Dawg half of us don’t even know what that is

That’s the issue

Teaching is great but we need people who know what their doing first

I can't do software shit. I only do in person stuff.

An IOC is an Intel Ops Center

A central “hub” for gathering, analyzing, aggregating, and disseminating information.

Ahhh, a TOC, or G2X

^

Bingo

For those that don’t know. TOC = tactical ops center, G-2 = general staff officer 2 (intelligence)

Military intelligence terms

Indeed.. I mean, I have no idea what the hell those things are.

But yes. We need a “G2” so to speak. It should be a group of volunteers who have actual experience and knowledge of the intelligence process

Training you guys up on local Intel and collection is good but we need national capabilities as well

I'd love to help out on that, but I'm about to deploy here soon, so I won't have the ability to stay constant.

Stay safe

Thanks, you too.

B word has a filter on it, sorry.

Your message can be found at <#705250618163331104>

Woof, shoulda kept the typo.

Intel needs its own server for the purposes of formalizing intelligence processes across multiple domains, as well as to provide a platform for more formally allocated workloads in order to generate reports containing all relevant information with respect to an event/concern/operation.

"Read the comments" doesn't scale, and relying on community members to spontaneously generate good info is either unreliable, or will result in a lot of intermittent, redundant efforts.

@Reno thanks, should've checked for that before posting

Also a weekly “sync” wouldn’t be a bad idea either

True

<#704438705947017327> should be a clearinghouse for intelligence products, and a point of contact for the broader Eskimo community

^

Do we have people here willing to work with and represent regions/areas of intelligence?

I’m in NC but I’m not as familiar with the region as a whole as I’m from the north, but I can advise on cyber matters.

I don't think we have enough people to justify having anything like bureaus. We need to lay the ground work first, that way we can vet and onboard people in proportion to our capacity and needs.

How we allocate domain authority should similarly be determined early on by the seed population of Intel volunteers.

If we do assign regions, we'd probably begin using FEMA/census style subdivisions

That would make sense

It’s more to divide up monitoring and reporting

Funnel information through a single point for aggregation and validation.

Definitely.

If we create another server we wouldn't have nearly as many people of course.

That'd be the goal. Have a core workgroup. Add/remove people as needed

^

The point of a second server would be to keep the core Intel population connected, and ensure some institutional memory.

As stated. I can advise on cyber/electronic warfare matters since that’s my area of employment

Also allow for flexible on-demand channel creation

We could make a custom role for the intel community and their own channel, to utilize some of the people already here.

Be a good start.