Nick Smith wrote

There should be a new rule saying "Mice that do not meet rules 3. to 5. will be allowed to compete if there is time but will only be eligible for the minor prizes." If someone has spent weeks developing a mouse but hasn't finished it I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to demonstrate it, even if this means they have to use an umbilical.

Alan Dibley wrote

I agree with Nick about rules that seek to exclude people from competing. I am sure that was not the intention when they were formulated. I know what a thankless and difficult job it is writing sets of rules. I get involved in writing rules for model aircraft competitions, and folk get very upset about toy planes. I feel that rules for MM-type comps. should imply that anything close to the spirit of the comp. will be allowed to perform on the day.

It should be clear that flexibility in the rules will be used to encourage all attempts at mouse-building, but not to the extent of allowing "non-legal" mice to take precedence over "legal" mice.

The introduction of "judges-discretion" prizes, for instance for most amusing/original/adventurous/complex.... means that such entries can be rewarded and hence encouraged, bcause the guiding rule is:

WE WANT THEM BACK NEXT YEAR.

 Jerry Niman wrote

The rules as drafted are the same as for the 2000 competition. In view of the fact that many teams will have started building the mice well before even the draft rules were available, I feel they should stand.