On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Jörg Emmerich wrote: > As someone doing ATC 4 days/week, I would like to bring in another point > of view to this issue: <snip> > So my take is: > - yes, we need the ability to lock some people out, if it is getting too > bad > - but do not lock out people because they may not (yet) have a certain > qualification > --> try to find a balance between those two! > > I know everybody believes we Germans like to regulate everything: I > would prefer to convince!
A very good point. As you say, we need to avoid excluding newcomers. I think this can be handled fairly easily: - The newcomer joins at KSFO with the default multiplayer options. - By default he/she will be able to see all other aircraft, probably with the exceptions of those labeled "ignore" and possibly "dogfight". So, they will be able to see all the aircraft under ATC control. - The ATC controller can choose who he/she views as well, and if they are not busy might want to view all aircraft, and communicate with the newcomer. - The "class" really provides the user with the ability to state what they are attempting to do. If the newcomer wants to take part, they can change their class to "learner", or "ATC". There's no assumption that they will be perfect, merely that they are trying to work within the constraints of the label. It may be the case that these classes help encourage newcomers to engage with the ATC process. If they are making a conscious decision to change their class, they are declaring their intentions, and will want to do their best to fit in with what others are doing. -Stuart ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
