Integrity of the Network

[Brian Pryor]

You can put this in the "for what it's worth" catagory.

The way I see it, you have three different groups on here, 1. the far left, 2. the far right, and 3 the middle.  Sounds to me like typical group dynamics, and btw, yes I did take group dynamics 101.   And alot more.

So is the network going to the dogs... I think not, mainly because the largest group of the 3 is the one in the middle, who are happy to be here, appreciate all the hard work that goes into providing this "free" service, and will continue to stay, and some will contribute, and that's all good.

my .02

Well said Scott, and you hit it on the head, we have the liberal group (wide open) the conservative (the sky is falling, restrict everything) and the bulk in the middle who are ok with things.

[Salvatore Barcia]

You can put this in the "for what it's worth" catagory.

The way I see it, you have three different groups on here, 1. the far left, 2. the far right, and 3 the middle.  Sounds to me like typical group dynamics, and btw, yes I did take group dynamics 101.   And alot more.

So is the network going to the dogs... I think not, mainly because the largest group of the 3 is the one in the middle, who are happy to be here, appreciate all the hard work that goes into providing this "free" service, and will continue to stay, and some will contribute, and that's all good.

my .02

Very well said, Scott.

[Mike Cassel]

Scott,

I wish it was that simple. I just don't think it can be described in those terms. The issue I have with VATSIM isn't all about the direction of the network - it's the procedure by which the decisions are made. VATSIM is currently obsessed with one-size-fits-all management and policies, and no matter how irrational or how counterproductive VATSIM's policies are to their own goals, in my experience attempting to change the policies is about as effective as peeing into a headwind.

The trouble is that the management style of VATSIM crushes the spirit of its best people. VATSIM has an amazing ability to attract smart, incredibly dedicated, fantastic people - people any business would be delighted to have working for them. It also has an amazing ability to stand in their way as they try and make the places they help to run just a little bit better. While assuredly in the end this network is the founders sandbox, and they can run it however they'd like - many people over the years have signed up to help make the sandbox nicer and better run. VATSIM has an institutional obsession with the "worst of the worst" - and constantly uses that as an example to justify bringing the best down to their level. Management and making rules are different things.

That part has nothing to with right-left-center group dynamics - just basic management and respect for those actually charged with doing something productive instead of making more rules.

[Romano Lara]

Mike,

I understand where you're coming from. It's very obvious actually from what it seems. However - I don't think VATSIM is a democracy. We don't have any say at all if the Founders wanted to change something in a blink of an eye. We all can side our opinions but there's no guarantee that's it's going to be considered or not. At the end of the day, its still the founders that has the final say. We weren't elected by the people to run our respective facilities, we were appointed by the higher ups.

But hey.... that's just me... that's how I see things around here

All we/I can do is to adopt to those changes...whether we like it or not..

I think the higher ups (founders/BoG) call the shots around here..

[Scott DeWoody]

Mike, I understand what you are saying, however, another "group dynamics" tidbit, as we all know, and it's unfortunately true, is that "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch".  Where there are tons of very talented people out there that would not only devote their time, and financial resourses to make this an enjoyable hobby, there are the few that "think" they are trying to help, that have put no resourses into the hobby, and are lying, backstabbing, title grabbing egomaniacs.... that later group is that "one bad apple"....   so MHO is that the "powers to be", have to draw the line somewhere...

if that made any sense.

[Ian Elchitz]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]if that made any sense.[/quote]

Use a Quality Assurance process to identify and get rid of the bad apples before the good apples are made into applesauce.

 As we drive down the highway we throw the bad ones into the back of the pickup truck, allowing them to somehow make their way back into the barrel. What we should do is chuck them out the window as hard as we can and let them be eaten by the livestock.

I'm tired of being applesauce.

[Scott DeWoody]

Ian, I'm pretty sure that's what has been said by some higher ups ...."if you don't like it, there's the door"

This whole thing is not rocket surgery, or brain science, we are playing in someone else's sandbox, they make the rules, no one is being forced to be here, so                 "......"

[Daniel Hawton]

Ian, I'm pretty sure that's what has been said by some higher ups ...."if you don't like it, there's the door"

This whole thing is not rocket surgery, or brain science, we are playing in someone else's sandbox, they make the rules, no one is being forced to be here, so                 "......"

Except, let's say hypothetically, a majority of staff members take that instruction and walk away and enough walk away that having any staff like we do now.  How do you think this network would be?  As most know, the level of training staff in VATUSA has dropped over the last year.  It's becoming harder to find and retain instructors and mentors.  A couple ARTCCs have even gone so far as to email controllers to try and recruit them from outside their ARTCC and even posting it on VATUSA's position openings.  Also, there are some ARTCCs (and FIRs outside VATUSA) that can't find Training Administrators/Chief Instructors.  Would there be a network worth having if everyone walked away?  Even if they provide it, we're the users of it.  If enough walk away that their network apart or there is a risk of it.. they can't just look the other way otherwise there would be no network or no point to it.  So, while it is their sand box and their policy goes, at the same time, without the users there is no network.. some kind of common ground needs to exist.

[Scott DeWoody]

Daniel, I hear ya, but look at my previous post.  Plus it's not the serious, generous, dedicated members I am referring to, those aren't the bad apples.

[Andy Duong]

Daniel, I hear ya, but look at my previous post.  Plus it's not the serious, generous, dedicated members I am referring to, those aren't the bad apples.

Hey Scott, it's been a while.

I am not meaning to contradict your post, as it makes complete and total sense what you mean by "bad apples"... However, I can't help but notice (I've been quiet, but I've been paying attention and keeping up with the forums) that it is mostly the "serious, generous, and dedicated memebers" that are the ones taking the advice of "if you don't like it, then there is the door".  I mean, those who have walked away or are arguing about their concerns about the network are the ones, IMHO, that are spending more time dedicated to the network compared to those who are in on it for the experience.  

I have to agree with Daniel on this.  Unfortunately if the staff takes the advice of walking away, the dedication stops, and the facilities (whichever ones that are affected by it) are constantly "rotating" their staff members/roster.  There isn't a set plan for the facility in terms of operations/training/etc.... And when there isn't a set plan, I find it harder for one to perceive as to what to do in that case because certainly, I would be completely lost at what to do and how to do it.

Regards,
AD

[Scott DeWoody]

Hey Scott, it's been a while.

I am not meaning to contradict your post, as it makes complete and total sense what you mean by "bad apples"... However, I can't help but notice (I've been quiet, but I've been paying attention and keeping up with the forums) that it is mostly the "serious, generous, and dedicated memebers" that are the ones taking the advice of "if you don't like it, then there is the door".  I mean, those who have walked away or are arguing about their concerns about the network are the ones, IMHO, that are spending more time dedicated to the network compared to those who are in on it for the experience.  

I have to agree with Daniel on this.  Unfortunately if the staff takes the advice of walking away, the dedication stops, and the facilities (whichever ones that are affected by it) are constantly "rotating" their staff members/roster.  There isn't a set plan for the facility in terms of operations/training/etc.... And when there isn't a set plan, I find it harder for one to perceive as to what to do in that case because certainly, I would be completely lost at what to do and how to do it.

Regards,
AD

Andy, you may be right, I don't know.  What I do know is that I'm glad some of the "bad apples", have tucked their respective tails and are no longer a factor to my enjoyment of this network.