The List... (Edited)

[Kyle Ramsey 810181]

I'm still waiting for an answer, and so far the two protagonists of this issue have failed to respond.

BL.

 

VATUSA is a part of VATSIM and when they are not able to perform their duties adequately VATSIM becomes accountable as is currently the case. Which makes it a VATSIM issue

 

I hope you are not calling me people names Brad, that might just warrant a COC Violation.

 

You might want to go look that one up as its neither good nor bad, thus isn't likely to be a CoC violation. And who is not able to perform what duties adequately? VATUSA has a Deputy, who is the acting VATUSA1 until another is appointed, nothing missing there. ZAU has a deputy ATM, who is the acting ATM until one is appointed, so nothing missing there. Deputies are used for continutity purposes all the time during transitions. I have the upmost faith in both individuals in those seats to carry out the duties of the DD/ATM.

[Graeme Florance 906409]

Thanks Kyle I never once mentioned our current acting ATM or deputy director as failing just for clarity as failing. The failings in this debacle are obvious for all to see. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder right !!!

Edited September 6, 2009 at 10:03 PM by Guest

[Brad Littlejohn]

I'm still waiting for an answer, and so far the two protagonists of this issue have failed to respond.

BL.

 

VATUSA is a part of VATSIM and when they are not able to perform their duties adequately VATSIM becomes accountable as is currently the case. Which makes it a VATSIM issue

 

I hope you are not calling me people names Brad, that might just warrant a COC Violation.

 

A protagonist is calling anyone names, Graeme. There are people in this who aren't so sensitive about this (non) issue as you. But to be honest, you and Bo are pushing this issue, so yes, that would make you to be one of the protagonists. There is nothing wrong or offensive about it; in fact, from Mirriam Webster:

 

protagonist: noun.

2: a leader, proponent, or supporter of a cause

 

And you want to throw a CoC violation at me...

 

That is also beside the point. Once again, you fail to get my point.

 

This is a VATUSA issue only. The BoG, let alone the founders of this network, should not have to get involved in this issue unless your other options have failed. You have VATUSA to deal with. If that fails, you have VATNA to deal with. If those two bodies fail, THEN you have the BoG, and should the entire BoG fail, you go to the Founders. You not only have people from VATUSA dealing with this issue, but you have Kyle (who really doesn't need to be involved yet) coming out and dealing with this. Bo has riled up GSM on this, so you have 3 bodies here, two of which don't have to really deal with this yet..

 

Yet you decide to go over VATNA's head on this, not even engaging Bryan Wollenberg. Real nice there, isn't it?

 

Think of the structure as an appellate process. You've just gone around the whole lot of them on this soapbox. In Bo's #3 on this list, as I am part of ZLA and was privy to the whole thing happening over *5* years ago, not once did ZLA go over VATUSA's head. not once did ZLA go over VATNA's head. Not once did anyone in ZLA go straight to the BoG or the Founders screaming bloody murder over what happened. Yet the protagonists here want to rehash something that has been dead and gone, and those involved with it having moved on.

 

EDIT: The threads for that whole entire incident still exist on this forum. If you doubt what I just said, simply go back through the entire threads, and you will see my point.

 

So I say once again. This is a VATUSA issue. If you don't get what you're wanting there, Take it to VATNA. If you don't get what you want there, then bring it to the BoG, but your stomping your feet and soapboxing straight to the BoG and the Founders not only makes you look childish, but to the new people joining this network, make the network look childish. The BoG let alone the founders, let alone yourselves don't want to risk the people on this network, and especially you, just to prove that you're right.

 

BL.

[Kyle Ramsey 810181]

Thanks Kyle I never once mentioned our current acting ATM or deputy director as failing just for clarity as failing. The failings in this debacle are obvious for all to see. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder right !!!

 

Then who precisely are you saying is failing, Graeme? I'm sorry I'm not as smart as you so its not obvious to me.

[Roy Evans 1061333]

A founding member made this issue a VATSIM issue, so ask him for the details.

[Graeme Florance 906409]

I didn't take the issue to anyone higher it went higher because it needed too not my issue, but rest [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ured it is no longer a VATUSA.issue am sure Alan and Bryan will concur.

 

Kyle, not today

[tom van der elst]

I am not a VATSIM Staff member, BoG member, or anything outside my sector, so I have no political agenda here. But I am disgusted to hear that people think the Founders of this network are being equated to some good 'ol boys club, when I personally know otherwise. I have had the pleasure of having conversations with Harv on more than one occasion, and have found him to be one of the most humble and down to earth people I know.

