Pages in category "Actors from Chicago"
It is adorned with many "doodles", including a picture of Alf and a joking note that producer-engineer Ari Levine "hangs out with Jamaican drug lords on the reg. All Network Members, Team Members, and clergy should be in attendance. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. And that's the thing you pray you will always have. The polarisation between masculine and feminine roles as defined and controlled by male society, has not only subjugated women, but has made all men, regardless of class or race, feel superior to women — this feeling of superiority, countering anti-capitalist sentiment, is the lifeblood of the system. Because the larger movement in most cities is as unstructured as individual rap groups, it is not much more effective than the separate groups at specific tasks. If it is the only such network in a structured group it may or may not be an elite depending on its composition and the nature of the formal structure.
But it does hinder the informal structure from having predominant control and makes available some means of attacking it. We cannot decide whether to have a structured or structureless group; only whether or not to have a formally structured one. Therefore, the word will not be used any longer except to refer to the idea which it represents.
Unstructured will refer to those groups which have not been deliberately structured in a particular manner. Structured will refer to those which have. A structured group always has a formal structure, and may also have an informal one. An unstructured group always has an informal, or covert, structure.
It is this informal structure, particularly in unstructured groups, which forms the basis for elites. It is never used correctly. Within the movement it commonly refers to individuals though the personal characteristics and activities of those to whom it is directed may differ widely. Any individual, regardless of how well-known that person is, can never be an elite. Correctly, an elite refers to a small group of people who have power over a larger group of which they are part, usually without direct responsibility to that larger group, and often without their knowledge or consent.
A person becomes an elitist by being part of, or advocating, the rule by such a small group, whether or not that individual is well-known or not known at all. Notoriety is not a definition of an elitist. The most insidious elites are usually run by people not known to the larger public at all. Intelligent elitists are usually smart enough not to allow themselves to become well known. When they become known, they are watched, and the mask over their power is no longer firmly lodged. Because elites are informal does not mean they are invisible.
At any small group meeting anyone with a sharp eye and an acute ear can tell who is influencing whom. The members of a friendship group will relate more to each other than to other people. They listen more attentively and interrupt less. Of course, the lines are not as sharp as I have drawn them. They are nuances of interaction, not pre-written scripts. But they are discernible, and they do have their effect.
Once one knows with whom it is important to check before a decision is made, and whose approval is the stamp of acceptance, one knows who is running things. Elites are not conspiracies.
Seldom does a small group of people get together and try to take over a larger group for its own ends. Elites are nothing more and nothing less than a group of friends who also happen to participate in the same political activities. They would probably maintain their friendship whether or not they were involved in political activities; they would probably be involved in political activities whether or not they maintained their friendships.
It is the coincidence of these two phenomena which creates elites in any groups and makes them so difficult to break. These friendship groups function as networks of communication outside any regular channels for such communication that may have been set up by a group. If no channels are set up, they function as the only networks of communication.
And it is a rare group that does not establish some informal networks of communication through the friends that are made in it. Some groups, depending on their size, may have more than one such informal communication network. Networks may even overlap. When only one such network exists, it is the elite of an otherwise unstructured group, whether the participants in it want to be elitists or not.
If it is the only such network in a structured group it may or may not be an elite depending on its composition and the nature of the formal structure. If there are two or more such networks of friends, they may compete for power within the group thus forming factions, or one may deliberately opt out of the competition leaving the other as the elite.
In a structured group, two or more such friendship networks usually compete with each other for formal power. This is often the healthiest situation. The other members are in a position to arbitrate between the two competitors for power and thus are able to make demands of the group to whom they give their temporary allegiance.
Since movement groups have made no concrete decisions about who shall exercise power within them, many different criteria are used around the country. As the movement has changed through time, marriage has become a less universal criterion for effective participation, although all informal elites still establish standards by which only women who possess certain material or personal characteristics may join.
The standards frequently include: Other criteria could be included, but they all have common themes. The latter are what any movement or organisation has to use if it is going to be politically effective. Although this dissection of the process of elite formation within small groups has been critical in its perspectives, it is not made in the belief that these informal structures are inevitably bad — merely that they are inevitable.
All groups create informal structures as a result of the interaction patterns among the members. Such informal structures can do very useful things. But only unstructured groups are totally governed by them. This has two potentially negative consequences of which we should be aware.
The first is that the informal structure of decision-making will be like a sorority: As long as the movement does not do significant things this does not much matter.
But if its development is not to be arrested at this preliminary stage, it will have to alter this trend.
The second is that informal structures have no obligation to be responsible to the group at large. Their power was not given to them; it cannot be taken away.
Their influence is not based on what they do for the group; therefore they cannot be directly influenced by the group. This does not necessarily make informal structures irresponsible. Those who are concerned with maintaining their influence will usually try to be responsible. The group simply cannot compel such responsibility; it is dependent on the interests of the elite. We live in a society which expects Political groups to make decisions and to select people to articulate those decisions to the public at large.
