Honor is doing the right thing when nobody is watching.
Honor is a very difficult thing to enforce with rules because there are so many areas where things can be ‘overlooked’ by the officials.
Every year I tell my team “This is a competition, and the goal in a compitition is to win. However, it is the actions that one takes in achieving this goal that tells the measure of the person”.
And as far as mentor built robots go … How the mentors of a team inspire their team is unimportant, as long as the team is inspired to do great things. We in 1824 believe in ‘student designed, student built’, but that does not mean that all teams should do as we do. For inspiration comes in many forms.
I graduated from Caltech (PhD in Chemistry, 1984), an institution which has operated under an Honor Code system throughout is existence (over 100 years). The Honor Code at Caltech is driven by one, single guiding principle:
“No member of the Caltech community shall take unfair advantage of any other member of the community.”
That principle is applied to academics (it is policy that all tests are unproctored), research, property, and even interpersonal relationships at Caltech. Violations of the Honor Code are dealt with very seriously. The Conduct Review Committe along with the Board of Control or Graduate Review Board will conduct investigations and hearings to deal with cases of suspected violations of the Caltech Honor Code. If substantiated, the violator can expect justice to be administered - up to and including expulsion.
So, what is the result of having such an honor system in place? At Caltech, you have complete trust in everyone in the community. You can be open with exchange of ideas, offer critical comments, and work together without the fear of being taken advantage of by others. This creates a very stimulating environment in which to explore and learn.
I get the same feeling in the FIRST community. In this forum, students (and mentors) explore the interpretation of rules to determine the boundaries of acceptable behavior - that’s OK. After being in FIRST for a while, participants generally become less interested in “lawyering” the rules and tend to focus on the real purpose of FIRST: inspiration. This is why I believe the Honor Code is an essential part of FIRST culture - if we accept that principle and are faithful to it, FIRST will remain an environment of trust, respect and honor for all of its participants.
Note: My discussion of the honor code was not about mentors or students building/making parts, it was mostly about how teams can go as far as they wish if they wanted to concerning fix-it windows to build parts, bring more than their allotted weight to competition, and other stuff along those lines. Although most teams will uphold the rules, there is always that possibility and that possibility is an unfair advantage. My discussion was if there is a way to ‘check up’ on the honor code?
For my Independent Study Mentorship class, my teacher would call either us or our mentors during slots where we signed out to make sure we were ‘on task’ when we were not being watched. Although she only called once, the fear of her calling again reduced the amount of people signing out to ‘meet their mentors’ and going home to honestly writing ‘going home’ on the sign out sheet.
its doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do. even when there is no one watching, or you can have personal gain if you dont do the right thing.
The honor code is simply an answer to the question “Do teams ever cheat?”. Remember, we are all part of FIRST not to win, but to play with everyone else. We love FIRST so much that we would shame ourselves to even think of intentionally sneaking around the very loose rules that are imposed.
I am going to make a distinction on what I consider cheating. Cheating is intentionally ignoring the explicitly or implicitly stated rules in the competition manual, with the intention of gaining an unfair advantage over other teams. If you don’t know what cheating is, then you should go play in a different sandbox.
I feel I need to further by reminding people not to use accusations of cheating to mask feelings of jealousy, most notably against an experienced three digit team from the West Coast. We all feel jealousy at one time or another, but sometimes we are so amazed (and jealous) of a team’s ingenious and effective ideas that sometimes give them the upper hand against us. And this jealousy can lead us to conclude that the other team must be cheating. And needs to be punished. :mad: And for all the time that you are thinking about this, the other team is actually focusing on things that really matter (i.e. anything but jealousy).
If it really bothers you so much then go up to the team and start asking questions. What materials do they use and why? Did any real life object serve as inspiration? Who is in charge of what? What to do if you have more questions? You will invariably discover that all teams respect the game and its rules just like you.
At the Atlanta championship we caught 2 vex teams applying lube to sliders. Which is definitely illegal and spelt out in the rules. We confronted them about it and they replied that they were unaware of this rule. Ignorance is not a excuse. I think this was an abuse of the honor code. One of the teams used it again later, and we found the lube and threw it away without them knowing. We felt bad, but they were not abiding by the rules. One of the teams went on to do VERY well in the competition.
enforcing the rules is not up to teams, it is up to FIRST. For this i lose respect for you and your team. If you notice something that shouldn’t be done ask them top stop this (which you did), however if you see this happen again you should notify a FIRST inspector and allow them to deal with it.
Enforcing rules is not and should not be left up to team (except for the code of honor which deals with the fix-it windows)
I think one thing that makes the honor code in FIRST so un-controversial is that everyone knows the reasoning behind it. If people buy into the philosophies of FIRST, the thought of cheating a) wouldn’t even occur and b) if it does occur, is instantly repugnant.
