Here's the GDC we know and love

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=11175

I see they’d rather spend time making a funny than addressing some serious concerns about bumper rules…

I’m suspecting the 10 seconds they spent thinking and writing that response out, comes out to a wash with the 10 seconds they would have spent citing the rule/ page number and writing it out… Just a guess

Just like the question about what is under the carpeting (from last year’s Q&A). (:

I think the point they are trying to make is “asked, and answered, several times elsewhere”. And a fraction of a difference between brand names isn’t worth worrying about.

After all, it is the wheels that are making most of the difference in driving dynamics…

I think everyone needs to lay off the GDC a bit. Try and remember what they have to do every year. Creating a new game with a new set of rules is a ridiculos challenge. The tiny difference of material is the least of their worries. Lay off them.

No but we’d really love to get some bumper rule updates, especially since a team who previously thought their bumpers were legal due to poor wording the manual could be told they have to change it or be DQ’d at the regional bot check

They get an immense number of questions DAILY! Many of them I’m sure are about bumpers as much as other things. They are just trying to get the bumper rules right. Just be patient with them, that’s all were asking.

Check this one out …

http://forums.usfirst.org/showpost.php?p=23478 … second paragraph specifically

I think it is even better … :stuck_out_tongue:

I don’t. Everytime the GDC starts making silly remarks in an official response (which like it or not, a Q&A answer is) some poor soul or team gets confused. As an official, I’m one of the people who has to help cleanup the mess. Try telling some team that what they built is illegal because they didn’t understand somebody acting in an official capacity was making a joke.

At least these two responses are hard to implement in hardware.

I still think the best GDC response is the one below from 2007(in my signature)

Agreed. :slight_smile:

We need a pool to guess the average number of balls that will have to be replaced after each MATCH.

Understood, I am an official too. Head referee 6 times over the past 3 years, so I understand that sentiment. However it is the team’s responsibility to at least read and try to understand the ENTIRE manual BEFORE asking questions that require valuable resources to answer.

Sometimes a little levity helps break the tension in a stressful environment.

I would genuinely like to know of any concrete example where one of the GDC “funnies” caused a team any hardship.

Every year FIRST makes a big deal about only one person from the team is allowed to post questions on the forum and that before one posts, they should check the rules and other responses already posted. I guarantee they are sifting through TONS of duplicate questions and TONS of questions that are the simplest interpretations in the manual.

It is fine for a couple of questions like that to get through because of rookie teams, but I’m sure it must be frustrating for the GDC to have to constantly answer the same questions over and over again. From their point of view it would seem like no one reads the manual, team updates, or other Q&A responses. From our point of view it would seem like the GDC has spent too many nights locked up in a darkened room after eating too many Krispy Kremes to make any sense.

In my opinion, no one will know how this year’s game is supposed to be played until a little after 12:00am on April 19th.

tuesday by 5p.m. team update number 3 hopefully…

falls on knees “WE JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND! TO UNDERSTAND! NOT THE MEANING OF LIFE… jus …jus…JUST HOW TO MOUNT OUR BUMPERS! PLEASE GDC THIS IS ALL WE ASK!”

If I had to deal with hundreds of questions every day dealing with all kinds of questions (many of which are repetitive), I’d throw humor into the responses just to keep my sanity.

And I still don’t understand everyone’s dilemma about the bumpers. Cover all your corners on the robot perimeter with at least 6" of bumpers on either side of corner vertex. Must cover at least 66.67% of robot perimeter (string method) with bumpers. Leave opening for trailer hitch, so trailer makes bumper-to-bumper contact. Mount at correct height and fabricate according to instructions.

Unless I’m missing something, it’s not that hard to figure out.

It gets into concave openings into your robot. Prior to the Q&A response where the GDC said that corners must be protected on both sides, many teams (such as mine, and from the look of it 842 as well) assumed that we wouldn’t need bumpers on both sides of the corner. Moreover, the rule that bumpers can only be on the BUMPER PERIMETER means that there appears to be no way to satisfy the GDC while having exterior corners of less than 90 degrees on your robot. This makes a lot of designs I have seen on Delphi illegal, and I don’t think that was the GDC’s intent. For example, harvesters now effectively must drive the “wide” way in order to meet the apparent bumper rules.

Direct, specific questions have been asked by my team and by others in the Q&A forum, and they have yet to be answered. I can only assume that the answers are being withheld for Team Update 3.

Any flavor of triangle or quadrilateral can easily satisfy the bumper rules, even with acute angles. It’s only when you start adding more vertices and the polygon becomes concave that things get complicated.