Don’t act like you didn’t expect a thread about this… 
I’m curious as to how things went at the team forums. What were the main points discussed, what was in general agreement, what was in big disagreement…you know the drill.
Since my brain is basically fried and I still have a paper to write, I’ll give you what little I can about Los Angeles.
First thing that happened was four giant post-it notes were placed on a white board with the following headings:
- Complexity of Game and Field
- Complexity of Kit of Parts (and missing parts)
- TIMS and Registration System
- THS
The people attending were then asked to place small post-it notes about the pros and cons under the appropriate topic.
The Game: In general, we all liked the complexity of the game due to the lack of obvious domination. Also, those that build an entire field determined that they did not want to see the player stations or full border changed, but that limitations within the border could be instituted (ie, a circular field). The major issue that came up was that blueprints of the field needed to be put out sooner so people could build it, and a copy of the actual playing field blueprints were desired as the interface between the horizontal and vertical bars were very different between the two prints. Also, people liked that the parts were a modular size (at most) of 4’x8’ since that fits in a pick-up bed nicely.
Kit of Parts: The only real negative thing that I can recall was the IR system. Someone said that if they had shipped a working IR beacon rather than making the teams build them, it would have been more feasible. Other than that, you had the usual “more pneumatics, less drills” from some specific people.
TIMS: Only complaint was to make the coaches not have to click so many times to get into the actual system. Those of you that do registration for your teams should know what I’m talking about. Also included in this discussion was the Q&A section. We determined that this worked out much better this year than last with only one major flip-flop of a ruling (the servos).
THS: Only issue I recall was that one team couldn’t determine if the rates were per room or per student.
Sorry I can’t recall more, but I’m sure someone from LA will eventually add to or correct my errors.
indieFan
These are the notes I took at the Richmond Team Forum on Monday. Typed again when I tried to post and it said page not found. 
Sound is too loud, be generally the opinion is better this year than last
A CD of the manual would be very helpful. Some rural teams have limited internet access, with mabye noone on the team having highspeed access for downloading large PDFs. CD cheaper to burn then copying paper manual.
Autonomous mode, lots of talk
- Many against and many for, most against expanding it this year
-New controller limited autonomous advancement from last year
-A reliable plug-in center would improve automode, especially for rookies
-" ‘Woodie likes it’, so it isn’t going anywhere"
-A reference model would help teams with a starting point
IR needs work, a assembled sensor would be very helpful.
Also having working emmitors on the field would be good.
Reflections off the diamondplate on the field was causing problems.
Playing field blueprints were late, and that was bad
Releasing bill of parts for field early is very helpful. Allows teams to get items donated/price check.
Inventor model of field in the kit.
Consolidation of rules after week one
Have official refs at scrimmages
Judges need FIRST experience, at least some of them should have previous FIRST experience
Feedback from judges to facilitate team improvement would be very helpful
Missing parts, want parts or to know they can’t have them. FIRST acknowledged that this was a major problem this year, and attrebuted most of the problem to growth.
MSC on site was beneficial at Chesapeake Regional
MSC reps that were at Chesapeake wants to expand and have MSC onsite at more/all the regionals next year. Possibly having nuts and bolts and such be free for repairs. This is still being percolated upwards at MSC.
Availability of game pieces, not substitutes was discussed. There was miscommunication between FIRST and the vendor somewhere.
Larger accumulators, possibly plastic accumulators for lower weight.
The LED lights were flimsy and broke often.
Defer eligibility to Nationals for a year o allow for fundraising.
AV is one of the largest costs of a regional, but AV makes the event.
Fed-ex pick up in rural areas is sometimes difficult, with pickup not guaranteed on any day. FedEx won’t schedule, only calling the day before for a “maybe we’ll pick it up tomorrow.”
Winner getting losers points helps level the playing field and is good.
Publicize rule clarifications/interpretations better.
Better control of media passes at events.
People are still opinionated on engineer vs. student run. Big surprise.
These are just the notes I took, and I didn’t write down everything that was said, just most of it.
Wetzel
Ughh…what do they want, a church service?
Sound is too loud, be generally the opinion is better this year than last
Sounds was softer, and i virtually couldn’t hear the music on the field, had to listen for it = no fun!!
as for it being too loud for some people…that’s why we have earplugs:p
Obviously, you don’t attend MY church! 
What I WANT at competitions is to be able to hear:
–The announcer
–The person next to me, if we need to talk to each other
–My own thoughts in my own head
What I DON’T want is to go deaf prematurely, or to have to shout at you because YOU are going deaf prematurely from listening to grossly over-amplified sound. :ahh:
Because I don’t abuse my hearing, I was able to hear the music just fine at all three competitions I attended this year. Seriously, anyone who couldn’t hear the music at Arizona, Southern California, or Nationals should go to a doctor for a hearing test.
If you attended the VCU regional, you’ll know. For me, it’s not the noise level, just the REPITITION! If they didn’t have 25 songs repeating over and over, I’d be fine.
My Arizona Regional notes:
- stored energy rules need clarifying
- most people liked larger number of tasks this year, they gave any team a chance to be competitive in every match
- people want more complimentary strategies
- people want more matches at competitions
- people like win/loss system more than previous years’
- some peeps thought autonomous should aid the robot throughout the match (no pure auto mode)
- some peeps thought the auto should be its own game (keep it as is)
- people agreed that the time should be shortened as most teams are done in 5-10 seconds
- robots should have the option to send an ‘i’m done signal’ when they finish auto, and when all 4 robots are finished auto discontinues
- missing or bad sensors were a pain
- new technology (ir sensors, beacons) should be delivered early so teams can learn them
- people thought pnuematics improved greatly this year
- field was good except side walls interefered with some autos, FIRST keeps changing height year-to-year
- final blueprints need to be final
blueprints - perhaps teams could opt out for certain parts if they don’t need them to save FIRST money
- some people want middle-speed motors
- some people want to be able to use industry equivalent motors
- everyone hates the drill motor transmissions
- people want more contacts
- people want more sortability using the q&a
- suggestion that each team have a student contact (to relay info to students that is regarding things like mentor award nominations)
- people want more detailed criteria re: judging awards
- people want past examples of how teams won (to get an idea of what to do or how to be different)
- people want more business oriented awards to get business schools involved
- people had lots of questions about judging logistics
- people want inspectors with better bedside manner, more objective
- people want more pr for events, more spectators
- people want more consistent refereeing
- people want to make sure teams know how to get clarification of penalties after a match
- people want workshops on new technology well before the build season
- people want more varied workshops
Note: I say ‘people’, ‘peeps’, and ‘some people’ interchangeably. They can mean almost everyone to about one or two. I like team forums. 
I would actually tend to disagree, in the pits at least. In both Arizona and Socal (but Socal more) the music could not be heard to well in the pits. I would start bopping my head to a song and all my teammates would be like “what the heck are you doing” I’d be like “I like this song” they’d be like “I don’t hear it, what is it?” On the field was better. At LA in the stands for viewing the field it was very difficult to see or hear what was going on. The screen was too small, faded, and out of focus. The anouncing wasn’t loud enough or clear enough.
In 2002 and 2003 in LA, the whole place was so incredibly loud that you had to shout at the top of your lungs to the person next you and we all lost our voices. Soft is better that loud, but a good balance in between is the best.
One thing they should change is that music should be playing from the moment the first person steps in the door of the Arena. it makes the place get lively faster. Usually, it takes them up to an hour to get it going.
One thing is that Phoenix as always has absolutely fantastic pit announcing and queing. LA was significantly improved as well.
One small issue is that several inspectors at both events had inspected the previous year as well and still thought we were not allowed to have titanium because it was not on the “additional hardware and materials list”. Once we convinced them that there was no such list and titanium was indeed allowed, everything was okay. Also, inpectors should check for compressors running in reverse, they didn’t seemed at all concerned that ours never reached full pressure and was so hot you could fry an egg on it.
