Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Kevin Kelm

Pages: [1] 2

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 02, 2011, 10:25:54 PM »

Quote from: Andrew Wolcott

Okay,

Let me clarify. Ratings came from SATCO. Some of you don't know what that is, but it may only be a handful. Now, C3 rating was meant to acknowledge that a Center Rated controller worked 200 hours on a "_CTR" position. The hours did not count for sitting on east bumble delivery. They had to be logged on a "_CTR" position.

Now, here is the question for Kevin and anyone else. How many cookies and golden star stickers and badges must be passed out to people on this network to make them feel appreciated? Should I just arbitrarily honor you for some set number of hours you've logged working a regular position?

Or should I respect and reward you for putting in time and effort to help make this community better, such as assisting an EC, designing an ARTCC Logo, doing website work, performing staff duties as an ARTCC or VATUSA staff member, help author countless numbers of SOPs, LOAs, or learning how to develop sector files and keeping them up-to-date for others to use?

Anybody who wants to be rewarded because of hours should only want to be rewarded for the time and effort they put in GIVING BACK. Jockeying a computer for hours on end with watching youtube videos, twittering about how you just posted a comment or link on someone's facebook wall all the while plugging a position working little to no traffic at odd hours of the day or night is not with recognition on the level of being GIVEN any sort of rating. Period.

Senior controller recognition should come not only because of time plugged in, but rather the showing of dedication, pride, and at times disgust, many of us here have put into or received from this community.

The big difference is the willingness to give back, versus asking someone else to always give to you.

I earned my C3 with pride, and I know what it stands for to me. Hours on position ain't it.

Andrew,

You bring up a fantastic point, and to be quite honest, its one that I don't have an answer for. That's a very valid question, but let me sit on that before I give you one if I could.

The Control Room Floor / ATC Headsets

« on: December 02, 2011, 03:43:04 PM »

Quote from: Harold Rutila

Trust me, a good quality microphone makes all the difference between sounding like talking through a can of Progresso or actually being understandable. Not all pilots use the "realistic VHF frequency" setting, either. And how is vSTARS going to change the network codec?

It is my understanding that it is the radar client that controls the voice codecs. See Ross's response to the poster (post #2) here:

http://www.metacraft.com/VRC/forums/viewto...1c60ad25524bb37

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 01, 2011, 11:07:27 PM »

Quote from: Bruce W. Clingan

Page two of this reads like an Intro to Sociological Study course I teach. We can't look at our personal experiences and expect to get a clear picture of what is happening with a large population.

A vast majority of my closest VATSIM friends are not active on the network. That doesn't mean that the network is failing. It simply means that they were involved in a situation under certain leadership that changed their opinion of VATSIM forever.

Even Brian's stats really don't give us a clear statistical picture of overall retention on the network.

Maybe not, but that's all we got.

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 01, 2011, 06:23:51 PM »

Quote from: Bryan Wollenberg

Kevin, yeah, unfortunately the numbers are staff-only access, on the CERT level. You have to take into consideration as well that I can't currently differentiate between how many of those members are actually controlling. Same may just be observing, some may have switched to flying, etc. So I can't say that 60% of controllers are still controlling. But 60% of the controllers are online doing something. What that something is, is anyone's guess.

So in all fairness I can't call your numbers completely incorrect. Perhaps 90% of the controllers left and are now flying, for all I know. There is really no way to currently tell, aside from looking every single member up on the stats and seeing what they've been up to. Not going to happen. Ha!

Bryan, if those numbers you gave, even due to your uncertainties are even slightly correct, I really was not aware the numbers of activity were that good. Just from observation it seemed very much a different story; but I will definitely consider that, thank you for letting me know.

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 01, 2011, 05:43:19 PM »

Quote from: Bryan Wollenberg

If you really want to know, about 57% of controllers who signed up at the start of VATSIM (2001) are still online doing something, and about 58% of those who signed up within the first 3 years. That doesn't necessarily mean they're controlling, but they're still here enjoying VATSIM. Throughout VATSIM's entire existence, about 60% of all controller-rated members are still active on the network. VATUSA sits around 58%, and VATNA sits basically with the average, at 60%.

Over a 10 year period, those are actually fairly good numbers for a hobby of our size.

I can assure you that 90% of the members are not leaving. Perhaps 90% of the members are leaving ZSE for another place on the network, but they certainly aren't leaving VATSIM.

Bryan, my estimations are from members I knew at 2004 that are still on today. I sure hope ZSE isn't the worst out there for turnover, but I'll have you know we are doing excellent on staffing currently I was not aware the numbers of returning were that good. Where did you find this information? I'd like to be able to keep track myself (or is that a VATSIM staff-only thing)?

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 01, 2011, 05:19:53 PM »

Quote from: Bryan Wollenberg

The turnover question was just rhetorical. We really don't need to address the turnover rates at specific ARTCCs.

