Have found a few things to point out, as well as questions on wording...
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]REVISED: 3/19/2009[/quote]
I suppose this should be 3/19/2010?
Looking at paragraph 1...
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]VATNA and its associated divisions are established per VATSIM Code of Regulations.[/quote]
I cannot find anywhere in the CoR, a listing, establishing the divisions. I can only find a listing of what countries belong to what region. So this statement is factually inaccurate.However, I do find where it states that the Regional Director establishes the Divisions that make up the region.
IF, you (VATNA1) want us to operate under the premise that each country is its own division, no problem, but let's say THAT instead. Thus placing it under YOUR authority to create the divisions.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]The current VATNA divisions are divided into VATSIM Canada (VATCAN), VATSIM United States (VATUSA), VATSIM Caribbean (VATCAR), and VATSIM Mexico (VATMEX).[/quote]
Is this necessary? In trying to reduce future workload, do the "active" divisions need to be listed? I ask as IF a new division were to show up, it forces a revision to the document. Maybe this isn't a bad thing, am just thinking about future workload.
Looking at paragraph 2...
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Each division is delegated the authority to establish additional polices that support the management and administration of their respective divisions.[/quote]
Spelling of policies? Do you mean each division DIRECTOR is delegated the authority, or are the local managers being officially recognized by VATSIM now? Perhaps a new precedent, but pretty sure you mean the directors.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]It is recognized that each VATNA division is unique in its structure and standards, and that certain divisional policies may not be uniformly applicable.[/quote]
I THINK I understand what is trying to be said here, but shouldn't Regional policies BE uniformly applicable for the region? If not, why not leave it to the division to regulate? Same question stands at the divisional level. I guess I would like an example of a regional policy not uniformly applicable to the region. Help?
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]However, these divisional policies must be equitable and balanced in all respects and may not take away from or circumvent polices established by the following documents:[/quote]
Is this statement necessary? It seems this is covered by the CoR, nearly word for word. I am looking at it from the standpoint of "duplicity". If I am required to follow the CoR, and this is in the CoR, do I need to read it in a policy at the regional level when you have already told me I am responsible for the content of the CoR?
With reference to the listing of documents, I notice the User agreement, and EC policy is among items NOT included. Does this mean that the region need NOT follow THOSE policies?
Looking at paragraph 3...
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Division Directors shall ensure that all policies, including any policies established by local ARTCCs/FIRs are in keeping with the above standards. No policy shall exist that is unfair, divisive, and/or violates established executive/regional polices.[/quote]
Spelling of policies again? Again, I question the necessity of the paragraph for the same reasons listed above. Is this not clear in the CoR? Just raising the duplicity question again.
Looking at paragraph 4...
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]VATSIM members who are assigned to the VATNA region shall abide by all policies as validated by the following documents:[/quote]
I can't help but notice that the User Agreement and EC policies are not included. Same question as above stands here. Does the User Agreement apply? Do the EC policies? Is it necessary to include divisional policy and local policy in THIS document dealing with how to create divisional policy. Seems that a "circular reference" has been created.
Looking at paragraph 5...
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Violations of established polices will be investigated and processed through current, applicable VATSIM regulations.[/quote]
No issues, other than wording. Aren't all published policies "current", or else why are they published? If we weren't using VATSIM's regulations, whose would we be using?
These are my thoughts and questions, I look forward to yours...
JV