One big thing that has always bothered me is that they say no grinding, soldering, or open flame in the pits, only in the designated area. Well, at every single event I have ever been to, I’ve asked everyone I could find if they know where we are allowed to grind and they don’t know. They ask someone else who doesn’t know, and it goes on. All the people I’ve asked where this special area is, it seems like news to them that you can’t do it in the pits. But as soon as you do grind in the pits, you have some FIRST person YELLING at you to stop and if you ever do it again they’ll take your grinder away and not give it back. We need designated areas for these activites.
Additionally, I have seen students using (in a very unsafe manner I might add) circular saws in the pits. I don’t think the size and power of a tool like that is really something that belongs in a 10x10 space with like 5 other people.
Last, FIRST please do whatever it takes to put a monitor or screen on the Pit side of the curtain. LA had zip, zero, nothing, nada. Even just a 15" computer monitor or 13" TV would be better than nothing. Had we known, we could have brought like 2 LCD projectors and screens from school.
The electrical in the LA pits was not very good. We were running a battery charger and a small air compressor, team 980 was running a soldering iron and a battery charger and we kept tripping the breaker. That made our dual compressor set up out of the question. We need better electrical in the pits so we can run multiple battery chargers and air compressors and such. It’s really annoying trying to run an air ratchet with no air, a robot with uncharged batteries, or a cold soldering iron.
I know this isn’t necessarily what was brought up at a forum (because I wasn’t there) but it probably should have.
Perhaps you didn’t hear about the dismal financial situation of the LA (SoCal) Regional this year. Except for its first year, LA has been somewhat underfunded (no team party), and this year it was even more serious. That’s why we had undersized or nonexistent media. We are VERY grateful to the sponsors who stuck with us this year!
There are prospects for better funding in 2005, but if it doesn’t come through, “zip, zero, nothing, nada” will apply to the whole regional. FIRST cannot afford to pull us out of another hole next year. (Which is why a certain committee member asked team 330 to pray for that additional funding.)
If you haven’t seen the discussion on FIRST funding, go to:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28828
Yes, I was aware of the situation and experienced it firsthand. However, I don’t think the overall scheme of regional funding, now matter how little of it there is, should keep the pit table from having a cheap computer monitor or cheap tv and an extra cable to the video source. The cost of that is little to none.
I’m glad the regional has survived and I hope it gets some more sposors and money for the future.
Anyway, back on to the recaps. Does anyone have any more?
The announcers and MC’s took a big hit at all of the lowA/V budget events. The announcer had a push to talk mike at the table and the MC had a hand held cordless. This puts a big damper on how they (WE) do their jobs. I was not even allowed to bring my own headset mike. In Detroit they did accomodate us and allowed my headset mike for Saturday. I let Paul C use it as an MC really needs the use of both hands.
Money is tough everywhere. If you know any potential sponsers, PLEASE let your regional chairperson know!
I attended the NH forum and didn’t take many notes. I thought the structured process was good. Many of the same discussions were held as above postings. Other info:
· Kickoff Jan. 8
· Championships April 21,22,23
· Considering more than 300 teams at Championship
· FIRST have innovations they want to introduce to kit over time, like IR sensors. May consider releasing what it will be before kickoff.
· FIRST will have better photo album of parts this year and better supply chain, better drawings, and more catalogue options.
· Considering weighing at inspection without battery and lowering weight limit. Lots of constructive suggestions re: inspections.
· Discussion held on the “zen” of FIRST: student-driven vs. engineer-driven teams.
· Discussion about more guidelines given to judges and more feedback needed from judges.
· Discussion about the Chairman’s award and the Engineering Inspiration award. Told that “EI” award was not the runner up to Chairman’s.
Hopefully, some of the other NH attendees can fill in some more. Thanks to Sue, Hut , Brian, and darn it, I lost the other woman’s name, from FIRST for listening.
If that is true, how come chairmen’s award winners get gold medals, and EI award winners get silver ones?
And don’t EI winners qualify for championship?
PLEASE DONT BRING THIS THREAD OFF TOPIC! I understand what you may be thinking, but please if you want to discuss this or argue over the topic of EI being 2nd to CA, then please make your own thread on it.