I was discussing with my wife the other day that FIRST teams really get the notion of collaborative competition. “If I help you as much as I can, if I help you be as good as you can be, then beating you becomes that much more satisfying.” It’s almost like a sibling rivalry between teams, especially those in close geographic quarters.
One sidenote to this conversation - Within your team, whose obligation is it to present the Honor Code to the new members? Once instilled, whose obligation is it to police the team and keep the Code alive in the team’s conscience? (by “whose” I mean coaches, teachers, mentors, NEMs, parents, veteran students, etc.)
edit: I agree completely with Mr. Delles. Teams should not be vigilante groups; if you spot suspicious/illegal behavior, discuss it with team members (which was done in this case) and try to come to an alternate, ethical solution. If necessary, alert officals. We make ourselves better by lifting others and standing on their shoulders, not by knocking them down.
At one of the first team meetings (mid-September) this concept is discussed by the team coach (a teacher). When the ‘final’ team is assembled (late December) after some students drop out, the coach brings it up again, especially with the new team members.
After this formal introduction, the general idea is brought up many times, as circumstances warrant (or as opportunity presents) by students, mentors, and coaches. Sometimes these discussions are informal, off-the-cuff comments, other times we all sit together as a team to discuss whether doing something is ‘in the spirit’ of the rules and unwrtitten honor code.
That last part is important: “Where are the lines” is a healthy discussion, helping everyone understand themselves how to recognize when the line is crossed, or might be crossed, or is even in sight.
The best is ‘overhearing’ the kids handle this by themselves. Peer pressure can be a positive influence as well.
The reason the honor code WORKS in FIRST is because of the prestige that floats around the competition. To the lucky teams who have won a competition, they know that feeling right after you win. It is unbelievable. The reason our team honors the honor code ;), is because of that feeling. You can never really call it a win, if you cheated to get there. The reason i like the honor code in FIRST is because it seems almost everyone GETS THIS FACT, and understands what is up for grabs out there.
p.s…it is NOT up to the teams to enforce the rules, this is where the line needs to be drawn. bring it to FIRST, it is not something an individual team should be doing.
Once there is a check on someone’s behavior there is no longer a code of honor. It is called a code of honor because it is someting we all live by, because we know it is the right thing to do. The code of honor is all about trusting and not checking on people.
And what you are saying is to get rid of something that has been working well??? Yes if you implement a check on this even a random check there is no longer trust. We all participate in FIRST to have fun. Honestly if FIRST checked every box at a regional with extra/spare parts and one of those was 25.5 pounds what would you do? I know i would let them stay, because all the spare/extra parts don’t make a difference if they aren’t easily changed out or your drivers are not skilled at driving the robot.
Here is a question. Is it the robot or the driver that wins matches? From what i have seen winning a match is all about strategy, adaption to opponents strategy, and driver skill. For this i take quarterfinals match 1.1 and 1.2 of th Galileo Division this past year. It was 1425, 25, 488 v. 65, 79, 503. This should have been a domination by the number 1 alliance, however the number 8 alliance implemented a better strategy, adapted to the number 1 alliances strategy, and had overall better driver control of there robots. Now would any extra parts or extra time building there robot have helped here? no… if anything it hurt them because it would take away from DRIVER TRAINING!!!
once again just a few more cents from me, still can’t see what the big deal is with trusting teams.
This is careless advice and should not be followed. Questioning a rule is fine. Stating that a rule should be changed is a freedom that we all have. If someone thinks a rule is wrong, they can argue their case properly and work hard to get it changed.
I hope this was what Tom was referring to, and just posted in haste.
Breaking a rule just because you think it is meant to be broken is not good advice.
Everyone’s - beginning at the top - with the leaders.
Oftentimes, when a new member joins the team, be they student, mentor, parent - they have the understanding that a robotics team builds robots. Period. In our team, we often hear the questions, ‘why can’t we do that?’ or ‘why do we have to do it this way?’ These questions provide excellent opportunities for the leaders and the veteran team members to provide information and training, helping the new members understand the process. It is a process providing guidelines and how to build and compete with robots for a FIRST competition following the rules, respecting and understanding them and the code of honor.
It is important that the team leaders are on the same page with this or things can become chaotic very quickly. It will affect the actual build process and the organization/smooth running of the team as well as the competition(s).
I think my vagueness was confused for something else. Let me clear it up.
FIRST is supposed to inspire and prepare kids for a life and career in a science based profession. The last time I checked, the world wasn’t “fair”. People lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead in every aspect of life. I’m not saying this is justification to go out and break the rules; it is nothing even close to that. With that being said, people really just need to worry about themselves and their team. How far are you willing to push while still feeling comfortable? In reality, this is a question that only YOU are able to answer, and if you break the rules then prepare to suffer whatever consequences await.
