitude need to be taken into all accounts. Sure, the volunteer could be the most devoted FIRST person in the world, but it doesn't mean they should be in charge of a key position at a competition because of it.

I heartily agree. This is why high school students have traditionally not been offered roles that could affect the outcome of matches, especially ones that would affect their teams. This is why the Head Referee is usually a position of gravitas and someone who has shown his/her ability to be fair and impartial. That is why the MC is traditionally someone who has a large amount of knowledge of teams and carries a long history and amount of respect. One can debate until the pigs come home on whether or not one's local "key roles" are being filled to this standard.

Originally Posted by Don Wright

But, how do you tell them that?

You tell them by treating them like adults and explaining the standard which they're judging volunteers by, and if you think that they're unqualified give the reasons WHY you think they are unqualified and allow for a chance for explanation.

Since I am qualified to only speak for my own record, I will use myself as an example:
3 years FLL Announcer
6 years FRC Offseason DJ (Wrote the book on DJing as well)
5 years Regional Robot inspector
3 years offseason scorer, 1 year Regional Scorer
5 years team mentor
6 years Regional Referee, 3 years FRC Offseason Head Referee

In addition, the Head Referee at 95% of the regionals that I've reffed can vouch for my skill at refereeing. The FLL committee of the regional I announced can vouch for me. The committees of the offseasons that I've DJed can vouch for my excellent playlist skills (even if volume may be an issue. I'm working on that). Any head robot inspector can vouch for my inspecting abilities (Thanks Al!), and I have NEVER heard a criticism of any of my abilities in any of my positions that I didn't immediately remedy. If anything, I am my biggest critic in the positions I've been in. As for emotional control, I think that from January through Thanksgiving, I have maintained a level of dignified maturity that far surpasses what should be expected of someone in my situation.

The problem is that I REFUSE to be bullied like this. I had enough of bullying as a geek in High School and I refuse to be bullied by strangers that don't even know me. The fact that myself and others have been forced out of the roles that we have the most experience in without any regard for respect or explanation is a travesty that must be remedied. I and the others may go on and volunteer our services to regionals that still have respect for their volunteers that Michigan lacks, but it's a shame that the state that we call home would stoop to this level.

[Pavan Dave]

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I'm in Texas, granted it's a different story but I have a feeling many things like this happen everywhere. Dirty laundry may not help us as a community but on a personal level it provides two things that are good for the poster and reader:

1) The first being that you get big issues off your chest. This is the probably why people are so negative. In reality, no one cares about you on a personal level especially on a board where the (most of the) masses blindly eat, sleep, and drink the notion of FIRST.

2) You publicly let everyone know what is going on so that they know and are informed. As a volunteer, I WANT to know things like this happen so I know that the next time I apply for MC or Announcer with 2 recommendations from MCs and Announcers with prominent names in FIRST, that there is some reason. Especially when on game day, many people in the audience question why you weren't selected.

The idea of introducing something to the public is not for acceptance [or at least for me it sure as hell isn't]. The purpose of my ideas the purpose of publishing these posts are to tell people what's going on from their eyes and what they see called as they see it. You can ignore everything said, but the purposes of these [ideas in the form of] posts are to get even the harshest of critics to read them. To get them to think about the idea [albeit in a negative way or not] they develope opinions for or against and have to think about it. Even if for a second, the next time that something happens you have this log stating what happened, where, when, etc.

To get attention for an idea you must seek down to sometimes the most outspoken levels. The ones that might make you look bad, but for the greater good of your idea, get the message out. In regards to the title, who on the forum would not open a thread called "This. Is. WAR!!!"? ... Apparently you just did so it worked. You're reading. Those quick to judge please look at the date the original letter was sent and please consider why he would care to share with us so late if he wasn't getting anywhere. He already sent this, he just wants an answer as any person who has sweat blood and tears as he, has the right to demand.

If something is kept private it is easier to hide because no response required. If something is made public it can either be pushed off and hope the people let the issue die out or the the public pushes forward and to clarify for the sake of their reputation, they must say something.

Especially on a forum where the most junior of mentors on this forums such as I are passionate volunteers, we can if we choose, make a difference. Just think of the posters in this thread and the hundreds of hours of experience that if gone, a regional would have trouble functioning without.

The blacklisting is something that is angering me right now. I will not post further on it. But even in my short time and history with FIRST I have noticed the political nonsense which does not make me question my involvement in some areas but not in others in FIRST.

EDIT:
Apparently the idea got addressed. That was the success.

