Curial Commentary Thread

[Heinz Guderian]

The Plebs misbehaved. Its their own fault.

[Jom]

That's part of the reason I proposed the final, successful attempt at gaining application transparency (for those not versed in the CVRIA, there had been several attempts by other people before).
An important part of it is also to make the CdeC subject to public scrutiny though.
With this latest amendment (I voted "no"), it's still subject to CVRIAL scrutiny, but no longer to public scrutiny, nor is it possible for an applicant to see his application until it's finished.

I don't see why the CdeC should be subject to public scrutiny rather than Curial scrutiny, when it's the Curia who elects them, thus giving them their mandate, and the Curia to whom they are responsible.

[Meneth]

The Plebs misbehaved. Its their own fault.

Some actual guidelines would've been much better than an outright ban on them viewing.

I don't see why the CdeC should be subject to public scrutiny rather than Curial scrutiny, when it's the Curia who elects them, thus giving them their mandate, and the Curia to whom they are responsible.

An extra set of eyes always helps.
There's already been at least one discussion in this thread on CdeC practices.
I also see no reason why potential future citizens should have no insight into the CdeC.

[Jom]

Some actual guidelines would've been much better than an outright ban on them viewing.

An extra set of eyes always helps.
There's already been at least one discussion in this thread on CdeC practices.
I also see no reason why potential future citizens should have no insight into the CdeC.

They do have an insight into the CdeC; they can read the Citizen Antechamber thread like I did to try and get an idea of how I should set out my application and what my chances of being accepted were.

[Meneth]

Let me rephrase that:
I also see no reason why potential future citizens should have reduced insight into the CdeC.

[Jom]

Let me rephrase that:
I also see no reason why potential future citizens should have reduced insight into the CdeC.

Well, personally I'm against obligatory transparency (I'd rather have opt-in), so I can sum it up with the fact that I'm uncomfortable with having to lay people bare in public, as I doubt some would be pleased with everything that has been said and the fact that others can see that.

[Ishan]

Let me rephrase that:
I also see no reason why potential future citizens should have reduced insight into the CdeC.

Potato, Potato.

Well, personally I'm against obligatory transparency (I'd rather have opt-in), so I can sum it up with the fact that I'm uncomfortable with having to lay people bare in public, as I doubt some would be pleased with everything that has been said and the fact that others can see that.

True.

[Meneth]

Well, personally I'm against obligatory transparency (I'd rather have opt-in), so I can sum it up with the fact that I'm uncomfortable with having to lay people bare in public, as I doubt some would be pleased with everything that has been said and the fact that others can see that.

It's currently opt-in:
"If the nominee wishes his citizenship application to remain private, the patron sends the paragraph, along with his own, outlining why he nominated this member, to either the Curator or a member of the Consilium de Civitate. The application itself will then be posted in the Politia."

[Jom]

It's currently opt-in:
"If the nominee wishes his citizenship application to remain private, the patron sends the paragraph, along with his own, outlining why he nominated this member, to either the Curator or a member of the Consilium de Civitate. The application itself will then be posted in the Politia."

Weren't you arguing for full transparency, though?

[Meneth]

That I was, excluding disciplinary cases. I still support that.
However, that has little to do with the current transparency now being limited to citizens only.

[Halie Satanus]

This is how it should be. The curia should have always had oversight. Plebes don't need to see what's going on but for the sake of integrity the curia does.

Sad to say since it goes against everything the CdeC is supposed to stand for, history has proved there are few mature enough to behave with due diligence once given position.

The curia should now push for greater transparency.

[Hader]

I don't see why the CdeC should be subject to public scrutiny rather than Curial scrutiny, when it's the Curia who elects them, thus giving them their mandate, and the Curia to whom they are responsible.

We don't want all governments to be free of public scrutiny now do we?


Granted, the CdeC deals mostly with just citizen apps and such. But making it invisible to plebs seems like a useless, possibly redundant, step towards...whatever the hell we are going towards.

[Remlap]

We don't want all governments to be free of public scrutiny now do we?


Granted, the CdeC deals mostly with just citizen apps and such. But making it invisible to plebs seems like a useless, possibly redundant, step towards...whatever the hell we are going towards.

Backwards. By removing transparency for say people like me that actually care enough about this site to go in and see what is going on. Transparency is ruffling feathers in all the right way's, and people on the CDeC don't necessarily enjoy it. So they have pushed for an even closer return to how it was before transparency. But how long will it be before they revoke anything to do with it?

[Belisarius]

CdeC dont revoke anything, its the 2/3 majority that got the amendment through.

[Remlap]

So if members of the CDeC hadn't said anything about it, transparency would still have been reduced? I can't really follow that. Yes the vote decided the outcome of it but when I go back and look at the discussion threads this one was carried out much faster than the votes for transparency. Why is that?

[Pontifex Maximus]

Why is that?

Because in the meantime applicants are failing because they can't refrain from commenting on their own case in a negative manner.

[Remlap]

Well wouldn't that be a good sign they aren't mature enough for the badge yet?

[Jom]

Well wouldn't that be a good sign they aren't mature enough for the badge yet?

The majority of the Curia saw fit to withdraw transparency from non-citizens. As a humble servant of the Curia, who am I to argue?

[Pontifex Maximus]

Well wouldn't that be a good sign they aren't mature enough for the badge yet?

Precisely.

The curia did them a favor by not giving them the opportunity to mess it up for themselves.

[Antwerpen]

A question to all those who struggle for transparency:

You take transparency as a given and consider the restraint as a breach of your rights - but what makes you think that you actually have these rights? The CdeC had a non-disclosure policy for a long time before the transparency reforms were implemented about half a year ago IIRC, so I think you must be grateful for what you have right now.