I was asked to share an idea I'd had. I had outlined this briefly at
the last meeting.
I've spent entirely too much time frustrated with the closed off
nature of groups within HackPGH. Specific members tend to be stand
offish and push members away from what are supposed to be shop
projects. So, I wanted to bring my frustrations to the council, which
I did, but I also wanted to come in with a solution. That's what this
is. It's a proposal that both leverages the dedicated, if cliquish,
nature of the membership at HP, as well as breaks away from the way
things have been done for the last five years. There is no denying
that the current approach to the Power Racing Series works well,
that's kind of the point. It's stagnant. HP gets on the podium
because of showmanship, not because it's first across the finish line.
WHY A COMPETITION
Right now we are a group comprised of many cooks in the kitchen who
think they are the smartest person in the room. And by default that
makes them the only capable one in the room. What we have is a lack
of applicable project intelligence.
This is the fact of the matter, and it yields projects sitting around
for years and no or marginal innovation. So, since everyone wants
autonomy, let's call it what it is, and actually do something in that
context.
The competition gives a semi-rigid framework to a project right off.
The winning entry will (1) be a solid plan by virtue of winning, so
that's a step forward to start wih. It will (2) be the product of one
or a handful of minds, so the street cred will be high profile for the
winning entry. (3) The proposal will further constrain the team for
the 2016 season, meaning that shooting down add-on ideas will be not
only doable but sanctioned. Having a workable, approved plan in
place allows for shooting down every ancillary addition--”This is plan
that was approved, this is what we're going with”. After the 2016
season the shop can start hacking away on the project as they wish.
A TIMELINE
Early September
Proposals due to HackPGH's council.
Guidelines for proposals are loose but should include
A BOM for the vechicle itself, along with a cost analysis for it and
accessory parts for the pit.
A systems breakdown including at minimum
Chasis design
Drive train
Safety implementation
General aesthetic, including theme and body design
and highlights of any unique systems or techniques.
Proposals will be reviewed at the September council meeting. At least
two proposals will be selected to move on by the council, assuming at
least two entries.
These proposals will be granted space at HackPGH's display for the
Pittsburgh Maker Faire.
VOTING
Voting on the final proposal will consist of three segments.
To imitate a team's ability to garner Moxie (see the PWRS rules if you
don't know about Moxie, it's super important), one third of the vote
will be cast by visitors to Pittsburgh's Faire, assuming more than one
entry is selected by the council.
One third will be cast by the Hackerspace's membership at the second
members meeting in October.
One third will be cast by the council itself.
The resulting winner will be announced no later than the first
November member's meeting.
Funds (proposed at $400) can either be granted whole or as a
reimbursement fund for purchased parts.
The realization of the winning proposal will be pitted against the
existing car in the second half of April in a race designed by the
board taking into consideration such factors as
Driver changes
Cornering
Track conditions
Speed off the line
Top speed
The victorious vehicle will be awarded an additional fund (proposed to
match the initial prize) that can be applied to past or future part
purchases to get the vehicle track-ready with a fully stocked pit.
QUALMS:
A list of nay-saying:
1) “I'm all for competition, but...”
Personally, any challenge I issue that's met with “I'm all for
competition” from a potential competitor, who then goes on to explain
how they don't think that THIS PARTICULAR competition is going to work
gets my skepticism.
So, yeah. If you currently have the crown, and you microaggress when
other people want be involved, and you don't want a competition that
might dethrone you in the context of a civic organization—well, you're
pointing out reasons why this type of competition is imperative.
2) “It's not fair because the current team bought most of the parts.”
First, let's be clear. You may disagree here: If you use shop space
to build a project that shop parts are included in that you are
planning to run under the shop banner, that project is the shop's.
If you use shop space and use your parts and the paid for resources
included with your membership to build something you will fly under
your own banner, that thing is yours.
If the shop funds the vast majority of the build, flies the shop
banner over the project, and allows for additional resources to be
used without charge above and beyond those included with membership,
then that project is the shop's.
With the new 501c (4) designation, this can be broken down even more
clearly. Donations of time and money that are important to a brand
identity that you put down on your tax filing are deductible which
outlines a transference of ownership of said capital.
Also the fact that hours applied to a project under that HP banner are
labeled 'volunteer' demonstrates that this is a civic organization
implying that the greater whole benefits from the efforts of the
individual.
If we take that to be true, then materials given are materials given.
That is, I hand you a pencil. I say that pencil is yours. You are
not obligated to give that pencil back, share that pencil, or be
guided on specific use of that pencil. It's yours now. Ownership is
transferred.
Depending on the individual, there can be complications with this. If
a person is trying to have their cake and eat it, they will put in
time and effort and start to consider the item theirs, or more theirs
than not. This mentality discounts the time and effort put in by
others.
There is a different, less self focused philosophy that recognizes the
philanthropy of what they are doing to benefit the greater group and
honestly feels attachment and fondness for a project but not a
perpetual ownership.
That former philosophy is the dominant one in the current project.
This is not in the vein of “HackPittsburgh is community.”
But, to try and be extra fair, you'll see above that I propose that
the victor in the head to head gets the second available sum of money.
So, if the current car wins they receive it and it can be applied
retroactively to their past purchases.
3) “Well, maybe we can bring two cars.”
That's hard to swallow for a few reasons.
First of all, Pittsburgh generally places or wins competition based on
Moxie points. Two cars means you split the Moxie.
Honestly I would love to see two cars happen. That would mean that
collectively HP is ranking doing proven, cool stuff to engage with
members above winning competitions. But frankly, during a clean up
day few months ago the ruling was to dismantle the other Power Wheels
chassis. That doesn't speak to support of a two car solution.
Also, there's the fact that getting enough people to a race is always
a scramble. At Maker Faire New York, I volunteered to drive. But
when two people couldn't show at the event, I had to drive. Don't get
me wrong...I LOVE to drive that thing, but what I thought was going to
be a single 15 minute run turned into 45 minutes away from my own
exhibit. Please understand, I'm happy to do it, but I want to drive
home the point of how hard supporting two cars is going to be. Not to
mention the debacle of trying to get the train to the south side for
the Barrel Roll.
IN SUMMARY:
Competitions get people thinking and creative. We could use a dose of that.
We could even advertise it. It's very provocative to have an internal
competition.
EJ
