Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Proposed Ostrakon amendment

  1. #1
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default Proposed Ostrakon amendment

    I propose the addition of the following paragraph to the Ostrakon rules. One could argue that it adds one more step to the procedure; actually this is not the case:the old procedure still stands; we're just relieving the Staff member from the sometimes sad duty to initiate an Ostrakon on the spot. This procedure should be in place for the case that a Staff member is reluctant to initiate Ostrakon, or unsure for the severity of punishment involved.

    "Any member of the staff can and should bring in front of the CVRIA, the case of any Civitate, Patrician or Senatorii who recieved 2 warnings since becoming a civitate, or recieved a suspension since becoming a civitate. The CVRIA has then to decide in 48 hours if an Ostrakon should be initiated."


    Rules relating to Ostrakon
    If a Civitate, Patrician or Senatorii is found to be acting in opposition to the rules of the forum and Curia, or is otherwise neglecting his duties and/or carrying about in disorderly and immature manner unbeffiting his position, he/she may be released from duties by the following procedure:
    i. Any Civitate permanently banned by the Hexagon Council or Imperator is subject to immediate ostrakon.
    ii. The individual in question must be brought to the attention of the Curia by formally initiating an Ostrakon, that is, a vote of expulsion from the rank of Civitate, Patrician or Senatorii by a Patrician, Senatorii or Staff member. Staff and Senatorii can initiate Ostrakon against all ranks including staff, Patricians against Patricians and Civitates, Civitates against Civitates.
    ii. Said Vote must contain deliniated reasons for which said Civitate is being tried. The vote will adhere to the aforementioned rules in the Syntagma as to voting guidelines, lasting 168 hours and must pass by a majority vote of those who vote either Yay or Nay (Votes Abstained do not factor into majority calculation, it would be superfluous, a majority abstaintion decides nothing. ).
    iii. The Civitate, Patrician or Senatorii in question will have a chance to defend himself against the alegations till the votes closing time, at which period the votes will be tallied and the appropiate decision taken.
    iv. The duration of the Ostraka (time he will not be allowed to become a civitate again) is to be decided by the Syntagma Curator acting as judge.
    v. All clients under the ostracised patron will immediately lost their position as Civitate members. They can be asked to join again by a new potential patron without any waiting period. A staff member in this situation would lose their Patron and all their clients but not their position.
    vi. A staff member directly and successfully ostracised will lose their position in the same fashion
    Last edited by Garbarsardar; September 24, 2005 at 03:33 AM.

  2. #2

    Default

    v. All clients under the ostracised patron will immediately lost their position as Civitate members. They can be asked to join again by a new potential patron without any waiting period. A staff member in this situation would lose their Patron and all their clients but not their position.
    This is being voted on and will probably be removed.
    Well, if I, Belisarius, the Black Prince, and you all agree on something, I really don't think there can be any further discussion.
    - Simetrical 2009 in reply to Ferrets54

  3. #3
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jacobus Maximus
    This is being voted on and will probably be removed.
    Yep, I just offered an addition to the present form. The section on patrons does not affect my amendment. Thanks for the heads-up.

  4. #4

    Default

    i would suggest replacing "acting in opposition to forum rules" with "recieved 2 warnings since becoming a civitate, or recieved a suspention since becoming a civitate"


    afterall, everyone makes the odd mistake one or twice, or is having a bad day and gets rattled. acting in opposition to forum rules is to broad IMO, and you could have a civ brought up for a single spam post on that definition

  5. #5
    Tom Paine's Avatar Mr Common Sense
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland (inside the Beltway)
    Posts
    33,698

    Default

    iii. The Civitate, Patrician or Senatorii in question will have a chance to defend himself against the alegations till the votes closing time, at which period the votes will be tallied and the appropiate decision taken.
    Surely before it begins? Any other way changes the thing entirely, in that people can (and will) vote without reading the thread; let them post a defence in the first post.

  6. #6
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the Black Prince
    i would suggest replacing "acting in opposition to forum rules" with "recieved 2 warnings since becoming a civitate, or recieved a suspention since becoming a civitate"


    afterall, everyone makes the odd mistake one or twice, or is having a bad day and gets rattled. acting in opposition to forum rules is to broad IMO, and you could have a civ brought up for a single spam post on that definition
    Correct(-ed).

  7. #7
    imb39's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    20,872

    Default

    Would it be reasonable to, say, have a time period for each warning, ie let's say they last 12 months (a starting figure). It seems harsh that 2 warnings are your limit, period. Having said that, there are those who have been Civitates (or above) for a long period without any warnings, but the goal posts might be moved, ie rules applied much more strictly. IF the warnings are going to be tightened up then expect to see a flurry of ostrakons - or are we to make an example of the first? I suppose that will be inevitable...

  8. #8
    Tom Paine's Avatar Mr Common Sense
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland (inside the Beltway)
    Posts
    33,698

    Default

    If there would be a flurry of warnings then there needs to be a flurry of warnings. Ostrakon for warnings before this comes into force should not be allowed, however; therefore, I suggest that from this Bill coming into force (if it does) we have the set-warning system.

  9. #9

    Default

    I agree with the purpose of this bill. I think Civitates who break the rules in an often manner are not worthy to be Civitates. And that also goes for all the staff members too.

    I think the person being ostracized should make his defense before the actual voting starts. This, ofcourse, Squeakus already pointed out.
    Under the wing of Nihil - Under my claws; Farnan, Ummon, & Ecclesiastes.

    Human beings will be happier — not when they cure cancer or get to Mars or eliminate racial prejudice or flush Lake Erie — but when they find ways to inhabit primitive communities again. That’s my utopia.
    Kurt Vonnegut

  10. #10

    Default

    Well, Would it be to much to ask to keep this discussion going untill the Civitates reform discussion starts and maybe vote them in at the same time so that we wont have to make anymore changes? :original:
    Well, if I, Belisarius, the Black Prince, and you all agree on something, I really don't think there can be any further discussion.
    - Simetrical 2009 in reply to Ferrets54

  11. #11
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jacobus Maximus
    Well, Would it be to much to ask to keep this discussion going untill the Civitates reform discussion starts and maybe vote them in at the same time so that we wont have to make anymore changes? :original:
    How can I refuse anything to you?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •