Curial Commentary Thread

[Hesus de bodemloze]

Why argue about a WIP thread, if we are willing to lower the standards for members in gaining citizenship why not just grant citizenship to every one who is a member for 1 month and has 50 posts?

[Viking Prince]

Because we wish to be all inclusive and elitist at the same time.

[Ishan]

I think the 'artifex to be' just needs to write a good application, so that everything important can be easily found.

Application = an official request for something, usually in writing.
So every application should be good regardless what one is applying for. If the applicant does so he is doing himself a huge favor.

Also, writing a few tutorials always helps,

Very True.
Tutorials are one of the supporting pillars of TWC it's the primary reason i got hooked onto TWC in the first place & i can't imagine TWC without them.

Not to mention they inspire newbies that want to learn modding and i have in past 2 years seen a lot of them ending up in mod teams, contributing and serving the TWC community.

even if they're on pretty niche topics.

Not sure what you meant by pretty niche topics but if you meant not helpful or vague then i personally throw such tutorials outside of tutorials section as it's not counted as a contribution in my eyes.

Recently in the past few months i have seen that it's a trend that is developing that before applying for artifex, members post tutorials an intriguing case that comes in my mind is of gracul (who posted commendable tutorials) which is a good thing & should be practiced.

[Meneth]

pretty niche topics[/I] but if you meant not helpful or vague then i personally throw such tutorials outside of tutorials section as it's not counted as a contribution in my eyes.

I mean tutorials on topics that are only of use to a small sub-set of modders.

[Halie Satanus]

Citizenship categorization...is it time for a change?

Citizen/Civitate/Artifex

The only real hiccup in the system is the freedom to interchange.

On application you apply for Citizenship. Civitate and Artifex are the sub groups.

I've always thought it odd that members are later allowed to apply for a group other than the CdeC were not given evidence for.

At present it's based on the Curators discretion. I imagine in practice it's simply switched (varying curators may have been more vigilant).

In these cases I think the application should be reassessed. If members go through the scrutiny of the CdeC to become a Civitate they have not been assessed for TW contributions, and visa versa, so should not be allowed to switch.

It may add a level of bureaucracy, but it would also reduce the amount of people switching unnecessarily.

Otherwise, we would have to elect Consilium de Citizen and Consilium de Artifex as well.

Been discussed many times.

The wider issue of defining the criteria.

Contribution seems to have been decided by those who quickly forget this community is (roughly) 20%citizens 80%non-citizens. TWC gives blah, this that, ect ect.

TWC it is an entertainment first and foremost. People come here to kill time. If a contribution, in any shape or form, affords them the opportunity to kill time then it is as much a contribution as something which can be DL'ed.

AARs, Strategy guides, RPG's ect ect are all site content, are all contributions.

Restricting Artifex to 'released modding' only restricts the number of members who can access the Curia via the TW.

[Halie Satanus]

NVM...

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

Kay I'll re firm up what I said somewhere else....

Pontifex Maximus...

Yesterday while skunk drunk I made a comment to you that was out of line, off-topic, and uncalled for. I sincerely apologize for it, and
will not use the fact that I was drunk as an excuse.

******************************************************

However I would like to say that to me we all responsible for our own actions here. Since this community is based on the written word we should think before we post. We should double, and triple check what we are about to say before posting.

I am ashamed of my actions and accept punitive measures if they are forthcoming.

[Nanny de Bodemloze]

Now, I don't pretend to know all the TWC rules inside out, but...

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=418336

In the case to dismiss the Curator (filed right after she announces she isn't running again, by someone who wants the job...LOL...classy), the member who initiates the VONC makes reference to a current disciplinary case, naming the disciplinee in question, and then making a comment on the case (I won't name them, cause I thought that was against the rules?):

This seems in a way to conceal the large scale embarrasement that ***** would garner, should the first Referral Thread be published.

If I have the rules all wrong, I apologize up front. But this 'outing' of a disciplinary case while in progress, without the person's consent, I thought was a complete no-no, and is slanderous towards the case subject. Without presentation of the referral itself, how is someone supposed to defend themselves from a hit to their reputation?

Perhaps someone could explain how a CdeC member can do this? Again, if I have the rules read incorrectly, I appreciate being educated.

[Meneth]

The OP wasn't the one who made it public. He intended it to stay privately in the CdeC, so I therefore consider it to be in accordance with the Constitution.

