Like, I get that Gwe shouldn’t have made a commitment if he didn’t think he could fulfill it, but device problems are unexpected. We’ve all experienced them. He couldn’t have known he would have problems. Honestly, I don’t get why his whole team can’t chip in and collab on his project. Wouldn’t really mess up things too bad in my opinion, but then again I don’t know what twists are coming. But the twists can be twisted.
It would be unfair for Gwe’s team to get a 0 on his project because he couldn’t (not wouldn’t) code it. It wouldn’t have been their fault, it wouldn’t have been his fault, but yet they would have had to suffer the consequences.
It was never stated in the rules that Gwe must find a backup or can’t leave his team without anything, anyway?? But he was required to?? Which I seriously don’t get. I mean, it would be nice, but it’s not required and it wouldn’t be unkind if Gwe didn’t leave his team something. This isn’t law. We aren’t lawyers and defendants, we’re tweens and teens and sometimes younger. Why must things be so unflexible and exact sometimes?
(I mean, I get safety rules until they go too far, but this. Is a contest. And a user who suddenly can’t participate because of device problems but wasn’t allowed to quit until he left his team with something.)
I honestly don’t see what Gwe did wrong. But he was kind of chastised about it repeatedly.
I also don’t get why flame wars and arguments are portalled. Can’t users learn from others’ mistakes? Figure out what happens when guidelines about those are broken and cause an issue and why the guidelines should be followed?