Tides of War

I dont think you should "apply" to do it as that has been tried by DBE and look where that lead.
At the moment - im happy with the way its done (normally through cherry picking the most dedicated folk). But if the community and game becomes larger to the point that cherrypicking is not suitable, then some kind of basic requirements could be worked out like you must be in a squad (squad pilots are retained for longer than non squad pilots), have voluntarily offered time for AA doing other things etc.

At the moment, im happy with how it works because the community size is small enough to work that way. But if the size of the game grows we should likely review the current system in place for something better.

Btw, in terms of size i'd say wed need at least twice the regular player base we have now at least to reconsider how sysops are chosen.

Del

If you havent seen Sir, this is the main problem now, and if you dont then you should look back at all major forum complaints/posts about Admins and Sysops. The main problem is that the Sysops are in squads and play other squads and know other squad members tags, and if they get beat or something goes bad in a match or with a ref, they......... well you know the rest..... no offense Sir but squad members being Sysops is a very unstable way to Police other players that they play against in matches. Not that all current Sysops cant be unbiased but there is a bit of tention and bad feelings mostly Mon-Thursday after the Sunday Matches, check the Time Stamps.

My real tag name is not important for 2 reasons,
1: Its an opinion

2: Maybe its better AA had some opinions from an anonymous poster to avoid personal conflict with any idea or comment I may say that may prevent that idea from being pushed forward, but being an anonymous poster maybe an idea may be taken for whats its worth not for who made it.

It is true what you say in #1 and #2 but it's also true that you are who you are and to express your opinions as you have done, no matter who you are, is a valuable contribution to the game of AA and should be respected as such no matter who you are.

I hope you understand my point, no matter who you are, and with opinions like yours on this topic I would concur with you no matter who you are and it would be nice to know who you are regardless of who you are.

Salute

I appreciate that point but it I reckon the benefits outway the problems.

I would like to see better management from all Admins to negate any gross bias that could occur. That would prevent a sysop bias problem.

I appreciate that point but it I reckon the benefits outway the problems.
I would like to see better management from all Admins to negate any gross bias that could occur. That would prevent a sysop bias problem.

Maybe a short term test of AA delegates could be possible, maybe trying it out and see if issues are better handled with mediation would work out better.

Take the next two major issues and use a mediator all done via PM or Team Speak and I will ensure that the problem wont find its way to the forums and the problem will be resolved with all parties shaking hands and ending with no damage to relationships, actually you will see it will improve relations.

Why not try it?

A bit of history might be nice .. in the viewpoint of the USAAC and its inception.

When the USAAC first came to be .. the original BoD decided wisely that in order to get the USAAC recognized as a legitimate community that could. . and would speak for the USA pilots, we decided to accept and use much of what was in place at the time. One of those position/titles was the USA Voice for the USA pilots. That person was Salami. Sal headed up the USA Voice for Sysops, etc. Sal decided who was on the US Sysops Team. I don't believe they used the same terms and titles as I've presented.. but in essence that is the way it was. Sal was the USA Rep.

At the beginning of the USAAC existence the folks in place for "USA Reps" and the entire sysops system worked just fine, the people were all doing a good job and their was far to much for the USAAC BoD to address and work out then worry about how sysops were born. So what was in place.. just fit into the USAAC Structure .. like a glove. Consider that Sal was USAAC Director at that time, and as I said the USA Rep.

Sal .. as far as I know was NOT elected as the USA Rep but 'appointed' by the 'powers that be'. Sal I was told, really didn't want the position but took it because he was asked .. and because their was a need. I could be wrong on this .. but this is what *I* was told by a person that 'should know'.

There were some transitions .. and these are things *I* do not know the details on .. but I believe the USA Rep passed from Sal to Kid. No election, no approval system by the USAAC was considered. USAAC was not consulted , etc. The process of the 'powers that be' approved the transition. At some time .. the transition occurred again passing the baton from Kid to Temper. Again there was no involvement by the USAAC BoD .. nor to my knowledge was the topic ever brought up. Once we knew .. we simply offered congrats. As far as I know.. there is no complaint within the USAAC BoD or USA Community as a whole with one exception which might be FD_TZU, and I only base that statement on recent posts that he has made. As a Fact .. I don't know. What I do know is the USAAC BoD has no complaint and are happy with the people and the job that they do. I make this statement based on folks that *I* talk to .. and as an 'active' member of the BoD .. and records of the BoD. I cannot speak for the USAAC BoD as a whole, but I can safely say there is no complaint.