What I do not like hearing about is the “vigilantism” that is going on at competitions. I don’t care if someone broke every rule in the book… One team has absolutely no right to touch another teams property. Seriously, it’s just a game. If everyone could just worry about how much fun they are having rather than how much they disagree with other teams, the program would be much better off.
Tho I conquer with the statement is always good to push the envelope I believe you have to stay within the rules and if you don’t you better be prepared to face the consequences by whoever they come from.
If a team breaks every rule in the book then you better make sure they are held accountable. If you don’t you taint the validity of the program it becomes a free for all the program disentegrates. Its absolutely foolish to just let teams go unchecked.
The fact of the matter is often times those responsible for enforcing the rules don’t know them. Often times ( not every case ) robot inspectors, referees and field managers make up their own rules or don’t know the specifics, mainly because they are improperly trained. Now granted many of them are innocent mistakes maybe a rule changed from year to year and made an honest mistake, but I strongly believe its responsibility of teams and volunteers to resectfully and properly rectify these problems. Otherwise the teams you compete against are cheated out a fair and balanced competitions.
I learned an important rule of thumb this year, as much as you want teams to do the right thing often they do not. Now acting like a vigilanty and pulling wires out of a robot to break it would be bad. Going through the proper channels approaching them with the rule book or making the robot inspector aware of the issue, that is what should be done. Many broken rules are accidental, misinterpretation of a rule, or failure to get all updates. But when faced with their rule breaking in the middle of competition its their reaction to this confrontation that reflects heavily on their honor and their integrity. If they refuse to acknowledge the rule, then it should be brought to the proper authorities, if they still fail to acknowledge I believe they should be disqualified from the competition and should be disqualified from all played matches.
I know this post is not as much about the key to the honor code which reflects on “fix it” windows and pre season building, but it is no less important. We all know teams do not follow the code and build parts before season, teams may even build entire drive assemblies preseason. Its unfortunate but true, do their need to be more checks and balances? Possibly, but within the current construct of FIRST I believe it to be nearly impossible.
Cheating is huge, in real life it can get you thrown out of your sport and quite possibly land you in jail. A rule is a rule whether you like it or not, what gives your team the right to pick and chose while the other 1350 teams have to follow it. So whether it be by the FIRST volunteers, or the FIRST community, teams need to be held accountable. If teams follow this advice and ignore the rules, accountability and integrity, I believe that this program would self implode quicker than it would be “better off.”
Hey, many of the rules can seem almost arbitrary and incompatible with the way some FIRST teams operate.
The “fix-it window” rule is a good example: last year you were allowed two 5-hour periods in which to upgrade, make spare parts or work on software. For some teams, that highly-constrained work period just couldn’t work. If, during weekdays, the mentors couldn’t show up until after 6 pm and the school or facility where you built the robot required you to leave by 9pm, you basically lost 40% of your fix-it window those days. FIRST could make it easier (and dare I say, more “fair”) by allowing teams to have three “fix-it window” sessions with no more than 10 hours cumulative permitted. Under last year’s rule, that wasn’t an option.
Would you consider a team that worked 3 hours on two weeknights and four hours on Saturday to be taking unfair advantage of other teams? Could YOUR team rationalize this as meeting the spirit of the “fix-it window intent”? (I’m not saying that I know of teams that did this; we certainly didn’t.)
As part of the FIRST community, we have the right (actually, the duty) to suggest that the FIRST rules have enough flexibilty to accommodate teams constraints without unduly penalizing them. Why put teams at a disadvantage via somewhat arbitrary rules intended to “level” the playing field?
Honor code is a great thing, but if some of the least enforceable rules seem arbitrarily over-constrained, the temptation to “skirt” them can drive teams down the path to rationalize their deviations from those rules. Once you start down that path, other rules can become victimized as well. I don’t think that’s where we want to go…
That is an excellent point and i back you completely on this. Even for our team it seemed diffucult to organize everything and everyone for 2 - 5 hour sessions. It would be nice to see FIRST allow 3 days with no more than 10 total hours.
Perhaps instances like this are exactly what Mr. Bottiglieri had in mind.
However, I do agree with Mr. Baker in that if you find a rule to be asinine, let the GDC know, don’t just pick-and-choose which rules you follow.
Is the world ‘fair’? No, absolutely not. But that does not mean that we cannot inspire these kids to be better than that. Lets change the world, 1 person at a time.
If you teach that lying, cheating, and stealing are acceptable ways to get ahead, than that is what these kids will do. I say, take the high road. Show them that lying, cheating, and stealing are wrong and will not be tolerated by our society (in this case, FIRST).
Here, I completely agree with you. 2 wrongs do not make a right. ‘Vigilantism’ is just plain wrong. If you see a team not playing by the rules, talk to them. If they dont care, let the proper authority (head referee?) know. Let the system work.
