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.