Recently we have had two new sysops "appointed" by the USA Rep, said sysops were 'approved' by the 'powers that be'. The USAAC BoD had no input, no voice on said appointments.

On the whole, however, most of us seem to be satisfied with the present bunch of neurotic megalomaniacs.

I agree.

Having said what I did above, I wonder, however, if there is a more democratic means of appointing sysops. Let me hasten to say I am not suggesting an instant overthrow of the present regime.

Well.. I'm glad you brought this up .. because .. surprise surprise I have some input here. I don't suggest any over throw either as I'm very confident and pleased with the current sysops. I have NO complaint at all (with the exception I still say they should fly a sysops tag more often, but its a not big deal complaint). As far as I'm concerned the current sysops crew is very fair and honest .. way to fair. At times I feel they are 'afraid' to act on trouble makers because of all the 'paperwork' and 'hate' mails they get. Hardly do they ever get the 'thank you' they really deserve!!

I won't comment on the 'mechanics' of the job, nor the actual job the individuals do for my purpose and statements below.. lets assume it all works well for the moment. What I am concerned about is the "how". How the USA Rep and USA Sysops get these jobs .. and "why' is the USAAC BoD NOT the body that makes the 'elections or appointments' for said positions. I think NOW is the time to address this.

I think the USAAC has proved itself and is a viable legitimate 'voice' for the USA Community. When I say WE at this point I mean to refer to the USAAC BoD and the community it represents .. the USA Pilots and those squads that are registered via the USAAC. WE have proven ourself as the USAAC BoD and USAAC Community as a responsible body that can .. and should decide who represents the USA Community .. and a decision making party of who should be part of the USA Sysops Team.

I'll go on record now by saying that a 'rotation system' as currently proposed on some boards .. I'm against.

I'll go on record now by saying that to include every person within any community to 'vote' on a sysops .. would be a mess and just won't work.. IMHO.

However .. a legit community such as the USAAC and its ruling board .. should now address this process of HOW and WHO. I won't suggest a total democratic system .. but I do sugges the BoD have input to this process .. and eventually should be the body that decides WHO will represent the USA Pilots .. and have input as to WHO is placed into Sysops positions representing the USA allotments.

If you check other boards you will find that different folks describe the system of "reps" and "sysops" differntly .. i.e as to the "how" they get put in those positions. One describes it a a 'voting' process of the community represented .. anthers says its an "appointment". In either case.. its seems to the outsider like me .. that the appointment is life long.

This quote is taken from the UKAAC Board, made by Wiz

There are three Admins UK+ US + GE
each of these admins are voted in by there community or asked to represent there community

Admins apoint Sysops I think there are 4 or 5 per community,

If an Admin is unhappy with his Sysop team he can remove them.

If a community is unhappy with there Admin they can remove him.

And the good thing about the Admins and sysops is even though they are from different

parts of the world they all get along and discuss topics and always come to an agreement

on how they think things should move forward,

I like to think we have made some great progress recently,

There has been a new US Admin

New US sysops

New GB sysops

New GE sysops

The post and explanation implies that the USAAC can remove our Admin and replace him. Umm.. I know of no such way to do so .. and I think the USAAC should address this and learn the process. I do feel in the future the USAAC BoD should elect and confirm our USA Voice.

Again, I have no problem with the USA Rep, the USA Sysops assigned .. but the topic was brought up and I think WE should know the "process" of "how its done" .. and have a vote as a legitimate community body (BoD). I don't advocate or suggest any immediate changes .. as stated I feel they all do a fine job. In the future .. I feel the BoD should be involved and 'vote' as the system Wiz explains implies.

Currently, I think that the USAAC BoD should simply take a vote and 'confirm' the current members in place just simply to say.. we voted/elected the current USA Rep and Sysops. We have always recognized them and given them a place at every BoD meeting.

To the public:

The USAAC BoD is a 'Board of Directors". Membership on that board consists of TWO members from each registered squad. Each squad decides who will represent them and speaks for the entire squad on every matter. Each squad decides how long a voice remains/represents their squad. Our Director .. is elected by members of the BoD to represent all those pilots registered who are NOT aligned with any particular squad and is given ONE vote to cast for those pilots, AND to represent the USAAC as OUR voice within other communities AND to the "powers that be".

Who the current 'powers that be' are .. I don't know.. and most of us don't know

There is a Sysops Board where Reps, Sysops and "powers that be" discuss the inner workings, etc of AA. It is this group that *I* perceive as the group that really makes the decisions ... and how things will be.. period.

Final note:

The USAAC conducts ALL meetings in public, times are announced to ALL of AA so that anyone can attend. There is a PUBLIC agenda posted as well. All decisions etc are a matter of PUBLIC record. You won't find that at ALL communities. If you need verification on this .. just ask any BoD member.

5-10 AA delegates would be selected based on experience/attitude/fairness/game involvement/etc.etc. Maybe each community could have 2-3 AA delegates.

Who would put them in place .. who would have the power to remove them?

Note: These AA delagates would agree to act fair and just and see both sides of all stories and situations they are presented. And agree to be unbiased and not use personal feelings when representing a player

.. and if they don't comply.. and/or just vote whoever they want to ..like a US super delegate? the Devil would agree to be fair now wouldn't he

Well It seems to me the people who don't break any of the COC rules don't

have any problem with the SYSOP staff.

So I will give you some insight on how I became A SYSOP.

1 st I have been flying in this game for 13 yrs, (still a rookie)

I volunteered to help with the USAAC club site.

I got put in fun events, and from there put in many HRS testing things for fun events,

I endured fun events without SYSOPS available and had to put up with rule breakers

as a SYSOP wasn't always there.

I got involved in The USAAC club, forums, debates,

Made contacts in GE and UK clubs through the working of fun events.

I was finally given a boot button for events only,

I did not abuse the boot button,

Later I had pilots coming to me with complaints about COC breakers in the open

teams and FFA, But there was nothing I could do about it.

So when the time came I was made a full SYSOP, not because it was my goal in AA

to become a SYSOP, but because the need arose.

And believe me being a SYSOP doesnt bring you respect, Your just a target for

bitter players who like to argue or have been banned or warned and look for revenge.

My point is trust is earned. You dont make a SYSOP out of a pilot thats only

been playing for 6 months, Nor do you make a SYSOP out of a pilot thats only

online once or twice a week.

AA delegates, SRRY but that would never work either.Someone would complain about them also.Then you would need delegates to choose the delegates.

No matter how you try to do it you cant make everyone happy.

We have a USAAC staff that takes votes on how AA is run from the US

side.The meetings are open to the public, And all are welcome to listen in and give oppions at the end of the meeeting.

The UK and GE admins have worked very hard to keep all of us in the air.

If it wasn't for them none of us we be flying in AA at all.

So I say we follow the COC rules and let them handle the administration of AA

At the moment - im happy with the way its done (normally through cherry picking the most dedicated folk). But if the community and game becomes larger to the point that cherrypicking is not suitable, then some kind of basic requirements could be worked out like you must be in a squad (squad pilots are retained for longer than non squad pilots), have voluntarily offered time for AA doing other things etc.

Define "most dedicated folks".

By that definition: most dedicated, I.. Mr Tbar should be a Sysops Want my resume?

Voluntarily offered time ... want my resume?

Did a lot positive for the community. Want my resume?

Help out anyone that ever asked? Want my resume?

I've had my name in the hat for a long time .. but I was passed over each time because .. "I make posts". Not one of those post ever attacked another player .. or criticized anyone for posting a suggestion or idea .. not one .. on any board. I never called anyone names, or used ugly terms for them. Ninty-nine percent of the post I have made concern "social behavior" within the game.. folks don't like that for some reason and claim .. *I* am trying to 'force' my way on 'them' .. when it was only a post.. only an opinion. I wanted the 'community' to think about something.. is this not doing something for the community?

What I have actually done is built a new squad from 'scratch'.. with the purpose of capturing as many NEW pilots as possible so they get a true picture of AA .. and REMAIN in the game. Then slowly I found people to take over that squad .. so I can move onto other AA related projects..