Arefin is completely right. FIRST isn't what it used to be. Nor will it ever be the same again. Power does that. And power can defined in many ways.



Pavan Davé

[Don Wright]

I'm sorry Dan, but I think you are taking the wrong approach to this. And this statement:

The problem is that I REFUSE to be bullied like this. I had enough of bullying as a geek in High School and I refuse to be bullied by strangers that don't even know me. The fact that myself and others have been forced out of the roles that we have the most experience in without any regard for respect or explanation is a travesty that must be remedied. I and the others may go on and volunteer our services to regionals that still have respect for their volunteers that Michigan lacks, but it's a shame that the state that we call home would stoop to this level.

really makes it out as a personal vendetta against those you are at "WAR" against. And by saying you are doing this for the good of all in Michigan as your basis behind posting this on CD seems contrary to the message I'm getting from your posts.

I also know you know some key people here in Michigan (and one not in Michigan anymore...ahem), and you can regularly find Gail's phone number posted all over the place on these forums. Did you even try calling her?

[Rion Atkinson]

Originally Posted by Don Wright

I'm sorry Dan, but I think you are taking the wrong approach to this. And this statement:



really makes it out as a personal vendetta against those you are at "WAR" against. And by saying you are doing this for the good of all in Michigan as your basis behind posting this on CD seems contrary to the message I'm getting from your posts.

I also know you know some key people here in Michigan (and one not in Michigan anymore...ahem), and you can regularly find Gail's phone number posted all over the place on these forums. Did you even try calling her?

Was it not personal vendettas that caused the pilgrims to run to America? Was it not personal vendettas that caused the Revolutionary War? Was it not personal vendettas that cause the Civil War? Both World Wars? The start of the Lutheran Church?

All I am saying is that personal vendettas do not start bad things. But do not always start good things. Regardless of wether or not this is his personal vendetta, is it moraly right for us to tell him he should not post his opinion on a website created for teams and mentors to help each other?


The begining of Mr. Swando's first post stated that the email was sent to all whom it concerns. At least that's what I got from it.

-Rion

[pathew100]

I guess my perspective is skewed. To me anyway, all the volunteers at these events are there to make the competition run smoothly and make sure everyone can play the game. Our hard work as a volunteer team makes sure that happens.

Some roles may be seen as more 'fun' (such as MC or Announcer) but ALL of the roles are just as important. There would be no matches to MC without the Queuers. And no robots on the field without the Inspectors. Etc...

The FIRST competitions are a celebration of the high school students accomplishment of 'solving' the game challenge. Personally I don't care how much 'glamor' is in the role I'm fulfilling when I volunteer. I still get the satisfaction that I helped to make event run for those hard working students. Isn't that what it's about?

[JesseK]

The first involves a good call that a Head Referee overruled me on, and I am criticized for not sticking with my call, even though it was not mine to make. The second involves myself being a Head Referee at an offseason event, as an inexperienced associate referee made a call that went against a team in the final match, then forgot to mention it to me before the score was posted. I was then forced into a decision where I either had to publicly revoke the call, or include the penalty in the match. Under duress and time constraints, I decided on the latter, without the foresight that it would change the outcome of the match, and therefore, the winning alliance.

These events involved the same team...

I think I understand what may be the missing piece here.

The first involves a good call that a Head Referee overruled me on, and I am criticized for not sticking with my call, even though it was not mine to make.

Was it not your call to make in the first place or not your call to try to overrule the head ref on? If the head ref is wrong and you can prove him wrong then why not do it ... not in a challenge of authority sense, but in a 'make the right call' sense? Did you even ask? I'm only asking because if you didn't then it serves as (even illogical) reasoning for bias against you.

The second involves myself being a Head Referee at an offseason event, as an inexperienced associate referee made a call that went against a team in the final match, then forgot to mention it to me before the score was posted

This is easily flipped to be biased against you by saying that you didn't ask the inexperienced referee whether or not there were any penalties. It's particularly egregious due to the timing, regardless of whether or not that aspect is under your control.

These events involved the same team...

And here is why it's all biased against you.

Two calls were made against the same team. That means the MI board of directors is basing their decision off of someone's subjective interpretation of your attitude and the look on your face when you made the calls as well as the timing of the calls. That interpretation attempts to reveal the intent of your calls. If the team your calls were against thought you made the calls out of spite, or were intentionally calling incorrectly for whatever reason, then that's the answer. There's no telling how many letters were written in favor of not allowing you to volunteer in positions that call for possibly subjective judgment in the future. What would you do in that situation if your team had calls made against it in the same manner? Wouldn't you at least write the regional director with the overall agenda of saying "WTF?"?