The press and the public do not know how to listen seriously to individual women as women; they want to know how the group feels. Only three techniques have ever been developed for establishing mass group opinion: Neither the movement as a whole nor most of the multitudinous groups within it have established a means of explaining their position on various issues. But the public is conditioned to look for spokespeople. While it has consciously not chosen spokespeople, the movement has thrown up many women who have caught the public eye for varying reasons.
These women represent no particular group or established opinion; they know this and usually say so. Thus, whether they want to or not, whether the movement likes it or not, women of public note are put in the role of spokespeople by default.
Because the larger movement in most cities is as unstructured as individual rap groups, it is not much more effective than the separate groups at specific tasks. The informal structure is rarely together enough or in touch enough with the people to be able to operate effectively. So the movement generates much emotion and few results. Unfortunately, the consequences of all this motion are not as innocuous as the results, and their victim is the movement itself.
Some groups have turned themselves into local action projects, if they do not involve too many people, and work on a small scale. But this form restricts movement activity to the local level. Also, to function well the groups must usually pare themselves down to that informal group of friends who were running things in the first place. This excludes many women from participating. As long as the only way women can participate in the movement is through membership of a small group, the non-gregarious are at a distinct disadvantage.
As long as friendship groups are the main means of organisational activity, elitism becomes institutionalised. For those groups which cannot find a local project to devote themselves to, the mere act of staying together becomes the reason for their staying together.
When a group has no specific task and consciousness-raising is a task , the people in it turn their energies to controlling others in the group. This is not done so much out of a malicious desire to manipulate others though sometimes it is as out of lack of anything better to do with their talents. Able people with time on their hands and a need to justify their coming together put their efforts into personal control, and spend their time criticising the personalities of the other members in the group.
Infighting and personal power games rule the day. When a group is involved in a task, people learn to get along with others as they are and to subsume dislikes for the sake of the larger goals. There are limits placed on the compulsion to remould every person into our image of what they should be. The end of consciousness-raising leaves people with no place to go and the lack of structure leaves them with no way of getting there.
The women in the movement either turn in on themselves and their sisters or seek other alternatives of action. There are few alternatives available. This can lead to a great deal of individual creativity, much of which is useful for the movement, but it is not a viable alternative for most women and certainly does not foster a spirit of co-operative group effort. The movement itself provides no outlets for their new ideas and energies.
These friendship networks are based upon their common non-feminist politics rather than the characteristics discussed earlier; however, the network operates in much the same way. Because these women share common values, ideas and political orientations, they too become informal, unplanned, unselected, unresponsible elites — whether they intend to be so or not. These new informal elites are often perceived as threats by the old informal elites previously developed within different movement groups.
This is a correct perception. The old elites are rarely willing to bring such differences of opinion out into the open because it would involve exposing the nature of the informal structure of the group. The only other alternative is formally to structure the group in such a way that the original power is institutionalised. This is not always possible. If the informal elites have been well structured and have exercised a fair amount of power in the past, such a task is feasible.
These groups have a history of being somewhat politically effective in the past, as the tightness of the informal structure has proven an adequate substitute for a formal structure. Becoming strutured does not alter their operation much, though the institutionalisation of the power structure does not open it to formal challenge.
It is those groups which are in greatest need of structure that are often least capable of creating it. Since the movement at large is just as unstructured as most of its constituent groups, it is similarly susceptible to indirect influence.
But the phenomenon manifests itself differently. On a local level most groups can operate autonomously, but only the groups that can organise a national activity are nationally organised groups. Thus, it is often the structured feminist organisations that provide national directions for feminist activities, and this direction is determined by the priorities of these organisations.
Thus their members become the troops under the leadership of the structured organisations. The more unstructured a movement is, the less control it has over the directions in which it develops and the political actions in which it engages. This does not mean that its ideas do not spread.
Given a certain amount of interest by the media and the appropriateness of social conditions, the ideas will still be diffused widely.
But diffusion of ideas does not mean they are implemented; it only means they are talked about. Insofar as they can be applied individually they may be acted upon; insofar as they require co-ordinated political power to be implemented, they will not be. But this style of organisation has its limits; it is politically inefficacious, exclusive and discriminatory against those women who are not or cannot be tied into the friendship networks.
Those who do not fit into what already exists because of class, race, occupation, parental or marital status, or personality will inevitably be discouraged from trying to participate. Those who do not fit in will develop vested interests in maintaining things as they are.
If the movement continues deliberately not to select who shall exercise power, it does not thereby abolish power. All it does is abdicate the right to demand that those who do exercise power and influence be responsible for it.
If the movement continues to keep power as diffuse as possible because it knows it cannot demand responsibility from those who have it, it does prevent any group or person from totally dominating. But it simultaneously ensures that the movement is as ineffective as possible. Some middle ground between domination and ineffectiveness can and must be found.