 

I also have had the pleasure of meeting some of the BoG at the AVSIM conventions held over the years, and once again, know that they do not have one elitist bone in their body. Anyone who doubts this has my leave (as if it's needed) to inquire on any one of them. But this is beside the point.

 

Infact,mány years ago,when I júst joined VATSIM,

I had the pleasure of meeting a flight of two online,

and even though I was at the time still on text,

I was instantly bitten by théir love for this organization.

That is the sole reason I keep coming back.

It was,for me,a true eyeopener to see "the big kahoona"

fly out ánd even converse with a lowly amateur wannabe pilot

that wanted very badly but wasn't very good at it,yet.

Also,it speaks volumes about their take on matters,as far as I'm concerned.

And yes,I'm still drinking Pepsi.

 

I too am disgusted by the statement I read.

 

As for the "this is a VATSIM issue" .

I do not believe it is.

A VATUSA issue,maybe,but the only thing I see

at the moment is two disgruntled members

shouting "Wolf" at 20.000 somewhat happier,or maybe even

satisfied members.

 

One of which is capable of intelligent answers,and the other

tries but fails at that endeavour.

 

cheers

 

Tom.

[Luke Kolin]

A VATUSA issue,maybe,but the only thing I see at the moment is two disgruntled members

shouting "Wolf" at 20.000 somewhat happier,or maybe even satisfied members.

 

With respect (and my stats daemon has had some downtime), but VATSIM doesn't have 20,000 (or even 15,000) active members.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

[David Klain 874106]

OK folks, this is clearly (and rightly so) I sensitive issue among several of the posters. I'm coming to the most recent series of posts a bit late because I just got back from temporary duty in Europe where I had very limited internet connectivity. The result is I am playing catchup. Some very valid points have been raised (as well as some that really aren't that valid in my opinion, but clearly the poster(s) felt they were valid or they would not have taken the time to write).

 

I am going to lay things out as clearly as I can while respecting the privacy of the parties involved.

 

Let me begin by saying a big part of the reason this thing has stretched out for so long (I think one poster said 71+ days although I don' think it has been that long) is BECAUSE OF ME. That's it. The buck stops with me and I accept full responsibility for that delay.

 

In a nutshell, here is what happened:

 

1. VATUSA1 made the decision to fire the ZAU ATM.

2. The ZAU ATM felt he was fired in an unjust manner AND alleged there had been some CoC and/or CoR violations [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ocaited with his firing.

3. The ZAU ATM appealed his firing to the BoG.

4. Acting for the BoG, I kicked the issue back down to VATNA1 and asked him to figuer out what was going on and also let me know since I wanted to answer the email I had received from the ZAU ATM.

5. VATNA1 appointed the RCRP chairman to investigate the matter. Mistake #1 on my part: I did not recognize this was creating confusion as it created the appearance we were in a conflict resolution issue when we had NO CoC or CoR violations at this point. I failed to get back to VATNA1 and move things in the right direction.

6. The RCRP chairman reported back that the firing was proper. Simultaneously with this, I learned from George Marinakis (VATSIM's attorney and the BoG's consultant on issues regarding process & VATSIM policies) that I had made a mistake at step 5 (as identified above). What should have happened at step 5 was that once we had some facts, the issue go directly to the VP, CRM for review and a determination be made.

7. To correc the error I made above, I directed an "All stop" in the process. This meant that:

(a) Hiring a new ATM could not move forward.

(b) New evidence had to be collected by the VP, CR.

© the VP, CR had to review the evidence and then make a determination.

8. I (and I alone) made the call that ZAU could wait longer to receive a permanent ATM (be it reinstatement of the fired ATM or appointment of a new one). As someone in a post above pointed out, this is a hobby, we aren't flying real planes or controlling real aircraft. My thought process was that it was more important to GET THIS RIGHT than put ZAU through further turmoil by potentially having 2 or 3 people made the ATM in quick succession. The Deputy ATM (who happens to be a VATSIM Founder) had the facility working fine (and yes, it happens I am a controller in KZAU and have been controlling there for over 5 years....) and I felt the prudent thing to do was delay any further changes to the ZAU staff until we sorted this out.

9. Simultaneously with number 8, additional allegations came up with regard to some of the parties involved, that required still further investigation...further creating a delay.

 

So where do we stand now? We pretty much had things sorted out and were preparing to make decisions on the matters involved (the appeal of the firing as well as the other alleged improprieties...two separate issues and investigations that had some overlap)...and then (while I was in Europe), VATUSA1 annonced he was stepping down (I just saw that email this evening).

 

So from my perspective, the following has to happen:

 

(1) a determination on if the firing was proper or not and either reinstatement (or not) of the fired ATM.

(2) a determination on if the alleged other improprieties were valid or not. Based on that, action may or may not have to be taken against the accused.

(3) VATNA1 has to look for and appoint a new VATUSA1.

 

Now why did the BoG get involved in what some are calling a FIR/ARTCC or Divisional (VATUSA) issue? The answer is that we got involved for several reasons:

 

(1) An appeal of the firing was made to the BoG. Now a review of the CoR and CoC shows detailed information on what happens/must happen to fire a member of the BoG or EC. It does not provide much guidance below that level. We did NOT have a CRM issue where the ATM was fired for CoC or CoR violations. As a result, the CRM appeals process did not apply. Instead, per past procedure, an appeal of the firing should have gone (and ultimately did) directly to the VP, CR for a final determination. Simply put -- the appeal of the firing made it the BoG's business.

(2) We had allegations of improprieties having to do with some items that (again) were NOT CoC or CoR violations. As a result, it was the BoG's business to investigate and make a determination.

(3) While we (the BoG) make every effort to work through the RD's, DD's and FIR/ARTCC managers, at the end of the day, the founders hold the BoG responsible for ALL ASPECTS of network operations. Collectively as the BoG (and personally as the President), I don't get to say "sorry founders, that isn't my business, it's a region/division/facility issue..." They EXPECT the BoG (and me) to keep the network running in accordance with their guidance. In the case of the ZAU firing, we had some a major perterbations, lots of accusations and counter-accusations, operations in one of the busiest facilities in one of the busiest divisions on VATSIM were being affected AND the acting ATM of the facility was a founder. All of these meant that the BoG would have been failing in its responsibilities had it chosen NOT to get involved.

 

Over the last few weeks a fair number of people have emailed me about various parts of this mess. Untangling it has been VERY difficult because a lot of it came down to "he said/he said" and, to be blunt, a number of actions/posts/notes/etc. by various people who were at least tangentially related to one or more of the issues have been no better than what I consider junior high school/teenager gossiping behavior that demonstrated a profound lack of maturity. Pretty much NO one (except a few BoG members) actually knows EVERYTHING that has taken place and what all the facts are. Those who think they know it all are sorely mistaken. This has turned out to be an incredibly complex series of overlapping issues and it has taken us several weeks to get to the bottom of it...

 

My entering position (and it remains unchanged as I write this) was that we had to separate fact from fiction, remove the emotion and personalities from the issues and figure out (a) what had actually happened and (b) what actions should be taken. I also made the decision that we would take as long as necessary to ensure (a) and (b) were done properly in a fair and just manner.

 

So if anyone here still wants to be upset at the situation after reading this post, please be upset at me. At the end of the day, I'm the guy in charge and I'm the guy who made some of the key decisions (including at least one mistake) in this matter. My commitment to the controllers of ZAU, the membership of VATSIM as a whole, and the founders is that I will continue to do things with the best interests of the network in mind and that I will learn from my mistakes.

 

all the best,

Dave

[Richard Gerrish]

...

 

 

welcome home and thank you for you service I'm sure you don't hear it enough. the post explains a lot as well.

 

cheers

[Bo Gercke 845743]

Thanks for the info, Dave. Just a thought here, but if you don't have the time to dedicate to being the President of VATSIM because of your position in the military, and frequent (or even infrequent) TDY's, than why put in for it? You let this play out far longer than it should have, and still, there has been no official announcement anywhere that I have seen about this situation. Nothing in the ZAU forums, of which you are a member. So, officially, there is no official announcement.

 

71 days. No. I stand corrected. It was 41 from Sept 3, when I made my post. However, in 7 years on this network, I have never seen something this simple become so convoluted and complicated. More than that, it has become an incredibly divisive issue to all involved on the inside, and outside, which apparently, has even contributed to the resignation of Alex Bailey. Inexcusable.

 

Again, I used this situation as a highlight point because it is the most current, and most relevant to make my point about the lack of cohesiveness within the senior staff.

 

Brad... Because people don't post, does not mean that they don't support what is transpiring on the forums. This is evidenced by the amount of support that I receive through private messages, both here, on my blog, and while controlling or flying. As far as it being a VATSIM issue, by having a Founder as a DATM an issue inherently becomes a VATSIM issue the moment something becomes an issue. To think that someone would not use ALL available means and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ets to resolve an issue would be short sighted, and that includes sending emails to fellow Founders. I am not saying it is right, wrong, or otherwise. I know that if I were a Founder acting as a DATM, I would use every resource available to me to resolve issues.

 

As far as all of the other divisions being "up in arms"... Very simply, people don't care. People are ambivalent to the goings-on in with the network. It's one of the items that I listed in my thread-starter. It's why there are so few truly qualified candidates applying for positions. It's why a C1 with less than 500 total hours on the network gets selected to run an ARTCC. It's also why nobody has an issue with the BoG selecting its own members without any direct input from the 20,000 + members on the network. And, ambivalence is why there are very few C3's remaining on this network who want to even get on and fly, or control, let alone play in the cesspool of political bureaucracy that has become VATSIM.

 

As far as Harv goes... Harv is gone. And this is where the problems originated. Harv retired, and left a big hole that needed to be filled. And here we are, with the hole trying to be filled. Known in government circles as a "vacuum of power".

[Tod Allison 996532]

Bo, the new ATM for ZAU has been officially announced. Let's all welcome J. Jason Vodnansky as the new ATM for ZAU

[Ross Carlson]

let alone play in the cesspool of political bureaucracy that has become VATSIM.

 

If VATSIM is that bad, why do you stay? What drives you to campaign against the alleged evils of VATSIM management? Do you honestly think you're helping?

 

I think I can say with confidence that VATSIM will never be good enough for you, if you truly think it's bad enough to be called a "cesspool of political bureaucracy". I know VATSIM isn't perfect, and I don't expect it to be. However, like I said in my previous post, if I felt it was as horrible as you claim, then I'd be LONG gone. You'd have to pay me really good money to stay involved in such a disaster.

 

Please don't shrug this off as the usual "if you don't like it, leave" retort. This is a serious question and I'd appreciate a serious answer ... if you feel it's so bad, why are you still here?

[Brad Littlejohn]

A founding member made this issue a VATSIM issue, so ask him for the details.

 

Roy,

 

A person here had caught the attention of a Founder of VATSIM by claiming he was privy to email and conversation that only existed between the Founders and the BoG. If that were true, which only the BoG, the Founders, and that person would know, then there would be a HUGE breach at the VATSIM level. But no, the Founding member didn't make this an issue, that single person would have made it a VATSIM issue, for just the sake of having that conversation. While it may be related to this ZAU issue, that is a separate thing as well.

 

Thanks for the info, Dave. Just a thought here, but if you don't have the time to dedicate to being the President of VATSIM because of your position in the military, and frequent (or even infrequent) TDY's, than why put in for it? You let this play out far longer than it should have, and still, there has been no official announcement anywhere that I have seen about this situation. Nothing in the ZAU forums, of which you are a member. So, officially, there is no official announcement.

 

Gee, Bo.. Real nice way to thank someone for their service, regardless for what country he or she is serving for. Being in the military is his JOB. This is his HOBBY. You said it yourself, that this is a HOBBYIST environment, yet you expect the fulltime work of a corporate CEO. News for you: If you want that, why not leave your profession and give it a shot yourself; IIRC, you're in the military yourself!

 

The above reminds me of a story I heard yesterday. A guy who just recently moved into a nice suburban neighbourhood was mugged a few blocks from his house. He went onto their community's forums to post and let everybody know about what had happened and to be on the lookout (as their community had a Neighborhood Watch program), and in less than an hour, he had 5 followups screaming at him and flaming him because his post about being mugged is going to make their property value go down.

 

My point: Don't just think about yourself when someone is doing you a service. You show your true colours and how much gratitude you lack.

 

71 days. No. I stand corrected. It was 41 from Sept 3, when I made my post. However, in 7 years on this network, I have never seen something this simple become so convoluted and complicated. More than that, it has become an incredibly divisive issue to all involved on the inside, and outside, which apparently, has even contributed to the resignation of Alex Bailey. Inexcusable.

 

Yet you reference the whole ZLA fiasco from 5 years ago in your 'list'. Actually.. it sounds like ZAU is going through its own little ZLA fiasco. Once again, a VATUSA issue.

