VATSIM Discord Server

[Braeden Post]

Hello all,
I'm not too sure if this is considered as advertising, and I'm not sure if I'm allowed to do this, but I have made a VATSIM Discord Server. Discord is a great voice and text communication server. I made this server so it could bring the VATSIM community together even more, and so people can communicate with each other while doing group flights, or just flying alone.

Here is the download link for Discord: https://discordapp.com/download

Here is the link to the server: https://discord.gg/uZSkguB

Discord can also be used in a web page.
Feel free to join. Come one, come all!
Happy Flying,
-Braeden

[Braeden Post]

If anyone is interested, please reply and feel free to join. Spread the word.

[Matthew Kosmoski]

Considering that there are already Teamspeak servers for nearly every entity associated with Vatsim, a Discord server would only add more stuff for people to keep up with...  Especially if it provides no additional value beyond the other communications mechanisms that folks already use, know, and maintain for everybody.  And personally, I don't trust Discord.  The company has no viable model and could disappear without notice.  At least our TS servers are managed by ourselves or third party resellers with sustainable business models.

[Cole Connelly]

And personally, I don't trust Discord.  The company has no viable model and could disappear without notice.  At least our TS servers are managed by ourselves or third party resellers with sustainable business models.

I'd be forced to agree with MK on the subject of where the server is (Discord). TeamSpeak is generally a little more manageable and controllable, as well as secure. I like the idea of this, but if it is worth doing might as well throw in the few dollars to host a TS.

[Daniel Hawton]

I would caution those interested in Discord.  The company behind Discord was previously sued for involvement in violations of privacy, wiretap and various California state laws. The privacy policy and past of the company involved is questionable.

[Brin Brody]

I would caution those interested in Discord.  The company behind Discord was previously sued for involvement in violations of privacy, wiretap and various California state laws. The privacy policy and past of the company involved is questionable.

Useful information.  Thanks, man.

[Ryan Parry]

ZOA is on Discord and we've had it for a while now. It's not bad at all.

[Brin Brody]

ZOA is on Discord and we've had it for a while now. It's not bad at all.

It has its limits, however.  And there are, of course, the privacy concerns mentioned by the good Mr. Hawton...

[Matthew Kosmoski]

While you have a good point, Matthew, it also provides a fun place for pilots and controllers alike to discuss various things, including planning group flights, outside set entities like ARTCCs/FIRs, and Virtual Airlines.  I've joined, personally, and seen that it is used more as a place to "speak easy" (no alcohol involved), more than one can in the more strict model of a TeamSpeak server for whatever entity.

Be careful with that.  Some various staff members and supervisors have been asserting that Code of Conduct applies to anything vaguely related to a subordinate or affiliated organization.

[Matthew Kosmoski]

I would caution those interested in Discord.  The company behind Discord was previously sued for involvement in violations of privacy, wiretap and various California state laws. The privacy policy and past of the company involved is questionable.

Also very true.  I left this out of my post since it's a personal preference thing that many are willing to waive for the sake of convenience.  While I disagree with those that do, it's their prerogative.

Additionally, I question the security of the platform itself in general, but I'm a paranoid kind of guy, and worrying about those kinds of things is what I do.

[Daniel Hawton]

While you have a good point, Matthew, it also provides a fun place for pilots and controllers alike to discuss various things, including planning group flights, outside set entities like ARTCCs/FIRs, and Virtual Airlines.  I've joined, personally, and seen that it is used more as a place to "speak easy" (no alcohol involved), more than one can in the more strict model of a TeamSpeak server for whatever entity.

Be careful with that.  Some various staff members and supervisors have been asserting that Code of Conduct applies to anything vaguely related to a subordinate or affiliated organization.

No assertion.  It's fact.  You may find this listed in the Code of Regulations Section 6.01 Paragraph B Sub-paragraph 9 which lists anything covered by the CoR and CoC.

[Matthew Kosmoski]

No assertion.  It's fact.  You may find this listed in the Code of Regulations Section 6.01 Paragraph B Sub-paragraph 9 which lists anything covered by the CoR and CoC.

I say assertion because it's hard to lay claim to something like that if you have no ability to manage it, let alone have any visibility in to it.

[Camden Bruno]

I say assertion because it's hard to lay claim to something like that if you have no ability to manage it, let alone have any visibility in to it.

The management and visibility comes from both Supervisors who are part of the facility as controllers and from the Administration (Senior Staff) at the ARTCCs, ATO, etc.

I.e. If a negative incident occurs between two controllers on TeamSpeak/Discord, and the Senior Staff think it warrants not only local disciplinary action but also VATSIM-level action, they can refer the case for post-factum investigation. If CoR 6.01(b)(9) did not exist, that would mean everything could only be handled on a local level. There are most definitely some things that can and should be escalated to a VATSIM suspension rather than just local action. Although local facilities are given a lot of discretion on policy and procedure, we must keep in mind that we are all part of VATSIM and all fall under the CoR, CoC, etc.

[Matthew Kosmoski]

The management and visibility comes from both Supervisors who are part of the facility as controllers and from the Administration (Senior Staff) at the ARTCCs, ATO, etc.

I.e. If a negative incident occurs between two controllers on TeamSpeak/Discord, and the Senior Staff think it warrants not only local disciplinary action but also VATSIM-level action, they can refer the case for post-factum investigation. If CoR 6.01(b)(9) did not exist, that would mean everything could only be handled on a local level. There are most definitely some things that can and should be escalated to a VATSIM suspension rather than just local action. Although local facilities are given a lot of discretion on policy and procedure, we must keep in mind that we are all part of VATSIM and all fall under the CoR, CoC, etc.

So, if local staff don't bring it up...?

CoR 6.01(b)(9) has a problem:  It says any "computers utilized in any way by VATSIM.net members for communicating via text or voice for purposes of" blah blah.  How does that account for shared hosting instances?  Does that mean that my personal computer is now subject to the CoR/CoC?  That's written in a broad way as a catch-all.  It doesn't mean it's right nor should it be there.

[Camden Bruno]

If local staff don't bring it up, then maybe a Supervisor who is part of the particular ARTCC/ATO/whatever will, if they witnessed it. Or maybe one of the individuals involved in the incident wishes to request a post-factum investigation (or a witness reports it, etc. There was a reason I said "I.e." because there are plenty of examples). If we want to stick with the ARTCC example (assuming that's what you're most interested in considering you're representing yourself as a member of the Houston ARTCC on this forum), if someone says something distributing, infringing, obscene, vulgar, profane, or unlawful (use your imagination here, you wouldn't believe what some people will say to each other), but they are on an VATSIM ARTCC TeamSpeak server, are you saying that the VATSIM Code of Conduct shouldn't apply? They are VATSIM subsets and, therefore, fall under the CoC and all other policy/regulation.

And, no, CoR 6.01(b)(9) does not end in "blah blah." I'm not going to cite the full text here because it's readily available, however, the focus isn't on your computer, it's on you (the member). Hence, "which are utilized in any way by VATSIM.net members for communicating . . ." So, if you're in an officially recognized VATSIM organizations TeamSpeak engaging in public discussion, yes, you fall under the CoC and all other policy/regulation.

As for the exact wording? I don't write the rules. I'm simply explaining to you why they apply in these situations. If you're looking for a debate on wording, you're on the wrong forum, as no one hear can change that (not that it should be changed in the first place).