If such letters exist, then in essence FIRST HQ, being an organization with some sort of chain-of-command, has probably agreed with the MI Board to some degree and will probably not pursue the specific issue or overrule that specific decision, ever. Improving VIMS is their next best option.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any corrective action to take other than to get to know someone on the Board, and enjoy volunteering for what it's worth in the meantime. An apology for public defamation (name-calling in general is bad, yet calling your best advocate 'gutless' is particularly arrogant ...) would probably be in order too. If you can't live with that then like I said before -- you see it differently, but you're the one who has to get over it. That's not a slight to you; it's a general fact of life.

Arefin is completely right. FIRST isn't what it used to be. Nor will it ever be the same again. Power does that. And power can defined in many ways.

FIRST must evolve in order to expand; is that a bad thing? There's all of this assumption of power hungriness without even minute consideration to that what one doesn't know. What's amazing to me is that 4 years ago I could have empathized with this statement and now I can only imagine a little kid sticking his thumbs in his ears so he doesn't have to listen to what he doesn't want to hear. The same principles that work at a small scale of 500 teams and 20 regionals are completely annihilated on the scale of 1600 teams with 40+ regionals. Should the energies of HQ be spent over every squabble or grievance of every team or should HQ delegate those out and focus on bigger picture items, like trying to achieve its goal of inspiring even more kids?

[Pavan Dave]

Originally Posted by JesseK

FIRST must evolve in order to expand; is that a bad thing? There's all of this assumption of power hungriness without even minute consideration to that what one doesn't know. What's amazing to me is that 4 years ago I could have empathized with this statement and now I can only imagine a little kid sticking his thumbs in his ears so he doesn't have to listen to what he doesn't want to hear. The same principles that work at a small scale of 500 teams and 20 regionals are completely annihilated on the scale of 1600 teams with 40+ regionals. Should the energies of HQ be spent over every squabble or grievance of every team or should HQ delegate those out and focus on bigger picture items, like trying to achieve its goal of inspiring even more kids?

Many mentors around my age and older, who were FIRST students and now are mentors are irritated and almost fed up with FIRST to the point where we're uninspired by FIRST now. Is the point to gain a new base but lose an old one? The point is to inspire but if the contrary, is it really worth it?

[Ken Patton]

Its pretty encouraging to see that there can be some good discussion on CD even after a declaration of war (dangit Dan, that was extreme - its good that you have followed up in a more diplomatic fashion, keep trying). CD is a good place to have the discussion imho, because I don't think there is much discussion going on anywhere else. The concentration of volunteers is probably pretty high at this site. Hopefully the discussion continues in a positive way.

The FiM organization has some very hardworking and incredibly dedicated individuals who have a point of view. My experience has been that people who may have other points of view are not typically encouraged to give input to FiM. I'm one of 'em. I have tried to give input or ask questions in the past, with multiple approaches (private, public, official, unofficial), to get discussion going about making things better, and feel like it has not gone very far, and even put some people on the defensive. It would be great if the trend toward transparency applied in this great state too.

Its one thing to have a list of people who you don't want in key positions because you don't think they will do a great job. Its entirely another to have a list of people who you don't want because they don't share your point of view.

What to do? Maybe the best thing to do is to volunteer where we are appreciated. Communicate directly with the volunteer coordinator. Help the volunteer coordinators do their job, and expose situations where they are being overridden by politics. Make sure we are qualified for the jobs we are going after. Keep the discussions about this stuff going on, so others can learn from the experiences.

We definitely have to keep volunteering, we know that - FRC needs us.

Ken

[Wayne C.]

Originally Posted by Libby K

I wasn't going to step in, and I still won't involve myself with any of Dan's statements, because I'm unaware of any details, BUT...

After working as an understudy to the Boston VC last year (I'll be a co-VC in '10), I just would like to say that not all VCs treat their volunteers as commodities. One very unfortunate isolated incident doesn't mean that ALL volunteers are treated as such, or that all VCs are the same. I happen to have a wonderful appreciation of the time our volunteers put in to the regional- I've been a volunteer -for FLL, FTC, FRC, FIRSTPlace, you name it- for many years myself, so I understand the commitment.

I'm sorry this happened, but I certainly hope that this doesn't scare people away from volunteering. Volunteers are the only reason FIRST events run at all. One bad apple -if that's what this is- shouldn't have to spoil the bunch.

