Jump to content
Gdpr Removed

feedback Supervisor Warning

Recommended Posts

Gunnar Lindahl
24 minutes ago, Craig Watt said:

[...]

I actually had the courtesy to read your post in detail, and your follow-up responses also. I understand that you aren't happy with what happened, but to jump down people's throats for giving their perspective won't solve that.

So let me write, again, what my perspective is, with a little more detail.

Supervisors are called to unattended connections by ATC every hour of every day on VATSIM. Whether that connection is unattended because the pilot has gone to sleep, gone down the road to the shops, their house is on fire, or in your case, because your PC crashed, is not something that SUP can know. They will never know the reason, because  the pilot is not there to tell them. A SUP will always message a pilot at least once (and usually several times) before disconnecting them from the network, to ensure that they know ATC is trying to contact them.

So the SUP was called by ATC to your connection, which was unattended, or they did a routine spot check, one of the two. They messaged you, they didn't get a response. They disconnected you, and sent you a warning. That is how the process works. It is not rational nor logical for an email to be sent asking what is happening before they take action. It is the pilot's responsibility to maintain an attended connection. I see in this case you are saying there was a technical issue which made you believe you were disconnected when you apparently weren't. There's a simple solution to that: email the Supervisor back or contact VP Supervisors to explain your side of the story, with evidence if you have it. Then they will decide what to do. I see from your above response that you have done this.

I'm struggling to understand what the issue is here, personally. People are disconnected from VATSIM all the time, many times for innocent mistakes which SUPs simply do not have any way of having oversight of during the situation. Sometimes people make mistakes through error, too. I'm pretty sure I have a CERT entry from 2008 from when my ATIS was one line too long. I still have my VATSIM member privileges, nobody cares about that one singular CERT entry, and the same, Craig, applies to you. 

I'd hate for you to think you weren't welcome on VATSIM for this one unfortunate incident. You are.

Edited by Gunnar Lindahl

Share this post


Link to post
Adam Arkley
1 hour ago, Craig Watt said:

You  clearly don't understand the point or didn't follow the thread. There was nothing that I could have done!! How much more clear do I have to make it? If there is conflict  use to me getting up and leaving my computer then I would have 100% understood that or  If it was done on purpose or If I had control but this wasn't the case. I am glad that you will see above another member has seen another thread of someone who may have had the same issue. I haven't seen the thread personally. Though if it is out of my control then I don't accept the warning. Its being passed on to the VP and I really cant be bothered when he/she gets in touch explaining myself.  What I was saying about vatsim was if SUPs take the enjoyment out of it by handing out warnings for something I don't accept then I am a liberty to use another platform, yes in my view vatsim is more superior but I am not coming on vatsim to be told by a SUP that this didn't happen when he wasn't in my sim room. That's my choice. Its the principal of the matter for me, which to reiterate there was nothing I couldn't do.  plain and simple, How about since you are SUP Gunnar prove against me that what I experienced wasn't the situation? again on your post you are justifying the reasons why he gave me the warning, So if there is nothing I can do it still warrants a warning? if I had have been able to acces Vpilot I would have been able to reply to the SUP to explain but given the situation, I was absolutely under the opinion 100% I was disconnected from the network. I accept that this isn't a situation SUPs face everyday but in my case this Is my version of what happened.

Hi Craig, this will be fun.

No supervisor enjoys disconnecting people from the network. If they did, they wouldn't be supervisors. The privilege of becoming a supervisor is closely guarded - trust me, I know. I've tried.

Let us examine the facts:

  • Access to the network is a privilege, not a right.
  • A condition of you connecting to the network is that you do not leave your connection unattended. Your demonstrate your connection is not unattended by being contactable.
  • A supervisor attempted to contact you. They could not.
  • The supervisor exercised their right to remove you from the network, in accordance with the Code of Conduct and Code of Regulations
  • You're very sad.

Nobody has accused you of anything other than not responding to a message. You have simply received a warning advising you not to repeatedly leave your connection unattended. Now, whilst it may be the case (and I am not saying it is or it isn't) that your PC was rebooting, it's literally inconsequential. You could not be contacted. Whether or not this is your fault/problem/within your control is immaterial to the sequence of events. You have been afforded the opportunity to write to the Vice President for Supervision and Supervisors and All Things Nice but instead you're shouting at people on a forum trying to tell you that it's not the end of the world.

Please enjoy VATSIM responsibly. 

All the best,
Adam

Share this post


Link to post
Gdpr Removed

Listen guys I am not wasting your time or mine anymore. I am providing the other side to the disagreement. If it isn't intentional does it warrant a warning? I don't think so, If I had have physically got up and left then of course id accept it. Adam I am shouting? can you please elaborate when we had the voice call where I shouted? I don't recall speaking to you and shouting so again is this another thing where people try and second guess the situation and get it horribly wrong just like you have done. I put it in bold in my last post to make clear, I see it as my side of the story and given my situation was out of my control there was nothing I could do. All I am saying is if the SUP can email a warning no problem then before he/she decides then a quick email to say can you explain what has happened especially when my record is clear.  Again as I said its about the principal, I don't accept the warning because the reasons he gave is not what happened. He said I left the computer, I didn't. I talk about the facts. So again, I don't feel a warning should be accepted when the version the SUP provided was different from reality.  

