Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted November 1, 2015 Report Share Posted November 1, 2015 Hello dear members! I would like to start the discussion among members and also gather some key data via an survey, regarding amendment of our constitution. Vatsim Scandinavia member survey Intentions with this survey is to gather information of the general opinion in our community. This survey is not connected to forum/vatsim account. Current constitution Membership Quote 4 Membership 4.1 Application Any person who agrees with the objectives and rules of VATSIM Scandinavia and its parent organizations may apply for membership, and on the approval by the board, become a member of VATSIM Scandinavia. The applicant must have a valid VATSIM ID and a valid email address. We do not have own register of our members, that is a fact and there is no need to dig deeper why not as we can´t turn back time! Before VATSIM SSO, the only register we had was users who had created forum profile and been checked that name and CID did correlate, maybe did some adjustments and thereafter the users forum account was approved. If there ever was an register of members and it´s found , that has most certain become so old that is of no use. Also with current SSO credential checks, there is many that have not created forum or website profile yet and old "members" that maybe never will. What does the http://vatsim-scandinavia.org/information/member-roster/ show?! It shows Vatsim members that have chosen subdivision "SCA" and with that are eligible for training requests in Vatsim Scandinavia and not counted as visiting controllers. I suggest for discussion an proposal regarding Membership/Application: Quote Any person who agrees with the objectives and rules of VATSIM Scandinavia and its parent organizations may apply for membership. By being registered in the Vatsim membership database as ”Europe – Europe (except UK) – Scandinavia vACC/vARTCC”, the individual is automatically a member of Vatsim Scandinavia. The applicant must have a valid VATSIM ID and a valid email address. ****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** Member voting rights Currently the community is an ATC oriented community as it´s only active ATC that are eligible to vote in issues concerning Vatsim Scandinavia. During latest discussions regarding amendment of constitution (sorry to say, all those discussions are in your memory as old forum is deleted) several opinions was presented, these two was at least presented by several during those discussions: Maintain current requirement --> only active ATC have voting right in issues concerning Vatsim Scandinavia Al members that are members in Vatsim Scandinavia and are not in status of inactive in Vatsim membership database (not active as ATC or pilot for a year, this is automatically updated in Vatsim membership database). Some other that I have forgotten?! The motivation for most of those members that liked to amend the constitution is the idea to involve our pilots in the community more and an natural way would to give also them voting right, if I remember correctly. Personally I share the thought that we should involve our members that are only pilots in some way, but is it by changing the voting right or trying something else: Pilot assistant (pilots@vatsim-scandinavia.org), oversee and update pilot pages, oversee/arrange FIR/vACC unofficial training flight happenings........... Any software community/collaboration tool for our pilots where they can inform of their flight and request ATC coverage https://forum.vatsim-scandinavia.org/topic/156-wish-list-what-functions-do-you-wish-for-on-our-platforms/?do=findComment&comment=553 Something else? Active ATC members Quote 4.2.1 Permanent ATC Membership Permanent ATC members will be divided into the following categories: Active ATC members Passive ATC members ATC members on temporary leave Active members have provided more than 10 hours of active ATC during the previous 6 calendar months, as documented though the VATSIM statistics. In current constitution, voting rights and active ATC members are connected to each other, so this topic concerns only the hurdle regarding "what is required to be active ATC and with that eligible to man ATC position in Vatsim Scandinavia: Amount of hours to remain "active"! More, less or untouched ? Any other hurdle? Visiting controller Current constitution Quote 4.2.2 Visiting ATC Membership Members, whom are permanent member of another VACC, but wishes to transfer temporarily to VATSIM Scandinavia, are defined as Visiting ATC members. Visiting ATC must have a rating of C1 or higher in VATSIM, and must be approved by the Director of VATSIM Scandinavia when joining. Visiting ATC members are not eligible to vote on issues concerning VATSIM Scandinavia. I suggest for discussion and proposal regarding Visiting Controller Quote 4.2.2 Visiting ATC Membership Members, whom are permanent member of another VACC, but wishes to transfer temporarily to VATSIM Scandinavia, are defined as Visiting ATC members. Visiting ATC must have a rating of C1 or higher in VATSIM, and must be approved by the Director of VATSIM Scandinavia when joining. Visiting controller that have provided less hours as ATC within Vatsim Scandinavia than required as of § 4.2.1 regarding active ATC requirements, will be informed by Director or board representative that their visiting ATC member status has been revoked. Visiting ATC members are not eligible to vote on issues concerning VATSIM Scandinavia. Suggested amendment 2.2 Quote 2.2 Staff Members working with the management of VATSIM Scandinavia, subordinated the Director. Must have been a member of VATSIM Scandinavia for at least one month, have a rating of S3 or higher in VATSIM, and be approved by the Director of VATSIM Scandinavia when appointed. Requirements for Staff member in Management can be lifted with anonymous decision by Board if members other qualities is for better purpose for Vatsim Scandinavia. The Training Director must have a rating of C1 or higher in VATSIM. Staff is divided in two groups as stated in "Management"; "Board", with the right to vote at staffmeetings, and "Staff", with no voting right at staff-meetings. Something else? Quote "No institution can possibly survive if it needs geniuses or supermen to manage it. It must be organized in such a way as to be able to get along under a leadership composed of average human beings." — Peter Drucker Please share your thought/idea as quoted above, executive staff members are not geniuses or supermen . *************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** During this process I would like to extract members thoughts about our community and how we should enhance our community and one way is to have an formal guideline (constitution) that shows the general path. As I see there is only the issue regarding membership that are required to amend to have an fully working constitution, the other topics are those that have been mentioned by members earlier. These topics has been discussed since 13:th of September in board. Do note that amendment of the constitution requires 66% in favor for the amendment, so with that requirement "uncertain" suggestions for amendment will most probably not be presented in the final proposal for amendment of constitution. Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 There seems to not be an lively discussion! With no discussion and almost no survey filled in, there is no way for me and the board to know in what you as member think! I do not think that you as member´s has given me and board "Carte blanche" to amend the constitution. I do like to have some responds on the suggestions mentioned above or at least fill in the survey! Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Frederiksen Posted December 5, 2015 Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Well.. To be honest, I don't really see the big discussion topic here. It's not like there are any major changes. The board should be perfectly capable of finding a solution to this. One word from my side though: Change the voting system. Let every member of VATSIM Scandinavia vote. They are a part of the community, so ofcourse they should have a say on how the community is run. ATC's are not better members than pilots. Christian FrederiksenDirector of Copenhagen FIR Denmark@vatsim-scandinavia.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 On 2015-12-05 at 11:49 PM, Christian Frederiksen said: Well.. To be honest, I don't really see the big discussion topic here It´s very important for me and the rest of the board to hear what our members think about these kind of issues. That to get the feel where the majority thinks among our members, as we will not propose an amendment of the constitution regarding those issues that not have an good majority behind the intended amendment. In case of the proposal of amendment goes to referendum, there is needed minimum 66% of votes for the proposal and I do like to avoid to have an referendum where the proposal does not receive minimum 66%. If that would happen, that is an clear signal that I and board has not communicated with members sufficiently to know what our members thinks! Therefore this discussion is necessary! We have had in our previous forum(sorry to say everything is deleted)very heated and good discussion and as many of our members have not yet said anything in this tread, there is no hurry to continue forward. This process will have it´s time. 51 minutes ago, Damon Hemstrom Burton said: I do see an issue that only ATCs can vote. Why not those who have home division set to SCA or their home airport to any SCA airport? That is one of the questions during this discussion. The value <pilot have home airport in SCA> I am pretty sure that we can´t use, as that are not read in any database, to my knowledge and pilot are able to change that when ever they like, even daily! 56 minutes ago, Damon Hemstrom Burton said: I also do wish there was more coherence between each FIR, with similar "methods" of doing stuff than the others... My email is always open for opinions if you do not like to state your question/opinion on our forum <director@vatsim-scandinavia.org> or if you have specific FIR´s you can reach FIR directors via <country@vatsim-scandinavia.org>. http://vatsim-scandinavia.org/information/about-us/contact-us/ But I prefer that we keep discussion as much as possible on forum, as that leads to good communication. Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Edvardsson Posted December 10, 2015 Report Share Posted December 10, 2015 42 minutes ago, Magnus Gustafsson said: That is one of the questions during this discussion. The value <pilot have home airport in SCA> I am pretty sure that we can´t use, as that are not read in any database, to my knowledge and pilot are able to change that when ever they like, even daily! Without putting any value in it, but we are a vACC (virtual area control center). This suggests the core of the organization is for ATC while VA (virtual airline) is an organization for pilots. We have also taken a stand to only provide ATC training in our organization and not pilot training. We provide documents and procedures for ATC but not for pilots. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wygene Chong Posted December 11, 2015 Report Share Posted December 11, 2015 Quote The value <pilot have home airport in SCA> I am pretty sure that we can´t use, as that are not read in any database, to my knowledge and pilot are able to change that when ever they like, even daily! However, is it not that when every member, pilot or controller, signs up to VATSIM they have to pick a division? Could we use that value? I agree our core goal is providing ATC, but I also think that the more we try to engage with pilots, the richer our community will become. At least in Iceland FIR, we have tried our best to provide procedures for pilots: http://vatsim-scandinavia.org/pilots/airports/iceland/. The voting right is one part of that, even though it is more symbolic. However, there is more we could do, such as the Pilot Assistant idea (discussed at last board meeting) where someone takes new members by the hand and organises group flights and training flights. Also the idea of individual pilots being able to request ATC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2015 On 2015-11-01 at 5:10 PM, Magnus Gustafsson said: Suggested amendment 2.2 Quote 2.2 Staff Members working with the management of VATSIM Scandinavia, subordinated the Director. Must have been a member of VATSIM Scandinavia for at least one month, have a rating of S3 or higher in VATSIM, and be approved by the Director of VATSIM Scandinavia when appointed. Requirements for Staff member in Management can be lifted with anonymous decision by Board if members other qualities is for better purpose for Vatsim Scandinavia. The Training Director must have a rating of C1 or higher in VATSIM. Staff is divided in two groups as stated in "Management"; "Board", with the right to vote at staffmeetings, and "Staff", with no voting right at staff-meetings. Added for discussion. Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 On 2015-11-01 at 5:10 PM, Magnus Gustafsson said: Hello dear members! I would like to start the discussion among members and also gather some key data via an survey, regarding amendment of our constitution. Vatsim Scandinavia member survey Intentions with this survey is to gather information of the general opinion in our community. This survey is not connected to forum/vatsim account. We have received 11 replies on the survey and with those we have good hint regarding members thought´s. The survey is still open! Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Edvardsson Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 Please explain the purpose and meaning: Quote Requirements for Staff member in Management can be lifted with anonymous decision by Board if members other qualities is for better purpose for Vatsim Scandinavia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 1 hour ago, Daniel Edvardsson said: Please explain the purpose and meaning: Board meeting minutes 3/2015 6.) Is an clear example of this. Where @Peter Persson is offering his services, that are of big interest for our community. His expertise and donation of server services for us, clearly should qualify him as Web Services Director (ACCSCA11), but the requirement for staff is minimum 1 month of membership and rating of minimum Student 3. Intentions is that this should only concern "administrative" staff positions. Do you have better wording or process to suggest in these cases, please tell me! Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Edvardsson Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 The expertice is one thing and I agree that it is wise to open up a position for him based on this. On the other hand, donating server service should be dealt with regards to the regulations of donations which raises questions on staff position (voting staff???) if the reason is "free webservice". Your Agreement By donating, you agree that your financial contribution is solely an act of goodwill, and that such a contribution does not grant you with any higher say in how the VACC is run. You agree that you will never use the fact that you have made a financial contribution as a tool to attempt to influence or intimidate staff members or the general membership. You will not use the fact that you have made a financial contribution for elevating your status in the VACC, nor to attempt to “bribe” the VACC into granting you special privileges. Once you have donated, you have surrendered your right to claim your money back at any time, unless your financial contribution does not go towards running costs for web services, as described. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 Intentions is to evaluate the personal expertise in these cases. Threshold to appoint in these circumstances is .. with anonymous decision by Board ..., that I think should be sufficient. Regarding @Peter Persson, I am absolutely certain that he already knows the agreement´s concerning donation to Vatsim and Vatsim Scandinavia. Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Edvardsson Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 Quote with anonymous decision by Board Jag fattar inte vad du menar. Syfte anonymt? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 2 hours ago, Daniel Edvardsson said: Jag fattar inte vad du menar. Syfte anonymt? Thanks, Daniel! The word should be "unanimously/unanimous" ! I will correct it! Quote unanimous {adj.} [näring.] enhällig {adj.} [näring.] There was in fact unanimous agreement on this in this very interesting debate. Detta rådde det ju också enhällig konsensus om i denna mycket intressanta debatt. Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Edvardsson Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) Perfect - now I get it. I would use the phrasing: Requirements for a potential staff member in the management group can be lifted with unanimous agreement by the board [if member's background or qualities are considered vital for the organization]. [...] = not needed but maybe it's important to specify it a bit further? On my behalf, I can see a pedagogic staff (teacher or similar) taking on as Chief of Training DK/NO/SE etc without the requirements listed in the constitution. Edited December 30, 2015 by Daniel Edvardsson 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted December 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 21 hours ago, Daniel Edvardsson said: Requirements for a potential staff member in the management group can be lifted with unanimous agreement by the board [if member's background or qualities are considered vital for the organization]. Excellent, thanks! Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Gustafsson (880543) Posted January 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 11, 2016 Survey is closed after been open for about 2 months, with 14 replies in the survey! With the requirement in our constitution [Referendums are considered accepted if 66% of the valid votes cast are in favour of the change.], I do not see sufficient support in our community to change regulations about: Member voting rights Requirements for active ATC member But I do see an need to evaluate pilot services! Board has today been presented with this fact also and a proposal of amendment of the constitution to evaluate, before presenting it to the community! A big thanks to those members that shared their thoughts in the survey! Magnus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now