The mom isn't the teacher and has no way of doing and *you* should have followed the rules. If you were designing this for use on the Hubble telescope or in the ISS you would be an unemployed (and unemployable) engineer having costs the tax payer millions of dollars and not following spec. That's what specs are for. Hate to be so harsh, but I live in a business world (software development) where specifications are *everything*.

*no way of knowing, not doing

The professor attitude is questionable, I agree. But your friend's mom did nothing wrong. She gave her advice and you chose to follow it. Your fault, not hers. As for the teacher, that's another, more complicated, discussion.

The teacher has failed for not explaining the rules of the project adequately (or you have failed for not listening). I am quite interested in what sort of over-sized non-mechanical timing device you came up with (although I have a feeling my definition of non-mechanical is somewhat different to the one used here).

You broke the rules and lost. I don't see what the problem is. This is the way the real world works (unless you don't get caught). Of course, from a person who has always claimed that no rules apply to you, I can see your frustration.

The lesson to be learned here is not to never break rules, but to get a better idea of the consequences of breaking a rule before you decide whether it's worth breaking.

@oct wouldn't an ordinary quartz digital watch be non-mechanical

@ hopsy: If the result of Conservative Man's project was a giant homemade quartz digital watch I will be most surprised.

Hopsy, I think you're right. By a strict definition of mechanical, I think that CM could have put a digital watch into a box and aced the project. But that kind of cheek rarely worked for me in school -- not that I didn't keep trying.

@CM, Tell me about it! What bullshit! I work for NASA, and we were giving specs on the size of our sensor. I built it great, but it was only half an inch too large. But, who cares right? As long as the spec is close, it doesn't matter. Well, I sent it up to the ISS and the astronauts got all pissy that it didn't fit in the designated slot. I said, "Just duct tape it on." But, apparently that wasn't good enough. Now, I don't have a job and NASA is out 8 Million dollars.

Draugnar and the others critical of your complaint are correct. What if you had been asked to come up with medical device and it did not fit? Does the surgeon take out a liver lobe or a lung so it fits?

I think the lesson here, actually, is that you should have requested clarification from your teacher.

If you only had, say, a day to complete this, then you pretty much want to stick to the spec. Or turn the file box on it's *side* - if the instructions were that it had to fit in the file box but the teacher didn't specify the *orientation* of the box, then that's *his* problem for a lack of precision.

If you had *more* time, but waited until the last minute to do this before discovering the problem... then that's on you. I'm not even going to pretend to state that I didn't wait until the last minute a time or two, but I've also been burned for doing so, and have learned not to do so.

Which is the lesson you should take away from this - and probably the lesson the teacher wanted you to learn. You've now seen the consequences of not following the specifications and/or not requesting clarification, and (hopefully) will not repeat the same mistake. That's a cheap lesson if it's only costing you a C and not your job, home, and/or reputation - whining about how 'unfair' something is when you get out of school is going to earn you nothing but derision, not sympathy.

...it is neither a medical device nor a vital component of satellite technology. It is a time piece in a cardboard box. Different projects require different rules and have different penalties for breaking said rules. I think some of us are just being silly.

@Octavious

I disagree. This is a very, very important lesson for CM to learn and he might as well learn it early. He was told to do something. When he wasn't sure if something was OK, instead of checking, like he should, he just damned the consequences and did what he wanted. This is not appropriate behavior. I think this teacher acted 100% correctly.

Furthermore, the fact that he's blaming anyone in sight (his friends mom, for instance) instead of taking responsibility himself is disconcerting.

I have to agree with abgemacht. Just because someone doesn't *think* something is important doesn't mean it *isn't* - I've had to clean up many a mess because people get sloppy and lazy, and they're sloppy and lazy because they've never had to face any *consequences* for being sloppy and lazy.

On the other hand, hey, I wouldn't have a job if everyone was competent.