 

Again, I used this situation as a highlight point because it is the most current, and most relevant to make my point about the lack of cohesiveness within the senior staff.

 

Brad... Because people don't post, does not mean that they don't support what is transpiring on the forums. This is evidenced by the amount of support that I receive through private messages, both here, on my blog, and while controlling or flying. As far as it being a VATSIM issue, by having a Founder as a DATM an issue inherently becomes a VATSIM issue the moment something becomes an issue. To think that someone would not use ALL available means and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ets to resolve an issue would be short sighted, and that includes sending emails to fellow Founders. I am not saying it is right, wrong, or otherwise. I know that if I were a Founder acting as a DATM, I would use every resource available to me to resolve issues.

 

Yet you do not give them that same luxury. Where was your will to go to VATNA? You totally missed a valuable resource who could use his position to look into it, and see what they can do before taking it to the entire BoG and calling out the Founders. A valuable resource that not only you wasted, but went completely over their head. Being in the military yourself, do you just simply go over your CO's head when you don't get you want?

 

Also, have you ever thought that people don't post because they don't want to deal with the drama that now is coming out of all of this? Drama on a network in which they only use as a HOBBY (as you so put it)?

 

As far as all of the other divisions being "up in arms"... Very simply, people don't care. People are ambivalent to the goings-on in with the network. It's one of the items that I listed in my thread-starter. It's why there are so few truly qualified candidates applying for positions. It's why a C1 with less than 500 total hours on the network gets selected to run an ARTCC. It's also why nobody has an issue with the BoG selecting its own members without any direct input from the 20,000 + members on the network. And, ambivalence is why there are very few C3's remaining on this network who want to even get on and fly, or control, let alone play in the cesspool of political bureaucracy that has become VATSIM.

 

If people don't care, why should that be your concern? Are you going to force them to care? You referenced the ZLA incident. Do you realize that at that time the ATM in question, who was barely a C1, with a little over 400 hours was selected to run the ARTCC? the very thing you are complaining about now?!? Where was this p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ion about this back then? You said nor did nothing for it then, yet are complaining about that very thing now.

 

Harv, Amy, GSM, Kyp, and others had explained this a long time ago, Bo. This network is not a democracy. Everyone is pretty much made known to this the moment they read the docomeents describing this network when they sign up. You did too. In fact, as you've been here as long as I have, you, like me, were privy to them as they were being written.

 

Ross has a very valid point, and I agree. VATSIM will probably never be good enough to please you. But I will be blunt. If it is indeed a 'cesspool of political bureaucracy', why do you still put up with it? If you don't like it, leave. I go back to my first response a while ago. Honestly, I to this day, even with the ZLA incident, have not seen one thing positive come from you. You've spent more time complaining about what is wrong and should be done than doing something positive and active about it. Ever heard the saying "If it's meant to be, it's up to me."? So far, stomping your feet isn't going to get you what you want, because whenever someone tries to do something, it doesn't meet your standards.

 

So. Why are you still here?

 

As far as Harv goes... Harv is gone. And this is where the problems originated. Harv retired, and left a big hole that needed to be filled. And here we are, with the hole trying to be filled. Known in government circles as a "vacuum of power".

 

This doesn't even dignify an answer.

 

BL.

[Norman Blackburn]

Nothing in the ZAU forums, of which you are a member. So, officially, there is no official announcement.

 

Bo, one was made there several hours before your post.

[Bo Gercke 845743]

.....

 

I am not here to talk about me. I will give you a more in depth answer in another medium, whether it be email, phone, or TS. Let me know what works for you. I'll answer any question that you may have.

 

To sum it up very briefly; my desire to allow others to use this hobby as a launching pad to a real aviation career (as it did for me) is what keeps me here. The people are what keeps me here. The joy that I have when I get on and control, and fly is what keeps me here. The great personal satisfaction that I gain from teaching somebody to learn to control here, and through this is experience gives them the confidence to seek it out in the real world, whether it be military, CTI, or direct FAA entry is unmatched.

 

As for VATSIM being good enough... ever. I will disagree with you. I think that VATSIM was an incredible organization. Top to bottom. Severed from SATCO for honestly noble reasons. There were people involved who had NO agenda whatsoever other than the very best for his organization. We had incredibly talented, smart, capable people running ARTCC's. When was the last time that a brain surgeon applied to be a Chief? Honestly. We had one running ZLA for a period of time. Gone. Why? Politics. Agendas. I still talk with these people, and they are incredibly disheartened and sad by what they see. Why do I speak out? Because I care enough to. Because I believe that VATSIM is broken and needing to be fixed. I agree that there is no such thing as perfect, but we can do significantly better than we are.

