DPRG
DPRG List  



[DPRG] Contests at the Science Place

Subject: [DPRG] Contests at the Science Place
From: Dan Miner miner at centtech.com
Date: Mon Feb 4 12:23:12 CST 2002

>From the rules:

--------------------------
Craftsmanship Value -VARIABLE scoring

Points awarded for exceptional robot design and construction. Points awarded
should be proportional to the quality of the craftsmanship exhibited in the
robot with more points being awarded for fine workmanship, clever design
techniques, overall appearance, etc. Example score: Loose wires and hot glue
= low score. Average robot = medium score. Anodized machined aluminum = high
score. Note: be sure to consider if the robot was "crafted" by the robot
builder or pre-fabricated etc. 
--------------------------


Couldn't this also apply to a hand crafted robot (more points) vs. 
a mass-produced ready-to-run toy (less points)?

				- Dan

> From: R. Bickle [mailto:rbickle at swbell.net]
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 11:47 AM
> 
> We wouldn't want to discourage competition by making "hacked" 
> toys or kits
> illegal in the competition, but I do think that there should 
> be some extra
> points somewhere for the person who has taken the time and 
> effort to design
> his own drive system, platform and controls etc. I mean, SR02 
> and a lego kit
> shouldn't even be in the same category.
> 
> Suppose there was an extra judging category for x points 
> depending on the
> level of engineering in the robot? (By the hobbyist, not the 
> toy company.)
> 
> Rick Bickle
> 
> 
> From: dprglist-admin at dprg.org 
> [mailto:dprglist-admin at dprg.org]On Behalf
> Of Sluggy!
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 11:21 AM
> 
> Ed Okerson wrote:
> 
> > "Robots must be built from scratch or kit form"
> 
> > That is an exact excerpt from the rules that have been 
> posted on the DPRG
> web
> > site for who knows how long.  Anyone care to comment on this?
> 
> 
> Let me first say that I have not served on the rules 
> committee [ as yet
> :) ], but I think the spirit of this rule is for each robot to be
> unique, as opposed to identical kits assembled identically.
> 
> I would think that even if two robots shared the same base chassis
> (BOEbot or ARobot, for example) unless they were identically 
> equiped and
>   configured (at the discretion of the contest judges), they will be
> unique. Actually, I think that even if tasked with creating identical
> robots from a list of requirements, any given pair of robot builders
> would make unique robots, siblings perhaps, but not twins.
> 
>  > I think the intent of this rule is that you cannot enter a 
> Sony Aibo,
>  > or other commercially built complete robot solution.  I guess that
>  > would mean that if you bought a Heathkit Hero in kit form and
>  > assembled it yourself it would be legal to enter, but if you bought
>  > one factory assembled it would not.
> 
> Hmmmm... I think the task of the judges would be to make a judgement
> call on how "stock" a kit was. I think a completely unmodified Hero,
> whether kit or preassembled, would not meet the spirit of the rule. It
> could be argued that if it were the only Hero in the contest then it
> would be unique. Tough call. Simply adding sensors or other hardware
> would be enough to make it unique in my eyes.
> 
> Of course, then we get into the whole concept of whether software
> differences constitute uniqueness :)
> 
> Sluggy!
> 
> --
> 
> "No dignified person would voluntarily submit to it; the people who do
> submit to it are usually defective to begin with and come out of the
> process moderately deranged, if not actively insane." - Dave Barry, on
> running for president

More information about the DPRG mailing list