My point is that the turnover rate isn't nearly as high as Kevin is making it out to be. Member retention is always something we want to look at, obviously, but I highly doubt the C3 rating is causing a massive exodus. There just isn't anything to support that conclusion. In fact, I have not heard from one single member who left because s/he can't get the C3 rating. Rahul provided a very good list as to the possibilities.

Bryan, might I add that I never said once that the lack of the C3 is causing any exodus of such, nor am I drawing that conclusion. What I am saying is that there is nothing wrong with using rewards and such to encourage controllers to log hours. Is there any evidence to support it would hurt membership?

**EDITED, quote from my post above: "My real feeling, is that the C3 rating itself isn't going to really make people stay on and control more, but something needs to be done to incentify controllers to stay"

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 01, 2011, 05:13:17 PM »

*Grabs a few of Don's cold ones.

Agree to disagree, I'd say that ZSE's turnover is very similar to others. How many active controllers are still around your guys's ARTCCs from the start of VATSIM?

Rahul, your list contains valid reasons, but I feel its a bit of an over-generalization. Do people stop playing computer games because of "family issues" more often then because they get bored with the game?

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 01, 2011, 03:41:22 PM »

Quote from: Rahul Parkar

So now you'd have to work hours outside the tower cab to get the C3?

Not sure I understand; the only thing I can see that would be problematic is controllers controlling positions they know they wont get traffic on just to log time.

Quote from: Rahul Parkar

Moving on,

I don't see why there needs to be ratings and incentives to do this, this isn't a game where the objective is to have you buy the product and keep you so glued that you come back for the next installment,

This is a hobby that people love, and well, go a bit OTT about, and in one that takes up so much real time over an elongated period of multiple years for most, we have to recognize that we cannot keep them here by handing out new pretty pictures and new ratings and whatever else.

They will leave for their own reasons, whether it be family or personal issues with others, or controlling burnout, and using "handouts" won't stop that.

Heck, I would be willing to bet that the key cause of burnout is the near-requirement of having to work with people who don't have the faintest clue of what they are doing, and although it's not their fault as they are not required to learn anything except how to connect, controllers go through a lot of training to go on the scopes, it is viewed as totally unfair, and it's a growing argument for, in my opinion, the growing number of controllers burning out.

You're right, it wont stop everyone from leaving; nothing will. But with a turnover rate of over 90% (number from my own experience at ZSE since 2004), something has to be able to change it.

If it doesn't make a difference, then how come VATSIM has started implementing these kind of things I mentioned above? Whether you want to realize it or not, the kinds of systems I referred to the post prior to this do work to incentify people to come on. People don't just leave because of "real world reasons"; they straight-up get bored. We have an opporunity to fix that. You yourself Rahul might not need any incentive to control, I'm with you on that. But not everybody is the same way, in fact, I think most do not enjoy it for the reasons we do; at least not in the long term.

Many people say they enjoy it purely for the controlling, but if that is the case, why is the turnover so high?

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: December 01, 2011, 01:37:48 PM »

Quote from: Andrew Wolcott

C3 used to have a benchmark. It represented 200 hours or more controlling as a C1.

Now it has come to be more of an indicator of who has served as a TA, or otherwise served in an ARTCC Staff position or higher.

Getting rid of the C3? Nothing doing.

The sole reason they got rid of it as this purpose (200 hours as C1), according to Gary Millsaps, was because people were complaining about how "broad and unfair" it was, in simple terms (which seems funny because setting an hourly metric on the rating is 100% less broad than VATSIM's definition of a C3).

It was never awarded based on a staff position etc, as before the "200 hours as c1" ruling, it was used to represent the ability to control Center, as someone posted earlier above me. Now as I said before, I wouldn't mind using it as an incentive to reward controllers for "overall good performance" on the network; as decided by maybe a board of several members on VATUSA staff.

People need to get away from this idea of "fairness and equality" in regards to this rating. As is today, those with C3 ratings already have it because of completely different reasons. Pre-GRP, because it was necessary to control Center; and after that, awarded at 200 hours. Gary himself told me that the primary worry with the "200 hours" was that a ton of people would come to reap the benefits of the C3, basically "diluting" the market for it; to his surprise, this actually did not happen. Not that many people, even with that set # of hours, applied for the rating.

Have VATSIM staff come up with an appropriate means of evaluating each candidate, and open up an application to several members of the Staff as a board. Maybe they can set a minimum # of hours just to stop EVERYONE from trying to apply; but that way, no one can complain. We don't complain about the way we have to take tests or receive training from VATUSA, or even if we do, it is how it is; why not take the same stand with this rating?