On the gripping hand - the fact that I have a job means that I'm brought in to fix messes. Once the mess is fixed, the person who *made* the mess may be... redundant under the new operating procedures. If the person who made the mess hadn't screwed the pooch, I'd be working elsewhere and they'd still be employed

@ abge

I've already stated the lesson here is to get better info on potential consequences, so we are in fact in agreement on that. But there are far better ways of teaching that lesson. The teacher has instead found a way of pissing off CM and buggering up his motivation, which is a mark of the teacher's failure. If the teacher had instilled a culture of initiative and active communication within his class then this cock-up would not have happened.

@Oct

I seriously doubt we're getting the whole story. For all we know, the teacher went over the rules numerous times and stressed the importance of following them while CM was asleep in the back. I saw this all the time when I was in HS. Things were perfectly clear to the entire class except for that one group that doesn't pay attention to anything.

@ abe

I make a point of assuming that diplomacy players are people of great wit and intellect until it is proved beyond doubt that this is not the case. I'll admit CM has come closer to achieving this than most, but I will continue to give him the benefit of the doubt for now ;).

Have you read any of CM's posts?

I think (and others have said this) the most telling thing here is CM's inability to take responsibility. In his defense, he's a kid. Its not uncommon to have this attitude. However, it doesn't make him right.

Simply put, you had to follow X Y and Z specifications. You chose not to. You got penalized. You feel this is unjust. However, you fail to have enough self-awareness to see that it was you who transgressed first.

tl;dr: Grow up and get a helmet. A wise superior of mine told me when discussing when it was OK to disregard the rules "You have to learn the right way backwards and forewards before you can start learning when to throw out the book"

@Octavious "...it is neither a medical device nor a vital component of satellite technology. It is a time piece in a cardboard box. Different projects require different rules and have different penalties for breaking said rules. I think some of us are just being silly" Well he got a C instead of getting fired for blowing a multimillion dollar project, or causing a patient complications. The point is he did not fallow instructions. I'd say it was proportional consequences. The teacher could have given him an D or F. He needs to buck up and learn from his mistakes. That's what school is for.

@CM: You didn't follow the specification. It *only* cost you 180 and, in your estimate, dropped you from B to a C-. I assume the whole class now knows the cost of failing to follow specifications and has learned a valuable lesson (teacher+1).

You may think that what most of the people here have said about you is harsh, but know this - the company I work for makes test equipment. This has to fit into industry standard 19 inch racks. These aren't 20 inch racks and they aren't 19 and a half inch racks. They're 19 inch racks. Our kit has to fit or the customers wont buy it.

@Stratagos "On the gripping hand" +1

This isn't really relevant to the discussion of how at fault anyone is, but:
@CM. If you could take a picture of this project (if it's still in one piece) and post it, that'd be pretty cool.
Like many others, I'm curious as to what this timekeeping machine was, exactly.

I just want to know what this time keeping device was if it was non mechanical. Was it just like a sun dial or something involving the flow of sand or water?

I would also like to know what exactly non-mechnical means and how you did it.

If the teacher said it had to fit in the box, then you have to fit it in the box. Maybe he was a bit harsh on you but rules are rules. If he broke the rule for you should he break it for the next person who's 3/4 of an inch out of the box? and if he breaks it for him should he break it for the person who's 1inch out of the box? and if he breaks it for him should he break it for the person who's 1.25 inches out of the box? etc etc etc

Non mechanical = sundial or hourglass, I would assume

@CM's device: or a ball of flubber mixed with just the right amount of rubber so that its energy loss is 0? Just drop it and it keeps perfect time.

Okay, the device was a pendulum. That is what works the best.
@Everyone: The thing is, we were allowed to assemble it there. Once assembled, the device could be bigger than the box. But my teacher wouldn't let me take the top off the device so it would fit, and put it back on later, because we didn't arrive with it fitting. That was NOT in the rules. I also don't believe the rules specified how many points we would lose for breaking the rules.

@Redcrane: Sorry, I threw the project away.