I certainly think if anyone is given warnings they should be given a chance to be heard regardless. After the explanation is given if that warrants a warning then yes accept it, but not when the sup is saying I left the controller when I didn't. If I don't agree with it I put it publicly and in doing so I have found out there is a guy in a similar situation. (though I haven't seen the post I trust the fellow member not to  make it up) I also haven't came across it on the forums but if it was a 3rd party site or Facebook/Twitter etc I wouldn't know where to start looking. Though on here especially sups replies, I know obviously they will favour the SUP which I can understand, Though if I where to take this to a 3rd party site (which I am not going to do) people with no connection with vatsim I would imagine the situation would be different. 

Given my experience in this case its a matter of principal with me. The warning was for leaving the computer unattended which didn't happen, plain and simple.  It made me feel like it was done deliberate and I am not prepared to have my integrity questioned whether its a SUP or VP.. If vatsim aren't prepared accept my reason as genuine and more less saying it didn't happen then Why would I or anyone want to be involved with a network like that. I don't feel I was given a fair chance to put my version across. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Gdpr Removed
2 hours ago, Gunnar Lindahl said:

I actually had the courtesy to read your post in detail, and your follow-up responses also. I understand that you aren't happy with what happened, but to jump down people's throats for giving their perspective won't solve that.

So let me write, again, what my perspective is, with a little more detail.

Supervisors are called to unattended connections by ATC every hour of every day on VATSIM. Whether that connection is unattended because the pilot has gone to sleep, gone down the road to the shops, their house is on fire, or in your case, because your PC crashed, is not something that SUP can know. They will never know the reason, because  the pilot is not there to tell them. A SUP will always message a pilot at least once (and usually several times) before disconnecting them from the network, to ensure that they know ATC is trying to contact them.

So the SUP was called by ATC to your connection, which was unattended, or they did a routine spot check, one of the two. They messaged you, they didn't get a response. They disconnected you, and sent you a warning. That is how the process works. It is not rational nor logical for an email to be sent asking what is happening before they take action. It is the pilot's responsibility to maintain an attended connection. I see in this case you are saying there was a technical issue which made you believe you were disconnected when you apparently weren't. There's a simple solution to that: email the Supervisor back or contact VP Supervisors to explain your side of the story, with evidence if you have it. Then they will decide what to do. I see from your above response that you have done this.

I'm struggling to understand what the issue is here, personally. People are disconnected from VATSIM all the time, many times for innocent mistakes which SUPs simply do not have any way of having oversight of during the situation. Sometimes people make mistakes through error, too. I'm pretty sure I have a CERT entry from 2008 from when my ATIS was one line too long. I still have my VATSIM member privileges, nobody cares about that one singular CERT entry, and the same, Craig, applies to you. 

I'd hate for you to think you weren't welcome on VATSIM for this one unfortunate incident. You are.

You keep saying unattended connection, but this isn't the case. So now that I have covered that why did I get a warning? I don't not feel welcome, in fact Sir its the opposite. Its a fantastic platform though I am just not prepared to use a network that you get warnings for something that didn't happen. Again I didn't leave the Sim unattended my computer had a massive crash which there was nothing I could have done.  

Edited by Craig Watt

Share this post


Link to post
Gunnar Lindahl

Craig,

Please read the responses to your posts. They are very clear! Nobody is saying you have done anything wrong - you were messaged by a SUP, you didn't respond (the reason why you couldn't is immaterial) and you were removed. It's been explained to you that you can contact the Supervisor and/or VP Supervisors. 

Once again: a Supervisor cannot see why you aren't responding to messages. 

Share this post


Link to post
Gdpr Removed
5 minutes ago, Gunnar Lindahl said:

Craig,

Please read the responses to your posts. They are very clear! Nobody is saying you have done anything wrong - you were messaged by a SUP, you didn't respond (the reason why you couldn't is immaterial) and you were removed. It's been explained to you that you can contact the Supervisor and/or VP Supervisors. 

Once again: a Supervisor cannot see why you aren't responding to messages. 

Should I really as a member have to explain this to a VP? When a platform that  someone  enjoys becomes a hassle then why use it? I am keeping my membership open, in the future who knows if I will fly on the network again though since the incident and the way it has made me feel I cant see it. If a sup doesn't believe me then its going to be hard for me to convince a VP and I am not having my integrity questioned when I know what happened. I am also keeping my membership open to use the forums. If you all reply to me and as much as I aim not using vatsim for flight sim I wouldn't want to be rude and not reply either as you have still taken your time out of your day to reply to me. Whether I like the explanation or not I wouldn't deliberately ignore anyone.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Gunnar Lindahl

Whether you choose to use VATSIM is totally up to you. It's a hobby network, not a job. You can come, and go, as you please.

Share this post


Link to post
Trevor Hannant

Craig, let me break this one down a little to help you understand a little more (hopefully!).

