2020-2021 Events

[SciolyMaster]

they BETTER FR*CKING keep Trajectory in the rotation instead of replacing it with Wifi Lab...

There's absolutely no reason to remove a perfectly good enjoyable build event just to replace it with another electronics event that seems almost identical to Detector Building.

I will be SO FR*CKING P*SSED if I NEVER get to do Trajectory again - the thing I've been looking forward towards my entire scioly career - just because they thought wifi lab was such a cool idea that it couldn't wait one more year to be put in detector building's rotation...

[LiteralRhinoceros]

smth else needs to be active in the second inquiry rotation
just game and code rn

[chalker]

There's absolutely no reason to remove a perfectly good enjoyable build event just to replace it with another electronics event that seems almost identical to Detector Building.

I will be SO FR*CKING P*SSED if I NEVER get to do Trajectory again - the thing I've been looking forward towards my entire scioly career - just because they thought wifi lab was such a cool idea that it couldn't wait one more year to be put in detector building's rotation...

I hate to have to break this to you, but there is virtually no chance we bring Trajectory back next year. It's currently slotted for the following year (21-22). However, this has nothing to do with Detector Building. Detector Building is in the Tech Committee track, whereas WiFi Lab is in the Physics Committee track. We don't really coordinate too much between the committees and hence neither event is related in our minds to the other. They are also quite different in terms of the science and engineering concepts and approach that are covered.

WiFi Lab (also known as Radio Lab) has been waiting in the wings for far too long and was overdue to come it as a real event. We first started seriously looking at it at within the Physics committee at the National level in 2011, and certain states were running trials of it even before that. Bringing it in was going to disrupt some aspect of our typical 2 years on, 4 years off rotation for Physics events, and we just felt this was the best way to do it.

Note, Trajectory WILL be a trial event at Nationals this year, and you might consider contacting your State Director to see if they can encourage it to be a trial event at tournaments in your State next year so you can experience it.

[CPScienceDude]

There's absolutely no reason to remove a perfectly good enjoyable build event just to replace it with another electronics event that seems almost identical to Detector Building.

I will be SO FR*CKING P*SSED if I NEVER get to do Trajectory again - the thing I've been looking forward towards my entire scioly career - just because they thought wifi lab was such a cool idea that it couldn't wait one more year to be put in detector building's rotation...

I hate to have to break this to you, but there is virtually no chance we bring Trajectory back next year. It's currently slotted for the following year (21-22). However, this has nothing to do with Detector Building. Detector Building is in the Tech Committee track, whereas WiFi Lab is in the Physics Committee track. We don't really coordinate too much between the committees and hence neither event is related in our minds to the other. They are also quite different in terms of the science and engineering concepts and approach that are covered.

WiFi Lab (also known as Radio Lab) has been waiting in the wings for far too long and was overdue to come it as a real event. We first started seriously looking at it at within the Physics committee at the National level in 2011, and certain states were running trials of it even before that. Bringing it in was going to disrupt some aspect of our typical 2 years on, 4 years off rotation for Physics events, and we just felt this was the best way to do it.

Note, Trajectory WILL be a trial event at Nationals this year, and you might consider contacting your State Director to see if they can encourage it to be a trial event at tournaments in your State next year so you can experience it.

hey how about hovercraft lol

[EastStroudsburg13]

We don't really coordinate too much between the committees and hence neither event is related in our minds to the other.

This seems like a major flaw to me, verging on critical. What possible reason is there to not coordinate between committees to make sure accidental overlaps don't occur? Competitors aren't concerned with what events come from what committees, all that matters is the set of 23.

[Scrambledeggs]

The biggest rip is that I won't be able to do awesome aquifers

[nicholasmaurer]

We don't really coordinate too much between the committees and hence neither event is related in our minds to the other.

This seems like a major flaw to me, verging on critical. What possible reason is there to not coordinate between committees to make sure accidental overlaps don't occur? Competitors aren't concerned with what events come from what committees, all that matters is the set of 23.

Given that each committee is focused on separate topic areas, there is a structural barrier to "accidental overlaps". If the Chemistry Committee focuses on chemistry events, the Physics Committee on physics events, etc. then there should always be an appropriate diversity of events and topics.

[EastStroudsburg13]

We don't really coordinate too much between the committees and hence neither event is related in our minds to the other.

This seems like a major flaw to me, verging on critical. What possible reason is there to not coordinate between committees to make sure accidental overlaps don't occur? Competitors aren't concerned with what events come from what committees, all that matters is the set of 23.

Given that each committee is focused on separate topic areas, there is a structural barrier to "accidental overlaps". If the Chemistry Committee focuses on chemistry events, the Physics Committee on physics events, etc. then there should always be an appropriate diversity of events and topics.

Theoretically, yes. But the possibility for an accidental overlap still exists, and that is the case I am addressing in my previous comment. It happens often enough that a discussion further than "well, we have committees, that's good enough" is more than warranted, but mandated.

[nicholasmaurer]

This seems like a major flaw to me, verging on critical. What possible reason is there to not coordinate between committees to make sure accidental overlaps don't occur? Competitors aren't concerned with what events come from what committees, all that matters is the set of 23.

Given that each committee is focused on separate topic areas, there is a structural barrier to "accidental overlaps". If the Chemistry Committee focuses on chemistry events, the Physics Committee on physics events, etc. then there should always be an appropriate diversity of events and topics.

Theoretically, yes. But the possibility for an accidental overlap still exists, and that is the case I am addressing in my previous comment. It happens often enough that a discussion further than "well, we have committees, that's good enough" is more than warranted, but mandated.

I think there are valid criticisms you could make of the event rotations. For example, there is a (recognized) need for more robotics/CS events. But I don’t recall any cases of problematic overlap in recent years that would make a significantly different approach “mandated”. Also, given that this is an almost entirely volunteer run organization, “mandated” often isn’t a realistic tact...

[Unome]

It's hard for me to comment on this much now. Different committees have very different approaches to things - interaction between them seems like it would be complicated.