If you said yes, apparently you’re in the minority. Looking through the number of views per Q&A thread, not many people are reading. The average number of views on a thread which has been posted for a month, is a mere 300! Now, when you factor in multiple views from certain teams (at least 6 people on 1114 check the Q&A regularly), and all the inspectors and refs getting ready for their events, I’d say at most 15% of the teams are reading the Q&A.
With events only one night away, I really recommend that you sit down and read through these questions and responses. Each year I see multiple teams fail inspection for misinterpreting rules, that were clarified in the Q&A. Don’t let this be you! Practice time is so crucial, but a rare commodity. Don’t waste by having to fix a problem that could have been prevented with just a little bit of reading.
I know I try to check daily, and make sure my teams know about significant rule updates. I know both teams have people that are checking the forums, but usually not as often as I do.
One or two team members check daily and populate a searchable database
(FIRSTsearch) with any new Q&A responses. Then we use the database rather than the Q&A directly.
I don’t check it… however, a couple of our engineers check it daily and one even prints out all Q&A’s pertaining to anything that our robot might do or so on.
FIRST hasn’t made it clear enough to teams that the Q&A is not just a forum for getting answers to your questions, but rather a place where uniform interpretations are made.
That, and it doesn’t actually say in the rules how teams are supposed to treat Q&A responses. Are they rules, are they interpretations, are they musings, or are they unofficial guidance? After having been around a while, we realize that Q&A responses are being presented as official interpretations, but that’s not obvious from the rulebook. This leads to teams being confused by the other communications that emerge from time to time concerning the rules. What is the order of precedence among the rulebook, updates, e-mail blasts, Q&A responses and random statements by FIRST personnel? Again, after having been around a while, we see that the usual interpretation is that updates can amend rules, while Q&A responses clarify (but don’t overrule or amend) rules and updates. The other stuff is unenforceable (as rules), but may convey other information or requirements.
If everyone is aware of that general framework (teams & FIRST alike), and sticks rigourously to it, we avoid the (frequent) occasions where teams are caught off-guard when they discover that they were not free to interpret certain rules in any manner consistent with the text, and instead were required to follow the guidance of the Q&A. (Bumpers and pneumatics come to mind…)
The following appears to be all that the rules say about the Q&A: