FE Team Challenge -- Scoring Poll

[zpiloto]

Originally Posted by diamondlarry

This is just my $.02 worth. I want to start out by saying that I don't have any trouble meeting the 3 gallon min so for me it's not an issue. But, I have to wonder if it's really all that neccessary. Let me explain. I fill my tank ALL the way to the top every time so it seems to me that there would be very little if any chance for variation in fill-ups by using this method. I have done this on every car I've owned in the past(both new and used) and have had no problems with expansion/leakage or damaging the charcoal canister. I realize that this is a very personal issue and I'm not putting anyone down because they do things different than I do. Perhaps we could allow those who don't use a full 3 gallons to do the top-of-the-tank method since it would virtually eliminate any variations in fill accuracy? Again, just my $.02 worth. I would hate to lose MetroMPG on a technicality like that.

I agree I would hate to lose Metro to something like this and I don't think we should. Right now this is something that's not a problem he made the required fill. Even when he went 4 months without fueling when he did that was over 9 gallons.

The filler neck fill is just not consistant. Look at gaslogs most of the big jumps happen from less than 3 gallons. It might be the pump that causes the problem but when you look at gaslogs the one common demoninator is the biggest jumps are less then 3 gallons. Even SG are not accurate look at metro last fill.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

omgz, wtf's up wit int3rn3tz dr4m4z? even here? *sigh*

[rh77]

Originally Posted by omgwtfbyobbq

omgz, wtf's up wit int3rn3tz dr4m4z? even here? *sigh*

What?

I'm sorry, I don't speak Internetonian -- and Babbelfish is down

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Originally Posted by rh77

What?

I'm sorry, I don't speak Internetonian -- and Babbelfish is down

Apology accepted! Was Babbelfish ever up?

[MetroMPG]

Yeah, life's pretty good when this is the biggest conflict a person has to deal with eh?

My "baseline" fill was within the 28 days. So technically I'm OK. It just means my recent driving doesn't benefit my team this sesson.

However it will apply to the next one, and it makes it far more likely I'll pass the 3-gal threshold within 28 days.

So let's just go with that.

[zpiloto]

Originally Posted by CO ZX2

I think it would be in the best interests of all concerned to leave the rules as they started. 14 of 15 team members accepted the rules as written and were very careful to follow them.

Everyone on every team was fully aware of the 3 gallon minimum fillup required each 28 days. Everyone was also fully aware that if there was no fillup that it woud cost their team 5% of their EPA average. Any one of us knew full well the consequences of not having a proper fillup.

Actually we have been changing the rules since the first post on this. As I mention several times this is a work in progress.

The idea of the 3 gallon fill was for accuracy not punishment. Let's keep the 3 gallon min fill but make the cycles 42 days instead of 28 days. That would enable us to still have 2, 6 month series with 4 cycles instead of 6. It would also allow folks that are trying to set the records tanks to make them instead of having to fill because of the competition, which I think was quit a few, and let the misers stay on board even through winter.

It sticks to the basic rule of KISS. Remember this is suppose to be fun.

I think this is a great compromise and should be option 4.

[rh77]

OK, I just want to make something clear here.

The poll was set up to get the opinion of the competitors. My role in this competition is to settle disputes, process data, and hopefully promote some goodwill that the concerns of team members are heard and considered -- on an unbiased level.

Since this is the first of its kind, it's a work-in-progress. I can tell you from a Project Management standpoint that you can try to think of everything in the beginning, but there WILL be something that takes you by surprise and you have to roll with it.

omgwtfbyobbq: My suggestion is to make a meaningful statement as to your vote, per polite request. Just because it's "dramatic" doesn't mean we can't deal with it. It's an intelligent discussion. Let's keep it civil.

-Rick / Commissioner

EDIT:

Z: It looks like we posted at the same time. So how does the group feel about a 48-day cycle? Let me know if another poll is required.

[DRW]

babbelfish? HA!
try GIZOOGLE
http://sites.gizoogle.com/index2.php...ssavers.org%2F

[rh77]

NEW INFORMATION

There has been a proposal to extend the cycle from 28 days to 42-days. This should indeed allow most parties to gain the additional gallons required to avoid penalty.

Thus far, 6 have voted to keep the rules the same and 6 have voted to change the rules in 2 separate vote choices. This has prompted additional discussion.

I'm requesting that those who have already voted to comment on this new proposal.

Thanks all -- and keep up the great tanks!

-Der Kommisar

[landspeed]

I would vote for 42-day cycles if there was an option.