These problems are coming to a head at this time because the nature of the movement is necessarily changing. Its issues are discussed and informal rap groups are formed by people who have no explicit connection with any movement group.
Purely educational work is no longer such an overwhelming need. The movement must go on to other tasks. It now needs to establish its priorities, articulate its goals and pursue its objectives in a co-ordinated way.
To do this it must be organised locally, regionally and nationally. This does not mean that we should go to the other extreme and blindly imitate the traditional forms of organisation.
The members on the team didn't want to give up after their failure. They didn't consider second to last a failure for them it was a learning experience.
Full of new ideas they went back to the basement the same dayand completely disassembled the robot. Within the next few days plans were made for team to attend the Pennsylvania Regional event eight hours away in Waverly, PA. Now the team had only a month to completely rebuild and re-program therobot.
Acquiring key parts that allowed the robot to be much more efficient, and switching their coding language to RobotC team met this goal with ease even allowing the drivers, Brandon Miller and Andy Woodruff, to have some practice before competition.
Soon the Innovators were off to Waverly with a new robot and a new mindset. Not only did the team members understand what they needed to do to be successful, they also understood that FIRST is about more than winning- it is about learning, meeting people and having fun along the way. At the Pennsylvania Regional event Innovators Robotics went in with their new robot and swept away the competition getting first place and winning both the Innovate Award for a clean and effecient design and the most covetted Inspire award for the team's showing of Gracious Professionalism, a key value of FIRST.
Because of these awards the team was advanced to the World Championship event in Atlanta, Georgia. After a couple months of fine tuning the robot the Innovators were ready to head off to Atlanta.
In Atlanta the Innovators also did very well. Finishing 2nd place in their division out of 50 teams, they entered the tournament bracket and lost in the last match of the semi-final round by only 15 points placing the Innovators at 3rd in world. Due to their success, after returning from Atlanta, the Innovators decided to move up and start an FRC team for the next season, and immediatly started working with Andrew Stelmack to set goals and make a smooth transition from FTC to FRC.
The beginning of was exciting! This relationship was relied on throughout the season. Taylor Chenoweth, a First Alumnus was a dual mentor for both Team and After successful qualification rounds with their alliances they won 7 matches, lost 3 and tied 2. The Innovators were picked as a second alliance and competed with Teams , Cold Fusion and Gateway Robotics, where they became Regional Finalists.
During the season, team competed at both the Pittsburgh and Buckeye Cleveland Regional Competitions, during weeks two and six consecutively, before advancing to the World Competition in St.
At the Pittsburgh Regional Competition, their robot was still a bit 'buggy' so the team didn't perform as well as they wanted. Unfortunately, the alliance didn't make it past the quarterfinals, though they did make Alliance 3 play, the best two out of three matches. Even though their team didn't finish with high scores, they were awarded both the Gracious Professionalism and Entrepreneurship Awards for their efforts.
When it came to the elimination matches, the number 1 alliance was started with the number 1 rated team picking the number 2 rated team, leaving the number 3 rated team to start the number 2 alliance.
At the final match, the score was so close that the winner was not determined until the penalties were calculated. The final score gave the win to Alliance Number 2. In addition, the team received the Chairman's Award, which also provided them with a position at the World Competition. At the World Competition, the team was placed in the Newton Division with 86 other teams.
At the end of the qualification matches, their team was ranked number one, which gave the team the first pick of alliance partners. Team was able to progress to Einstein as a substitute, incase one of the robots representing Newton should become non-operational.
Fortunately, we were on the floor next to the field, but did not play on the field. There were 23 teams and 24 robots, one team competed with two robots. The number 1 rated team asked Team to be on their alliance, which they agreed to.
Their alliance won the competition. Team led the second place alliance. Over all, we have had a net increase in the number of members and the number of schools where they attend school.
This year also saw an increase in new mentors as some parents are participating more with the team. In addition, two new mentors looked us up. They had been on a FRC team while they were in high school and want to help a local team. They are a welcome part of the team.
We started the build season brain-storming what we wanted the robot to do and different ideas of how the robot could accomplish those tasks. Some of the tasks that the team wanted the robot to accomplish included: One of the ideas was to orient the driving direction of the robot along the narrow dimension verses the longer dimension of the robot.
After the team came up with that some ideas, it was determined that a prototype would be built to test the idea before any metal would be cut and bent. The prototype was not stable going over the barrier, and crossing the barrier was identified as a higher priority, so the driving direction of the robot was reoriented back to the longer dimension.
The first competition was at Pittsburgh Regional Competition. At Pittsburgh, the robot was not shooting consistently. At the end of the qualification round, the team was ranked 10th with 8 wins and 2 losses no ties.
We were part of the the 4th Alliance with teams and