- Location
- Basel, Switzerland
Nick
Believe me when I say that there are answers to all your questions above.
There is not sinister conspiracy at play here.
The highest standards are being applied to assure consistent, replicable, backed-up and responsible decisions. Are we always spot on? Certainly not, I will be the first to admit this. But do we try to continuously improve, from event to event? Yes, I believe we do, as I am sure you can confirm after having attended the event in Milwaukee.
I am not interested in getting involved in in-depth discussions on-line, as I feel that with passions running high, the scope for misunderstandings is also high.
And that is not what is needed now.
What we need right now is a balanced, thoughtful dialogue involving all stakeholders. We went to considerable efforts to move forwards in order be able to allow the Rope Wrench in Milwaukee, which was possible, thanks also to Rich Hattier's efforts. Yes, there was compromise in regards to the configuration, but some things just take time to fall into place and do not happen over night. Having said that, if the quality of the final result is improved by taking the time to work through issues, rather than launching something half-cocked just to have it back fire on you, I believe the former to be the wiser route to take.
The mid term goal shall be to establish a set of performance criteria that apply across the board to all equipment and techniques, regardless of configuration.
But again, as all of this is based upon volunteer work this process just takes time. The ITCC Performance Criteria document has been put out for review twice (we received next to no feedback on it – but that is another story), and the next step will be to finalize that document and by doing so to create a common benchmark that people can reference when considering systems to use in the competitions.
Hope this helps to clarify things, I will be more than happy to take time to discuss this matter further, face to face, when we next meet in Tampa – or someplace else.
Regards
Mark
Believe me when I say that there are answers to all your questions above.
There is not sinister conspiracy at play here.
The highest standards are being applied to assure consistent, replicable, backed-up and responsible decisions. Are we always spot on? Certainly not, I will be the first to admit this. But do we try to continuously improve, from event to event? Yes, I believe we do, as I am sure you can confirm after having attended the event in Milwaukee.
I am not interested in getting involved in in-depth discussions on-line, as I feel that with passions running high, the scope for misunderstandings is also high.
And that is not what is needed now.
What we need right now is a balanced, thoughtful dialogue involving all stakeholders. We went to considerable efforts to move forwards in order be able to allow the Rope Wrench in Milwaukee, which was possible, thanks also to Rich Hattier's efforts. Yes, there was compromise in regards to the configuration, but some things just take time to fall into place and do not happen over night. Having said that, if the quality of the final result is improved by taking the time to work through issues, rather than launching something half-cocked just to have it back fire on you, I believe the former to be the wiser route to take.
The mid term goal shall be to establish a set of performance criteria that apply across the board to all equipment and techniques, regardless of configuration.
But again, as all of this is based upon volunteer work this process just takes time. The ITCC Performance Criteria document has been put out for review twice (we received next to no feedback on it – but that is another story), and the next step will be to finalize that document and by doing so to create a common benchmark that people can reference when considering systems to use in the competitions.
Hope this helps to clarify things, I will be more than happy to take time to discuss this matter further, face to face, when we next meet in Tampa – or someplace else.
Regards
Mark
Last edited: