Increase in the number of trusted ‘reporters‘

In the few months that have elapsed, we’ve seen the glory of the Expert Server dwindling due to some bad apples, be it grade 3, 4 or even 5s.

Keeping away from the debate about grades, my proposal is that the report button could be activated for verified users.

Who would a verified user be?
Anyone who qualifies to report uncooperative users on the Expert Server.

Requirements of a verified user?

  • More or less the same as IFATC
  • Community membership at TL1(considering moving it to TL2)
  • Grade 3+
  • Must have passed a written exam with at least 80%
  • At least 1 year from last ghosting
  • 14 years old and above(To match with IFATC)
  • No more than 50% landings to violations ratio.

What about interested IFATC users?
IFATC personnel would be able to get such abilities under these conditions:

  • Current IFATC members would automatically get access to the report button while flying.
  • Former IFATC would be required to fulfil the requirements for the non-IFATC requirements.

But Kiz, some members would likely abuse their privileges. Yes and that’s where the moderation team would come in.
Users making reports would have to have them verified and assessed similar to today’s standards but with a catch.(The penalties below are subject to change)

  • 2 false reports = Verbal warning from moderators, temporary deactivation of feature for 30 days.

  • 5 false reports = Permanent deactivation and do-over of the Test after a period of 90 days.

However, for intentionally wrong reports that would border on trolling, the user would have the feature permanently deactivated

But a user can just change their live account,
Yes, think of it this way, your IFC account would be the ultimate link. All the false reports would be recorded under your IFC username to prevent users from forming new live accounts to circumvent the suspensions.

This group would be structured in a similar way to IFATC(or even be it’s constituent organization)with a team of moderators(Live Moderators or IFATC moderators) watching over this group.

Anyway, guys, what do you think about this idea? Is it ‘too much’, ‘a bit inadequate’ or ‘brilliant’?

This is a very good feature! It would really help ATC and Pilots a lot.


seems like a great idea

I was developing this too! Well done for beating me to it! You have obviously thought very hard about this feature and I could really see it working. Personally, I would be a bit more brutal with the whole verbal warnings and temporary bans, but this could work! We could get our expert server back!


I’m one for high standards, and this might just fit the bill. This would really give the unruly ones a run for their money.


I think the false reports would need a much harsher penalty than that. If you give one false report you should be permanently removed from the system, it shouldn’t take several completely wrong violations to even get a warning.

1 Like

I think the age restriction is too low. Can be highly abused. Perhaps 16 years of age would be more suitable?
Ifatc have ghosting experience and have been through a lot of reviews. Would not giving specific ranks in IFATC reporting privileges be just as useful as we have to pass tests, and are monitored constantly


This does not seem to be a bad idea. There will finally be a way to get rid of fighter jets or users that would join into random group flights and ruin it completely for them. I would increase the verified user requirements, such as gaining Trust Level 2 and perhaps increase the age by a year or two. For the rest, spot on topic and the rules seem to be just as fair. 👍

If I would also hope for another feature, communication wise, for every display name, Expert Server Users are required by the system admin to fill in their IFC username. That way it will be easier to find out which person violated rules and guidelines, instead of investigating the display name with the forum moderators.


You can already be given the permission to ghost by becoming IFATC at 14.

There are different levels of false reports. If a pilot is ghosted for no reason, yeah that should be a ban. But if there is a misclick, or if there is a non-black-and-white situation then it’s more difficult. EDIT: or just lag on ground in general

1 Like

True, I’ve accidentally reported friends before trying to copy their fpl.

When you’re controlling, only.
Additionally there usually are other IFATC controllers flying around.

1 Like

Yeah, but you have the same ability to report anyone you want.

I am all for a mandatory IFC membership to be allowed into the ES.


I do think there should be more people that can report others.
I think the rank of IFATC Officer should have that report button activated.
To become an officer there are more steps.

1 Like

IFATC have the ability to report users when they control and the select team of IFATC Supervisors and moderators/staff also have the ability to report as pilots.

More policing doesn’t necessarily solve the issue, more education does! Some arbitrary requirements aren’t going to be the key to becoming a “reporter” either.


isn’t it easier to change IFC account. it doesn’t cost any money and takes a few minutes to make a new email. the only thing stopping people from switching accounts is the stats on either account right?

Precisely, preventing an issue is much better than plugging a current issue.

1 Like

Well thought out. Gave this a vote!

I’m down for more people to have these permissions - I am not down for half or even 1/4th of the server to have them!

There’s actually a lot of moments where even supervisors don’t know when or who to report due to the fact that they don’t always see the full picture and don’t know who’s at fault. ATC on the other hand can see the full picture and usually depict who to ghost.