36 minutes ago, Craig Watt said:

You keep saying unattended connection, but this isn't the case.

An "unattended connection" can be interpreted as an occasion when a user (pilot or controller) is seen to be logged onto the network but is unresponsive to a controller, pilot or Supervisor.  Unattended is a catch all phrase for when you cannot be contacted for whatever reason that is, in your case a PC crash which left your vPilot connection 'live'.  It doesn't necessarily mean you're not attending your connection, but you're simply unresponsive to calls being made to you on that connection.

36 minutes ago, Craig Watt said:

So now that I have covered that why did I get a warning?

It's Supervisor policy to send an email to anyone we disconnect to make them aware that it happened.   As Gunnar has said above, we've no magic wand or webcam in pilot's/controller's "gaming room" to see why that connection is not generating a reply to our messages.  We simply have to assume that it's been left, something that happens all the time.  The email should simply state that we tried contacting you, didn't receive a reply and as such, we removed your connection from the network.  It should also state the Code of Conduct regulation (in this case A9) which covers this.  This is done for clarity and transparency.

Here's the email that I send when I disconnect someone from the network:

Quote

Hello XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,

A few moments ago, I attempted to reach you in my capacity as a VATSIM Network Supervisor. You did not respond to several private network messages I sent you over a 30+ minute period between time XXXXz and time XXXXz.  This is contrary to Code of Conduct A9 which states:

“When logging on to the VATSIM.net network, a member is not permitted to leave his or her connection unattended for a period in excess of thirty (30) minutes. If a member is unable to comply with this requirement, then he or she must log off of the VATSIM.net network. A member who is found to be unresponsive for more than thirty (30) minutes is subject to immediate removal from the network. Members who are found to repeatedly leave their connections unattended are subject to the terms of Article VI. of the VATSIM.net Code of Regulations.”

http://www.vatsim.net/network/docs/coc/

Should you need to leave your connection unattended for an extended, or unknown period of time, you must disconnect from VATSIM and then you may reconnect when back.

VATSIM is an amazing community of flight sim enthusiasts, and Network Supervisors and Administrators are here to help users such as yourself. If you have any questions, or need further help, please don't hesitate to contact me by return e-mail.

If the email you've received varies from this, then the Supervisor who sent it has amended it for their use.  If you feel that the Supervisor has made the changes to his copy overly harsh, then an email to VP Supervisors highlighting the fact will help ensure that we're all running off the same basis.

In terms of how it affects your position on the network, it doesn't - you have the same access you always had and no controllers will know that this issue occurred (except those reading this! 🙂 ) so there will be no different treatment of you as a result.  Similarly, if you need to contact a Supervisor yourself in future, there will be no affect on that contact or subsequent actions as a result of the above.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Gdpr Removed
7 minutes ago, Gunnar Lindahl said:

Whether you choose to use VATSIM is totally up to you. It's a hobby network, not a job. You can come, and go, as you please.

Thanks Gunnar, Maybe we can leave this thread now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Simon Irvine

I am locking this thread as Craig as received comprehensive advice and explanations from several supervisors and members of staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Similar Content

    • Harry Sugden
      By Harry Sugden
      With reference to:
      More than 40 up votes were secured The last post states the changes will look to be implemented Is there any update on this? 🙂 Seems like the membership were asked, and the membership answered!
    • Jordan Hogan
      By Jordan Hogan
      Hello Everyone,
       
      Hope im not out of place saying this but it is something that i have noticed during my training for Vatsim ATC.
      Each mentor ive had has insisted on using a certain way for giving taxi instructions, for example
      "BAW001 taxi holding point J4 Runway 08R Via J"
      Now due to my line of work at EGKK i listen to ATC all the time when working, and the way every air traffic controller issues taxi instructions is, 
      "BAW001 taxi J hold J4"
      Many a time just 
      "BAW001 J J4"
      Due to me hearing this all the time IRL, i have been making the "mistake" of using this way of instruction on the network and being told by the mentor that it is incorrect.
      Im just wondering if there is a specific reason that it is done this way on Vatsim and it not the same way as IRL.
       
      Thanks 
       
      Jordan 
        
    • Harry Cameron
      By Harry Cameron
      Hi,
      I was trying to book a session on Gatwick Tower today for after a mentoring session while I was controlling it but the CTS gave me an error (https://prnt.sc/iqqkgw) saying that I am currently logged on to the position and must only book from the present to "make it fair for everyone". Is it possible that this could be removed as it is quite a pain and I see no point in having it.
      Thanks
    • Mark Duff
      By Mark Duff
      Thanks to all the controllers (and pilots) that made the Stuttgart to London City event such a great evening. It was nice to see Vatsim provide an event suited to the turboprop addicts with comprehensive ATC cover all round. It was nice to stretch the Dash 8's legs. Hopefully there may be more of this coming up?
       
    • David Solesvik
      By David Solesvik
      I selected Documentation Review because for some reason, i couldn't choose Procedure Consultation.
      My question is, what does the final letter in a SID and/or STAR designator (e.g. ‘M’ in DVR8M) indicate?
×
×
  • Create New...