 

We shifted from being about the members, and the network, to being about the business, and not being sued, and how to maintain profitability, and exposure, and FAA/Mitre/corporate relationships. This is where we went wrong. VATSIM may be a hobby, but it is not VATSIM LLC for no reason. It has become a business. ATM's, DD's, RD's, and the like have become formalities, and succinctly, liabilities. We may as well start charging a user-fee and be up front about it. According to one BoG member, ATM's have absolutely no authority, and no power. That is vastly different from how it was when I joined the network.

 

Do I think that I am helping? It's too early to tell.

 

...

 

That was not up at 6:45MST when I checked forums. Sorry I missed it.

Edited September 7, 2009 at 06:46 PM by Guest

[Tim Aaron 879165]

Congrats to Jason on his new (2) ATM position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can see the founder card is helping out many individuals around here and is making me wonder some.

 

Thanks and good luck,

 

Tim Aaron

[Kyle Ramsey 810181]

Congrats to Jason on his new (2) ATM position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can see the founder card is helping out many individuals around here and is making me wonder some.

 

Thanks and good luck,

 

Tim Aaron

 

As one who observed the process, no founder ever influenced the outcome and the only one who entered into the conversations was GSM in the capacity of our lawyer. The rest sat on the sideline, with me, and watched.

 

So, wonder less.

[John Cierpial 1008209]

Congrats to Jason on his new (2) ATM position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can see the founder card is helping out many individuals around here and is making me wonder some.

 

Thanks and good luck,

 

Tim Aaron

 

Are you insinuating a founder shouldn't be involved in a case in which he believes someone is being wronged and the way in which they were removed goes against the Founders' Letter & their own beliefs?

[Kyle Ramsey 810181]

The founder in question knew he was too close and did not engage in a manner to influence anything. He responded to requests for factual data in the form of emails, etc. while the CR process attempted to sort through the innuendo in search of material facts. He followed the process to the letter knowing he was under intense scrutiny.

 

He was not the source of any accusations or counter accusations to the CR process.

 

Nice try though, just doesn't happen to be true.

[Norman Blackburn]

That was not up at 6:45MST when I checked forums. Sorry I missed it.

 

No probs Bo. Goes to show we are all human and can make mistakes.

[Matthew Bartels]

...

Tim Aaron

 

Are you insinuating a founder shouldn't be involved in a case in which he believes someone is being wronged and the way in which they were removed goes against the Founders' Letter & their own beliefs?

 

I am when it violates CoR §4.08

[John Cierpial 1008209]

So please explain to me since I'm quite confused here, what rule or regulation is the DATM not following?

[Kyle Ramsey 810181]

...

Tim Aaron

 

Are you insinuating a founder shouldn't be involved in a case in which he believes someone is being wronged and the way in which they were removed goes against the Founders' Letter & their own beliefs?

 

I am when it violates CoR §4.08

 

Then you will be thrilled to learn no founder violated CoR §4.08. For others, this section says founders can serve in any leadership position within VATSIM but are subject to the same rules as any member.

[Tim Aaron 879165]

So we should just view it as a coincidence that a facility with a founder as its DATM has its rightfully removed ATM reinstated?

 

Is ZAU its own Kingdom following around one person? Im not trying to sturr up issues im trying to understand some things because i have many different altercations from when some people said "I will burn ZAU to the ground if i cant proove GRP's are S#^%". So is making your point by puting yourself before your ARTCC important? We have 7 new controllers here at ZMP from ZAU why. You guys tell me why. Im wondering and curious from the years we had FNO's and all were good partners here in the Mid region helping each other from FNO to FNO and one time we had nobody online from ZAU and had 24 arrivals. Who was the ATM then and how is he back in the same spot again after giving endless bashings to the VATGOV BOG's from years past on policies and issues that turn out to this day not to change anything.

 

I dont think you can blame discruntle members in this, the past two years shows cause and effect, ZAU was getting back on track, now all of a sudden where is it gunna go now. Lets see down the road guys. And if you are wondering where i got the quote, just ask the man himself he'll tell you or he'll tell you another story to put you in your place.