I'm glad you were treated well. All volunteers deserve that. Apparently not all have been and some have complaints. This isn't the only instance where I know of volunteers who were omitted or "black balled" for lack of cause.

FIRST IS a corporation that makes many of its decisions like a corporation with little input from the bulk of the teams. However it expects a broad base of volunteers to make the events run. Volunteer organizations run based on member councils and voting on major issues. Apparently FIRST doesn't consider itself such an organization. I hope that clarifies my statement.

I think the FIRST community at large expects way too much from the NH office- and vice versa.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Pavan Dave

Many mentors around my age and older, who were FIRST students and now are mentors are irritated and almost fed up with FIRST to the point where we're uninspired by FIRST now. Is the point to gain a new base but lose an old one? The point is to inspire but if the contrary, is it really worth it?

Part of that might be the natural order of things, in a way. There are some threads in CD that have discussed mentoring and participating in FIRST while attending college and/or becoming established in a career. Discussions about pros and cons and decisions and exploring new options. If people are uninspired and bring negative attitudes to the program, to teams as mentors, and to events as volunteers - how does that help the program and the goals of the program? Inspiration goes both ways, especially after one graduates from high school. For those who have been students in FLL, FTC, or FRC - the transition to mentoring or participating in FIRST as an adult may be smooth or it may be difficult. Some of the reason could be the expectations that the graduate brings to the transition. That reason can also be applied to the changes in FIRST as it continues to grow, expand, develop, and mature. Wasn't FIRST in Michigan a pilot program last year? Next year will be its second year as a district program. What was learned in the pilot program will be applied this next season just as in FIRST where each season has brought more experience and knowledge to the development of the program.

Perhaps this is an area that has not been developed or looked at closely. How do young adults make the transition? What can help young adults who want to stay involved, make the transition? Do they only want the glamorous 'rock star' status or do they want to work and apply the skills and knowledge that they gain while volunteering and/or mentoring while going to school or establishing themselves in new careers? Is this area of development being addressed and does it need to be? These are some questions that don't need to be answered in this thread but they can provide food for thought.

Jane

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Wayne C.

... FIRST IS a corporation ... However it expects a broad base of volunteers to make the events run. ... I think the FIRST community at large expects way too much from the NH office- and vice versa.

Your last sentence is definitely on point.

The FIRST office in NH does not directly organize and run the nuts and bolts of the many FRC Regions/Regionals. FRC Regional Directors and state (regional?) boards have broad semi-autonomous authority (within bounds).

For natural/understandable reasons, this organizational factoid is lost on many participants. They just think of FIRST FRC as a single monolithic organization, when it actually contains something akin to a franchise structure (not exactly, but there are similarities).

Blake
PS: With great authority comes great responsibility.
PPS: When are we going to move from discussing symptoms and consequences, to discussing root causes? to be followed by change suggestions?

[ebarker]

Originally Posted by Wayne C.

I think the FIRST community at large expects way too much from the NH office- and vice versa.

Echoing Blake.....definitely on point.

Just to clarify a couple of things. FIRST is a non-profit corporation. And corporation is a legal instantiation of a non-person entity birthed by 'articles of incorporation' much the same way a person is made legal by a birth certificate, but I digress.

Most people, students, teachers, corporate mentors and the people that work at FIRST tend to gravitate to the hierarchial institutional model of how things work and how things get done.

That is a big mistake. In reality the FIRST community is more like an evangelical church. The folks at HQ guide, direct, cajole, and keep the flame but the heavy lifting is done at the regional and local level. The growth of the program is done by the technological evangelists more than by any decision made at HQ. The 1st role of the folks at FIRST is to exert leadership by reminding everyone of the goals and mission of FIRST. Their 2nd role is to coordinate and communicate.

Root Cause - Chief Delphi is full of threads of conflicts related to the misunderstanding of how FIRST really works - falsely assuming that FIRST is a traditional linear monolithic thing, it is not.

Moving to solutions - Everyone at all levels needs to understand how the FIRST community really works.

There is periodic discussion and thrashing in every organization including FIRST on the topic of creating a set of 'best practices'. Ideally there should be a set of best practices for everyone that works in the FIRST community.

Think about it. If you were Dean Kamen, or Woodie Flowers, or Bill Miller, or Paul Gudonis there really should be a book on your shelf that has your job's 'best practices'. Ditto for volunteer coordinators, mentors, students, etc, etc.

that my 2 cents at Blake's PPS.