[Nanny de Bodemloze]

The OP wasn't the one who made it public. He intended it to stay privately in the CdeC, so I therefore consider it to be in accordance with the Constitution.

a VONC against the Curator that would stay private in the CdeC????

[Meneth]

To my knowledge, no rule says a dismissal of the Curator has to be public.

[Viking Prince]

(2-9-1) Sticky: Poll: [Dismissanl of Curator] Empress Meg is only a bit public. For some unkown reason the vote tally is not public in who voted for a yes, no, or abstain. Now from the thread I think we can assume Major Darling was one of the yes votes and that Squid, Jom, Mega, Legio, Ishan, y2day, and a stunned Noble Savage are the some of the no votes. Where do the other CdeC members stand on this?

I do not wish to make a big deal out of this but if transparancy is to mean anything the vote tally on a VONC might be a good place to start.

I am also concerned that this was not intended to be a serious vote, but a stunt. The use of a VONC should not be a stunt. The effect of a failed VONC might still give a message, but it should always be treated as a serious matter.

[Squid]

In any CdeC disciplinary case the defendant decides if the case is public or private after its conclusion. In this case the defendant was Meg, I expect the lack of editing out details of another case was an oversight instead of deliberate.

[Halie Satanus]

If it had removed her, it would have worked, but if it fails it still sends a message..

''There but for the grace of God, go I '' - Unknown, a true case of irony.

2/12 of the CdeC agree, even though its nowhere near a majority, it is not one alone.'

Oh, who ever brought the original case should be reprimanded for their petty vindictiveness and wasting the CdeC's time..

[Major Darling]

Thanks Halie

[Halie Satanus]

Thanks Halie

You're welcome, such an optimistic outlook should be recognized, it made 'Custer' famous.

(2-9-1) Sticky: Poll: [Dismissanl of Curator] Empress Meg is only a bit public. For some unkown reason the vote tally is not public in who voted for a yes, no, or abstain. Now from the thread I think we can assume Major Darling was one of the yes votes and that Squid, Jom, Mega, Legio, Ishan, y2day, and a stunned Noble Savage are the some of the no votes. Where do the other CdeC members stand on this?

I do not wish to make a big deal out of this but if transparancy is to mean anything the vote tally on a VONC might be a good place to start.

I'd like this to be cleared up too, in the interest of keeping things open..

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

Originally Posted by Viking Prince
(2-9-1) Sticky: Poll: [Dismissanl of Curator] Empress Meg is only a bit public. For some unkown reason the vote tally is not public in who voted for a yes, no, or abstain. Now from the thread I think we can assume Major Darling was one of the yes votes and that Squid, Jom, Mega, Legio, Ishan, y2day, and a stunned Noble Savage are the some of the no votes. Where do the other CdeC members stand on this?

I do not wish to make a big deal out of this but if transparancy is to mean anything the vote tally on a VONC might be a good place to start.
I'd like this to be cleared up too, in the interest of keeping things open..

I'd like this to be cleared up too, in the interest of keeping things open..

Well... new frontier's for settling I suppose. "If" Madame Curator had not chosen as defendant to make this public, would it not have remained by all respects,an internal CdeC action?

The initiator{in a generic sense} may or may not have taken into consideration, how the defendant would choose to manifest the visibility factor.

Therein lies the rub...

[Halie Satanus]

Rather be a mule skinner than scalped..

[Jom]

Well... new frontier's for settling I suppose. "If" Madame Curator had not chosen as defendant to make this public, would it not have remained by all respects,an internal CdeC action?

The initiator{in a generic sense} may or may not have taken into consideration, how the defendant would choose to manifest the visibility factor.

Therein lies the rub...

It's nothing to do with Meg's decision; it was because Major Darling opened a poll that wasn't public when it should have been. Funnily enough, if the poll had succeeded, its result would have been invalidated by the fact the votes weren't public.

[Viking Prince]

Actually, I misstated when mentioning a VONC since a VONC is initiated in the Curia and voted upon by the Curia. CdeC voted on a dsmissal of the Curator as Meg had properly classified the vote. I am a bit curious why Jom suggested the vote needed to be open to be valid though. I can only find a brief bit regarding the procedure in the constitution:

If, in the judgement of the Consilium de Civitates, the Curator has neglected their duties or abused his position, it may dismiss the Curator, arrange new elections.

That brief bit makes no mention of the nature of the ballot process so unless there is another constitutional section to look at, I do not think the poll was invalid. It just was not consistent with the desire (a bit unstated by the Curia) for transparancy.