What I have actually done is spend hours and hours working with Fun Events and League events .. developing and improving.. as well as actually hosting and running these games. then slowly building staff .. I handed over those jobs .. so I could move onto other related AA projects..

What I have actually done is start up a USA Community that I was constantly told: "Would never work". Well.. it does. At first, I had to do about everything .. or nothing got done. Then slowly folks started stepping up to the task. I spent hours and hours working with them. Slowly but slowly each task I had to do .. was turned over to another party.. so I could move onto other AA related projects ..

I have spent hours and hours working with Tank on the CLP system .. working out new ways .. working on new ideas.. testing and testing and testing till I could puke on testing. Want my resume? I volunteered that time .. and to day we see nice features on the CLP ..

If the Sysops team checks my record within the game .. I'm probably squeaky clean. More than acceptable.

As far as the USAAC .. every objective was meet. Everything from the concept to reality was meet. I have as I stated from the beginning given up each and ever "power position" that existed to the community.

I have never given out private information that was entrusted to me like : passwords or "who is".

I have never abused any of the CLP privileges granted to me .. in fact I had access to all sysops tools at one time .. and never even so much as "peaked in the door". I'm a honor based person.. my word and honor is what I live by. When I see a back door left open.. I know it was not intended for me and I stay out .. I don't need to be told. Honor and Trust.

I have access to a lot of records. I don't abuse that information, nor do I give it out to anyone. ever. Trust and Honor.

So I ask .. how could the 'cherry picking' system ever pass up a guy like Tbar??

How could the current system pass up a guy like Tbar??

What this whole post 'sounds like' is Tbar tooting his own horn and running for an elected office of Sysops.. hehe. Yes I run a risk to make a response.

I happen to respect and have trust in the current folks administrating AA for us all, and if they feel someone else would be better qualified at the time a decision is made.. no sour grapes on my part. What is important.. is that the best for AA as a whole is satisfied... even if it is not the best qualified in terms of "giving the most to the community voluntarily". The point is .. the cherry picking part .. ain't always cherry picking now is it?

Publicly putting in an application .. with a real application process appeals to me Why? Because currently you can't find any such devise .. its up to the 'good ol boys' to decide and I feel AA is mature enough to handle and process an application process properly. Said application process should have some posted information to qualify any given applicant BEFORE he waste everyone times submitting same. One should be a pilot for so long, one should have a 'clean' record as an AA pilot, one should volunteer as an instructor for new pilots, one should be a referee for a certain amount of time.. etc. One needs a full 360 view, open mind, etc to be a sysops. Can't be a hot head for sure.. Can't be someone constantly busted for infractions. One must set a good example, etc.. get the picture?

I think that everyone should be able to view who has put in an application. I'm not so sure everyone should see why an application was rejected .. lol . If an application is accepted, then it goes in the que on a next up basis.. for your community that is.

OTHER:

Love this topic.. so happy it was started. I could not start this topic, but I'm sure happy its here. Makes me think... Makes me aware .. make me digest what other have to offer. Food .. ummm give me more food..

I haven't met one person who disagrees with your appointment pop. You have worked tirelessly for the community and, whether it seems that way to you, we are all very appreciative of your efforts. I haven't used the word deservedly concerning your appointment because I don't think you deserve the abuse and criticism that you may get from time to time for doing your job. You have accepted a serious responsibility just as you stepped up to the plate as fun events manager. You have proven that you do not regard such appointments as a privelege but as a responsibility not to be taken lightly. We respect you for that and most of us will give you our wholehearted support.

Please believe that I did not start this topic as a means of criticizing our present sysops. I just thought that, for those who are suspicious of such things, it would not do any harm for the process to be discussed in a transparent manner so that there would be greater understanding by the masses. Instead of new sysops just appearing in our midst, let there be a joyeous announcement of the appointment and why not include a synopsis of their AA achievements and fitness for the job. In any event the players are entitled to discuss the process, once they know what it is, and to make suggestions as to how they think it might be improved. The administration should never operate in a vacuum without the benefit of all views.

You should see my resume Tbar if you want to see amount the amount of time I've spent on AA doing bits for it. (its like a part time job!).

I think the best way to explain it Tbar is "positive karma (no pun intended)". By no means am I saying its fair but some people just seem to not give off that ideal.