In my travels as a senior member in CAP, I have noticed more so in my wing that the IT people are missing something. I can not go into detail for this is an open fourm. What do you all think, and please do not incriminate yourselves. It seems that some do not have a clue as to how or what they are doing....
That is a very broad question that can have very broad answers. Would you be more specific in so far is it training, certifications, appearance, etc. You don't have to give the seat number but a section or row would be helpful.
Also keep in mind that the ITO is a volunteer just like the rest of us and although they may not have a formal IT certification or training, they may have been the only person to take the job when asked or offered. The IT needs for each wing may vary, which may also dictate the specific knowledge or skills that particular IT person may need.
The very fact that you are referring to them as "IT programers" (SIC) indicates you don't really understand the term yourself.
There are generally at least two camps in the industry - infrastructure and development (with infinite nuance to both).
Infrastructure types are generally interested in hardware, connectivity, and using the tools provided and created by others.
Programmers are generally coders who create software from whole cloth, and have little interest in the infrastructure beyond how it supports and intersects with their applications.
There are plenty of people who dip their toe into the other pool, but few who are strong or interested in both because the mindsets are pretty different.
As with every other profession, there are people with formal training, and people who hacked their way to knowledge - and then there's those who think they know and haven't a clue. Easy, cheap access to personal computers and connectivity have lead a lot of people to believe they possess a skill they really don't.
We get plenty of comm-guys who think they are Marconi and can't even find a repeater, finance people who aren't good at math, etc., etc.
In a volunteer situation you take the good with the bad and weed out the non-performers, though in many cases a less-than-proficient person is the only one even remotely interested, and then the decision is "bad" better than "none".
QuoteI have noticed more so in my wing that the IT people are missing something.
What is it that you would like them to find?
Quote from: Seabee219 on December 09, 2009, 05:45:36 AM
I have noticed more so in my wing that the IT people are missing something.
Must be saying they are 3 fries short of a happy meal....
One of my concerns is that the forms on NHQ website are protected by a password to get on the site. yet you can get all our forms from our Wing web site that does not take a password. We had false memberships drawn up that way from a mother giving her son a fake membership and giving it to a court Judge. She even forged the signatures. Wing was made aware of this problem and has done nothing as of yet.
I am not saying that these people are dumb, and yes we all volunteer, but we have to address these things as they come up.
That type of a situation needs to addressed by command and legal, not IT. And only a couple of forms are on a passworded site. Most, along with the regs, are available on a public site.
CAP forms are not password protected: http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/forms_publications__regulations/ (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/forms_publications__regulations/) will take you right to them.
I didn't see a singe "sensitive" form on the AZ Wing web site.
Quote from: Seabee219 on December 10, 2009, 03:51:48 AM
One of my concerns is that the forms on NHQ website are protected by a password to get on the site. yet you can get all our forms from our Wing web site that does not take a password.
As mentioned, all CAP forms, publications, and regulations are available openly to the general public. I don't know why a wing would post copies, since its better to just forward members to the authoritative source, but its not a security issue.
Quote from: Seabee219 on December 10, 2009, 03:51:48 AM
We had false memberships drawn up that way from a mother giving her son a fake membership and giving it to a court Judge. She even forged the signatures. Wing was made aware of this problem and has done nothing as of yet.
How is that remotely a CAP problem, or something the Wing should care about?
If asked by the court they might (or might not) produce a letter indicating that person's membership status - more likely Legal would refer the court documents to NHQ.
Beyond that, some random member of the general public impersonating a CAP member, and/or forging documents to that effect, is not really CAP's "problem", and certainly not an IT issue, nor something your wing can do much to prevent.
Ok, makes sense, we can close this thread now.