VADCFLL-L Archives

November 2012

VADCFLL-L@LISTSERV.JMU.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Laura Dysart <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Laura Dysart <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 10 Nov 2012 08:35:22 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (104 lines)
Yes, we are going to get the markings off- I don't think it is a good idea and was concerned from the beginning- did go back and find the rule. The team meant no harm- they thought they had come up with a good solution.  My bigger concern was if we could not undo- they have worked really hard all season - they actually put the markings this Thursday.  There will be no markings on our sensors.  thanks all for the feedback. Laura
On Nov 9, 2012, at 11:51 PM, VA/DC Referee Advisor wrote:

> Different Rules are there for different reasons.
>
> Most are there to make sure that the robot game is fun, and performed
> by an autonomous robot.
>
> Some are there to give the team more of a challenge.
>
> Some are there to make things easier for the referees to do, and for
> the team to understand.
>
>
> Although it's not my place to discuss the intent of the Rules (Rules 3
> and 29), I think that the limitation on markings is there for the
> following reasons:
>
> a) Teams are limited to using "LEGO-manufactured elements in original
> factory condition" to set a level-playing field, try to keep costs
> affordable for teams all over the world, and to limit teams in
> materials they can use, to give them a reasonable challenge.
>
> b) The referees don't want to have to determine whether stray
> markings serve some kind of strategic purpose.
>
> c) Most teams can remember what they need to do after a little
> practice, even without markings. It's just a little extra brain
> challenge.
>
> d) The robots look nicer in pictures without writing all over them.
>
>
> Actually, this rule as been around as long I as have been an FLL
> referee. I've teased teams about labeling their robots for years, and
> enjoyed asking them which kits their stickers came from. I've never
> seen a team kicked out because they had a name or a number on their
> robot.
>
> In response to the thought that teams should be allowed to do anything
> that helps them, we have lots of examples in FLL where teams are not
> allowed to do things that might help them:
>
> - having 11 team members
> - using 4 motors or two bricks
> - using Robot-C
> - taking as much time as they like with the project presentation
> - avoiding touch penalties by leaving a tether in Base
> - having Bluetooth on during a match
> - having an alignment jig extend outside Base
>
> Some of these might seem helpful, some might not.
>
> Bottom line--it's just a rule. One of the side effects of FLL is that
> we ask for members of the team to become expert rule-readers both to
> be able to comply with the rules, and to think creatively about how to
> act within the rules in surprising ways. This is one of those
> rules--even if there is minuscule benefit for the team, the team
> shouldn't mark the robot or its pieces, because it's not allowed
> within the rules.
>
> Steve Scherr
> VA/DC FLL Referee Advisor
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Purnima <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Still don't understand why marking the sensor or motor is not allowed, If
>> team wants to put a number on motors, sensor that helps them it should be
>> allowed. As that will not inter fear with the robot. Just wanted to
>> understand the justification behind no marking on the sensor/motor.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Purnima
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:14 PM, VA/DC Referee Advisor <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Laura,
>>> It's been tacitly understood that marking the robots to distinguish
>>> them from each other, especially where there were multiple teams from
>>> a school or other location, has been inevitable. Also, once you do
>>> it, it could be financially infeasible to undo.
>>>
>>> For attachments and other components like sensors, it would be seen
>>> as more consistent with the rules not to have those marked. So, if
>>> possible, swapping with unmarked sensors would be preferable.
>>>
>>> Steve Scherr
>>> VA/DC FLL Referee Advisor
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Laura Dysart <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> My team wrote numbers on two of their sensors in sharpie- they have some
>>>> swapping out of attachments and sensors and decided to mark the ports on the
>>>> sensors. Raised a red flag for me- is that "illegal?" We can swap out the
>>>> sensors if it is against rules. Thank you- Laura
>
> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE or CHANGE your settings, please visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-l.html and select "Join or leave the list".
>
> -- VADCFLL administrative announcements are sent via VADCFLL-ANNOUNCEMENTS-L. Visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-ANNOUNCEMENTS-l.html to subscribe.

-- To UNSUBSCRIBE or CHANGE your settings, please visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-l.html and select "Join or leave the list".

-- VADCFLL administrative announcements are sent via VADCFLL-ANNOUNCEMENTS-L. Visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-ANNOUNCEMENTS-l.html to subscribe.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2