My real feeling, is that the C3 rating itself isn't going to really make people stay on and control more, but something needs to be done to incentify controllers to stay. I don't want VATSIM to become a "game" any more than the rest of you; but if there was a reward/points system; I guarantee you the staffing levels would greatly increase. This really isn't a new idea. VATSIM has already recognized this with things such as the Iron Mic award, the newer Golden Mic award, and also those little images that people can attach to their signatures that rewards them for controlling for 1000/2000+ hours. VATSIM woke up and realized this, now it's VATUSA's turn to implement something. Gary mentioned in our discussion about plans to implement a system of rewarding controllers for time on the network. We'll see if it comes through. I don't want this to be something like BF3 or Call of Duty where you get "unlocks" and "XP" for controlling, but something similar seems necessary for the growth of the network.

Why do you think rank systems are being implemented in almost every single game released for PC and Xbox? Because it's effective; and people come back and play; not even just because they love the game. We have supervisors and staff to watch each ARTCC that C1s aren't controlling "Uncle Bobs Airport Clearance Delivery" positions just to get hours; so that's a pretty weak argument to make against it.

That's just my two cents.

The Control Room Floor / WHERE ARE THE VIDEOS?

« on: December 01, 2011, 12:35:46 PM »

That's funny, at UND, we rarely use these videos as some of them use outdated phraseology since it's been awhile since they were made. They are great references though for many things.

I laugh every time I hear Kyle's cheesy sign off: "This is Kyle Warner, frequency changed approved..."

The Control Room Floor / ATC Headsets

« on: December 01, 2011, 12:32:51 PM »

Foot pedal idea seems like a good one. Due to the very old codecs used by VRC, I honestly don't think a quality microphone is worth really worth it besides for controller comfort. Its amazing how much controllers sound alike because of the current codecs; we'll see what happens with vStars.

General Discussion / Proof that the VATUSA exam questions are misleading

« on: November 30, 2011, 09:58:41 PM »

Quote from: Isak Moebius

Regarding the 7110.65. This is a hobby of simulation controlling. I am not paid to do this, and I never would fathom that I would become an ATC in real life. This in mind the 7110.65 should be irrelevant to my hobby and not important. I haven't even read the first sentence of the 7110.65 and I don't particularly care to. If VATUSA's training material is supposed to be designed to teach me how to be an effective and good controller on VATSIM, which it does, then the 7110.65 should not matter. This is a hobby, the 7110.65 is an ATC bible particularly aimed at training real world controllers. Which I, and I am sure many other controllers on VATSIM are not. Because of this VATUSA should never have any of its test material based off of material from the 7110.65 that is not in its very own training material on the VATUSA site.

I disagree completely. The .65 is the reason you know how to give anything from a taxi clearance to an approach clearance, it's just been laid out nicely and is a bit easier to find in the training material. While this isn't real life, and we aren't real controllers, realism is what VATSIM users are to strive for; especially controllers. Why control if you don't want to replicate realistic procedures? While VATSIM controllers shouldn't be expected to know it cover to cover, "not even reading even the first sentence" means that more than likely, pilots are receiving unrealistic service in some manner.

The only thing that separates VATSIM from "a game", is the fact that we do strive for realism; both pilot's and controllers.

General Discussion / Happy Thanksgiving

« on: November 27, 2011, 12:50:44 AM »

I'm thankful to Ross Carlson for developing VRC and vStars Does that count?

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: November 26, 2011, 11:11:40 PM »

I had the pleasure of speaking with a staff member about the issue for almost an hour today. After reading some of these points, I have come to agree that the C3 rating itself really wouldn't incentify controllers to stay on and control anything more than any other rating; I do not control for hours or ratings, and as "flashy" as a C3 rating is, it wouldn't make me personally stay on any longer to control than if I had a C1.

I did discuss with the staff member that I think it is important that VATUSA recognizes the power of awarding controllers for experience and longevity; even things as simple as the badges they create for controllers who hit 1000 hours etc, and we were in agreement on some of these issues. I do appreciate your guy's input on the issue, it did help open my eyes a bit to really analyzing the issue more objectively.

General Discussion / C3 Rating

« on: November 25, 2011, 01:06:44 PM »

You guys are making valid points, but I guess where I'm caught up, is why does the fact that 6/7 ratings are based on a set criteria, mean that this one has to be? It doesn't have to cause headaches; let VATUSA decide who gets it, we're all gentleman (and gentlewomen :$) here, don't cry about it. There needs to be means of incentifying experience John, otherwise the network is going to keep losing experienced controllers. The overhead to training new students up to C1 so a ARTCC can stay frequently staffed costs a huge amount of time for the ARTCC. Maybe you don't want this to be seen as a "game" where you rack up points, but to be honest, for many people, adding to their total time is the only reason they control; sad yes, but it is what it is. And furthermore, we need those controllers, even if that's why they control. There are only two controllers left at Seattle controlling that were there when I started back in 2004, and they control a minimum amount of hours. Why not issue in a new means of rewarding controllers; other divisions use it just fine, even some who don't use it for center controlling; why waste the infrastructure?

Pages: [1] 2