Subject:
|
Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:03:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3984 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, John Hansen wrote:
> In lugnet.robotics, David Koudys wrote:
> > In lugnet.robotics, Steve Hassenplug wrote:
> > Anyway, the kid rants and raves about how the rules were unfair and such, and
> > that we shuld have been able to make the top any diameter.
>
> The length of time a top will spin depends (in part) on its diameter. As a
> result the analogy to a pleasant conversation (during which, to my ears, there
> has been no ranting or raving) about FLL allowing NQC or not breaks down.
>
> John Hansen
I wasn't stating that there was ranting and raving in this thread--I mentioned
that hte kid ranted and raved when his top was disqualified.
the greater point was that when there are competitoins, there are rules to the
competitions. These rules may seem arbitrary, but they also even the playfield
for everyone. The participants in competitions must adhere to 'da rulz' as
presented for the competition or be disqualified. The rules for FLL, as I
understand here, state non-third party software. That encompasses NQC.
Therefore, NQC cannot be used--it doesn't matter if it's comparable to what is
allowed.
If it were up to me--if I was running FLL, I'd allow it 'cause I love NQC. But
I'm not running FLL, therefore I cannot change the rules.
That said, when I run the 'bot competitions for rtlT, NQC is allowed. So, for
me, I didn't like the way others run their competitions, so I run my own.
Now for rtlT, we always stated that only non-modified LEGO elements and regular
construction techniques can be used. However, in the last competition a builder
used custom John Barnes sensors--the rationale--he could have done the IR
proximity using the RCX but this was just easier. Being the lax and laid back
rtlers that we are, we said 'no worries'.
But there begins the slippery slope--as Calum said once--maybe someone in the
future's gonna show up with a PIC/ handyboard whatever with 64 meg of memory for
a huge program and 102 custom sensors--we don't know.
So that's why there are rules--FLL says only LEGO software. It's arbitrary to
you and me, but dems da rules.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
| (...) Just for the record, I agree completely with what you said... but to that end, should a team be disqualified because they designed it in MLCAD? Or should they be disqualified if one of the team members wrote a computer program that could (...) (20 years ago, 16-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
| (...) The length of time a top will spin depends (in part) on its diameter. As a result the analogy to a pleasant conversation (during which, to my ears, there has been no ranting or raving) about FLL allowing NQC or not breaks down. John Hansen (20 years ago, 16-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
114 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
