A Request for transparency from FIRST

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by RMiller

For what it is worth, Dean mentioned this at the Midwest regional. Boiling it down (others can correct any misstatements), he didn't want to add lots of pressure during the build season. In addition, he really only wanted to see the best of the best in this initial year. The time crunch on teams allowed for the judges to not be overworked with up to 130 essays. I know not all teams submitted two names (or even one in some cases). From the sound of it, it was a post kick-off decision.
That said, I seem to recall there being hints at things to come in the kick-off. I don't know if Dean's List was what was intended.

Well, if you're looking for the best of the best, waiting till the last minute will NOT get you all of the best. Sorry, but this was a crappy, misguided decision if that really was the thinking.

Many teams I'm sure are like mine and don't have a ton of mentors or students sitting around waiting for something to do. I, personally, had to make a decision to ignore the robot withholding work for 2-3 full days because we made the decision to write the nominations. Thus, our robot was not as competitive on the field as it might have been in our initial event. It's not a decision that I regret, but I'm surely not pleased I was forced to make it. Other teams - some of the best with really awesome kids - decided the opposite, and I fully understand and support their choices as well.

Dean's list is a long overdue honor and I'm thrilled it exists. However, to quote a far more astute person than I on these boards, this was an "abortive process" at best this year.