Talk:Academy proposal - Revision history

DaLe: Removing all content from page

2009-02-18T20:58:35Z

Removing all content from page

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:58, 18 February 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Academy Instructors can find an overview of RSA-related wiki articles here: [[RSA Internal Board]]~~

DaLe at 20:57, 18 February 2009

2009-02-18T20:57:48Z

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:57, 18 February 2009
Line 1:	Line 1:
		Academy Instructors can find an overview of RSA-related wiki articles here: [[RSA Internal Board]]

DaLe at 15:11, 12 May 2007

2007-05-12T15:11:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:11, 12 May 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Proposal 1, I have an issue with. I do not want my fleet academy under the control/observation of the RSTO. I've appointed people who work great with the cadets. Should one of them not wish to do it anymore, I want to be able to go ahead and replace them immediately. I dont' think the RSTO fits anywhere in that equation.
	Do you disagree with observation or just control? I'd really like some way to know if TOs are operating correctly, for one. This doesn't mean the TO controls who you replace, just advises who is doing the best job or not. (Our current TO probably wouldn't even go that far.) Licah Fox 21:42, 20 July 2006 (EDT)
	I don't mind if the RSTO checks in to see how things are running, mayber offer some tips, but if it's in the fleet, it's the fleets responsability. Should one of my instructors not work out, I'll ask them to adjust their teaching methods or replace them. Fleet-bound academies shouldn't be under direct control of the RSTO. If that was the case might as well bring back Proposal 2 all over again. It's one thing if a cadet or someone goes to the RSTO and inquires what to do, or they haven't recieved word from my folks yet. Then I can see intervention, but I can't see anything more than that from the RSTO. The RSTO, IMHO, should be in control of the BP, Any post grad activities (Ie: Mission building, website design tips, etc).

	Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.

	~~Just my two credits.~~

	~~Joshua Hawkins 19:38, 20 July 2006 (EDT)~~
	~~This is Dave. I'm not modifying everyone's proposals, but I did add some information on the historical Academy. ":) --Dave 00:45, 17 August 2006 (EDT)~~

DaLe at 15:10, 12 May 2007

2007-05-12T15:10:15Z

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:10, 12 May 2007
Line 1:	Line 1:
		Proposal 1, I have an issue with. I do not want my fleet academy under the control/observation of the RSTO. I've appointed people who work great with the cadets. Should one of them not wish to do it anymore, I want to be able to go ahead and replace them immediately. I dont' think the RSTO fits anywhere in that equation.
		Do you disagree with observation or just control? I'd really like some way to know if TOs are operating correctly, for one. This doesn't mean the TO controls who you replace, just advises who is doing the best job or not. (Our current TO probably wouldn't even go that far.) Licah Fox 21:42, 20 July 2006 (EDT)
		I don't mind if the RSTO checks in to see how things are running, mayber offer some tips, but if it's in the fleet, it's the fleets responsability. Should one of my instructors not work out, I'll ask them to adjust their teaching methods or replace them. Fleet-bound academies shouldn't be under direct control of the RSTO. If that was the case might as well bring back Proposal 2 all over again. It's one thing if a cadet or someone goes to the RSTO and inquires what to do, or they haven't recieved word from my folks yet. Then I can see intervention, but I can't see anything more than that from the RSTO. The RSTO, IMHO, should be in control of the BP, Any post grad activities (Ie: Mission building, website design tips, etc).

		Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.

		Just my two credits.

		Joshua Hawkins 19:38, 20 July 2006 (EDT)
		This is Dave. I'm not modifying everyone's proposals, but I did add some information on the historical Academy. ":) --Dave 00:45, 17 August 2006 (EDT)

DaLe at 15:07, 12 May 2007

2007-05-12T15:07:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:07, 12 May 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Proposal 1, I have an issue with. I do not want my fleet academy under the control/observation of the RSTO. I've appointed people who work great with the cadets. Should one of them not wish to do it anymore, I want to be able to go ahead and replace them immediately. I dont' think the RSTO fits anywhere in that equation.

	: Do you disagree with observation or just control? I'd really like some way to know if TOs are operating correctly, for one. This doesn't mean the TO controls who you replace, just advises who is doing the best job or not. (Our current TO probably wouldn't even go that far.) [[User:Licah Fox\|Licah Fox]] 21:42, 20 July 2006 (EDT)

	:: I don't mind if the RSTO checks in to see how things are running, mayber offer some tips, but if it's in the fleet, it's the fleets responsability. Should one of my instructors not work out, I'll ask them to adjust their teaching methods or replace them. Fleet-bound academies shouldn't be under direct control of the RSTO. If that was the case might as well bring back Proposal 2 all over again. It's one thing if a cadet or someone goes to the RSTO and inquires what to do, or they haven't recieved word from my folks yet. Then I can see intervention, but I can't see anything more than that from the RSTO. The RSTO, IMHO, should be in control of the BP, Any post grad activities (Ie: Mission building, website design tips, etc).

	Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.

	~~Just my two credits.~~

	~~[[User:ThePoet444\|Joshua Hawkins]] 19:38, 20 July 2006 (EDT)~~

	~~::This is Dave. I'm not modifying everyone's proposals, but I did add some information on the historical Academy. ":) --[[User:Dave\|Dave]] 00:45, 17 August 2006 (EDT)~~

Dave: Talk:Academy moved to Talk:Academy proposal

2007-04-28T18:46:32Z

Talk:Academy moved to Talk:Academy proposal

← Older revision	Revision as of 18:46, 28 April 2007
(No difference)

Dave at 04:45, 17 August 2006

2006-08-17T04:45:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:45, 17 August 2006
Line 10:		Line 10:

	[[User:ThePoet444\|Joshua Hawkins]] 19:38, 20 July 2006 (EDT)		[[User:ThePoet444\|Joshua Hawkins]] 19:38, 20 July 2006 (EDT)

			::This is Dave. I'm not modifying everyone's proposals, but I did add some information on the historical Academy. ":) --[[User:Dave\|Dave]] 00:45, 17 August 2006 (EDT)

ThePoet444 at 11:32, 21 July 2006

2006-07-21T11:32:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:32, 21 July 2006
Line 2:		Line 2:

	: Do you disagree with observation or just control? I'd really like some way to know if TOs are operating correctly, for one. This doesn't mean the TO controls who you replace, just advises who is doing the best job or not. (Our current TO probably wouldn't even go that far.) [[User:Licah Fox\|Licah Fox]] 21:42, 20 July 2006 (EDT)		: Do you disagree with observation or just control? I'd really like some way to know if TOs are operating correctly, for one. This doesn't mean the TO controls who you replace, just advises who is doing the best job or not. (Our current TO probably wouldn't even go that far.) [[User:Licah Fox\|Licah Fox]] 21:42, 20 July 2006 (EDT)

			:: I don't mind if the RSTO checks in to see how things are running, mayber offer some tips, but if it's in the fleet, it's the fleets responsability. Should one of my instructors not work out, I'll ask them to adjust their teaching methods or replace them. Fleet-bound academies shouldn't be under direct control of the RSTO. If that was the case might as well bring back Proposal 2 all over again. It's one thing if a cadet or someone goes to the RSTO and inquires what to do, or they haven't recieved word from my folks yet. Then I can see intervention, but I can't see anything more than that from the RSTO. The RSTO, IMHO, should be in control of the BP, Any post grad activities (Ie: Mission building, website design tips, etc).

	Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.		Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.

Licah Fox at 01:42, 21 July 2006

2006-07-21T01:42:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:42, 21 July 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Proposal 1, I have an issue with. I do not want my fleet academy under the control/observation of the RSTO. I've appointed people who work great with the cadets. Should one of them not wish to do it anymore, I want to be able to go ahead and replace them immediately. I dont' think the RSTO fits anywhere in that equation.		Proposal 1, I have an issue with. I do not want my fleet academy under the control/observation of the RSTO. I've appointed people who work great with the cadets. Should one of them not wish to do it anymore, I want to be able to go ahead and replace them immediately. I dont' think the RSTO fits anywhere in that equation.

			: Do you disagree with observation or just control? I'd really like some way to know if TOs are operating correctly, for one. This doesn't mean the TO controls who you replace, just advises who is doing the best job or not. (Our current TO probably wouldn't even go that far.) [[User:Licah Fox\|Licah Fox]] 21:42, 20 July 2006 (EDT)

	Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.		Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.

ThePoet444 at 23:38, 20 July 2006

2006-07-20T23:38:56Z

New page

Proposal 1, I have an issue with. I do not want my fleet academy under the control/observation of the RSTO. I've appointed people who work great with the cadets. Should one of them not wish to do it anymore, I want to be able to go ahead and replace them immediately. I dont' think the RSTO fits anywhere in that equation.

Proposal 3 sounds very nice, and if done right could work very well, but you are correct PBF and other flight sims would get hurt because very few people would sign up for them. we basically have 3 areas for games, Flight Sims, First person games, and EaW (Erm strategy). Having a centralized academy in this case wouldn't be worth while. If we do then the flight sims go down the tank because of the newer games out.

Just my two credits.

[[User:ThePoet444|Joshua Hawkins]] 19:38, 20 July 2006 (EDT)