There is, its the IFC.
If they feel like theyre being treated by fools on the ifc when told what they did wrong then how would it be different with your system?
There is, its the IFC.
With my system…all ghosted logs creates table like that…search his aircrafts id
Send msg. Job done.
No creating thread like what should i do, or who should i contact.
This is an interesting idea. Maybe it could also be something like:
When your flight ends, it says (if you’ve been ghosted) You have been ghosted in this flight, please follow the link to the forum to contact your controller. It would then give them a link and the controller name
I like the idea, however this might be disrespecting some privacy. Bc it’s definitely quite embarrassing to be ghosted…maybe they have to log on through the IF account to access this feature instead of it being public info
Yes true…if the integrate both system. They can apply only the people who is in ghosting list can access the page. Like the Private lounge
Or maybe not have list at all just search box to search your aircrafts. Everything possible
Main objective is to make everything centralised regarding ghosts
There’s a reason the appeals aren’t done in the public threads, and it’s not because everyone needs to know who’s been ghosted.
Maybe the system creates temp id(code) upon ghosting. That would make person complete anonymouse…only thing he needs to do either search id or go through the list and send msg to controllers.
MaxSez: The Ghosting issue revolves around the inability to identify the IFATC who uses an anonymous ID on the aerodrome data block in Live. Plus the failure of the Pilot involved to fully understand how to challenge a Ghost by not completing the due diligence required to solve his/her gripe. “Individual Privacy” is routinely cited as the cause and effect of these false flag anonymous IFATC handles. I don’t see a privacy issue here, just requires the IFATC to establish an IF internal closed circuit “@“ address for the data block. Alternately the establishment of a letter box @Ginquiry or @ATCModerator for Ghost gripes. The necessity to post a Ghosted Topic to ID an Anonymous IFATC is redundant and a personal affront to the Pilot Involved. Solve the Comm ID issue and the need for the suggested Ghosting site is irrelevant and redundant.
Just Sayin, Max
thonos oh boy
Yes remove the aircrafts no. Add temp id and maybe hide controllers name too. Its duable.
Not really. We actually try to keep controller display names fairly in line across the board, but it can’t always be done with the static nature of IFC names (for people more creative than I).
We do try to be transparent with names if we can:
This list seems pretty public.
@Tim_B. MaxSez. Infinite Flight ATC & Display Name List is dated plus its not ezly found in the library. Additionally it appears the creators of the “I got Ghosted” Topics Post never research for an answer to the “What do I do/contact” question. KISS is the answer, an in your face IFATC System acceptable Address in the data block or a Gripe Address. Action is required here not redundant Ghost Gripe Topics.
That was last updated on May 10th, Max.
@Trio… The list is a bandaid. Privacy is not an issue on a
Closed circuit with a unique “@“ prefix.
Hi. What does it show. Because stats are not to date.?
It’s a list of all users on the site, you can filter the list by typing in someone’s username. The stats correspond to the dropdown you select, by default it’s set to “Week”.
Oh. That’s useful! Thanks
I like how all the controller names are marvel related
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.