Re: [Flightgear-devel] Class-based MP aircraft visibility

[Rob S. Jr. <rm...@ya...>]

Stuart Buchanan:
> I may not have explained that the user's setting indicating their 
usage-class
> is independent of the (multiple) usage-classes that a 
user can choose to
> display.  {...}  I think this provides sufficient flexibility, though it relies on the
> Tower staying "open" to new aircraft, rather than just hiding all 
non-"FGCom"
> aircraft.  However, I think that is something for the 
Tower to decide.
>
> I hope this addresses your concerns, and indeed 
will be easier to understand
> in practise than my explanation :)

Hi Stuart --

I too have a few concerns about this proposal, partially due to the inherent invitation to "segregate the community", but also due to the complexity of the various use-case scenarios, as illustrated by the example you valiantly attempted to explain.  Testing and troubleshooting that solution alone sounds like a bit of a nightmare.

Would it not be easier to pursue the simpler solution of allowing each user to ignore individuals (both chat and model/submodels) on a per-user basis?  This way, the community is still inherently unified, but troublemakers or unsavory "event crashers" could easily be zapped out case-by-case.  This would allow those participating in an event the chance to see if the newcomer is someone willing to play along nicely before deciding whether to render them invisible.

Sincerely,
-R. (MD-Terp)
 Robert M. Shearman, Jr.
Transit Operations Supervisor,
University of Maryland Department of Transportation
also known as rm...@um...