Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31

Thread: Civitates/House Proposal

  1. #1

    Default Civitates/House Proposal

    I would like to propose that Civitateship would be handled internally (within each House) with the following set of guidelines for each House:

    - The appointed person must have been a member of TWC for at least 2 months.
    - There must be general consensus from the Curia (all Houses and the Syntagma) for complete approval
    - Each House shall create their set of rules for admission.

    I will post a poll soon to all members of House of Manji, asking for a change in inner House policies regarding sponsoring of new civitates).
    Please elaborate on the subject if you find it worthy.
    浪人 - 二天一

  2. #2
    Søren's Avatar ܁
    Patrician Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Library of Babel
    Posts
    8,993

    Default

    Excellent idea Manji, looking forward to the poll

    After all, the Curia is just a complicated RPG, at best.

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

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default

    While I would like to see the requirements for civitateship amended, I cannot get in my mind this house thingy. What if a prospective Civis does not conform to the rules of house A and he's the perfect candidate for house B. Isn't this bound to create fiction?

  4. #4
    Pent uP Rage's Avatar Tech *********
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,842

    Default

    I'm no Manjii, but I still think that's a good idea.

    under the patronage of Emperor Dimitricus, son of the Black Prince
    Before you post, see if your question has already been answered
    here

  5. #5
    Søren's Avatar ܁
    Patrician Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Library of Babel
    Posts
    8,993

    Default

    While I would like to see the requirements for civitateship amended, I cannot get in my mind this house thingy. What if a prospective Civis does not conform to the rules of house A and he's the perfect candidate for house B. Isn't this bound to create fiction?
    Unlikly really, I imagne the rules will be similar on the whole. Anyway, I don't think Manji intends it as a forum rule. Just an informal obligation on the part of house members.

    Do make the poll, Manji

  6. #6

    Default

    I am in two minds about it, who will vote in civitates? All houses will have to abide by Ogres.net rules and TWC's.... Another thing I think should wait for after the civitates reform.

    Yes I know its taking me and sim a long time but I do have other things going on atm, which is why I resigned from staff.
    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

  7. #7
    wilpuri's Avatar It Gets Worse.
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    The Weimar Republic
    Posts
    9,512

    Default

    - The appointed person must have been a member of TWC for at least 2 months.
    - There must be general consensus from the Curia (all Houses and the Syntagma) for complete approval
    - Each House shall create their set of rules for admission.
    I like the idea, its worth working on. However, I don't think each house should be allowed to decide the criteria for admission. I think the requirements set forth by the syntagma must apply to all, but other on top of those you could always have some inter-family regulations... For example, you could build your house around a certain political orientation.
    The common culture of a tribe is a sign of its inner cohesion. But tribes are vanishing from the modern world, as are all forms of traditional society. Customs, practices, festivals, rituals and beliefs have acquired a flut and half-hearted quality which reflects our nomadic and rootless existence, predicated as we are on the global air-waves.

    ROGER SCRUTON, Modern Culture

  8. #8
    Søren's Avatar ܁
    Patrician Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Library of Babel
    Posts
    8,993

    Default

    I am in two minds about it, who will vote in civitates? All houses will have to abide by Ogres.net rules and TWC's....
    I think it's meant to be outside Curia procedure, on the whole.

    Another thing I think should wait for after the civitates reform.
    Not really, there's no harm in making the poll now and then updating it to reflect any changes. If necessary, as it should be an informal procedure.

    EDIT :

    I like the idea, its worth working on. However, I don't think each house should be allowed to decide the criteria for admission. I think the requirements set forth by the syntagma must apply to all, but other on top of those you could always have some inter-family regulations...
    As I've already said, I think it's supposed tio be informal.

    I disagree about centering it around a political orientation though.

  9. #9
    wilpuri's Avatar It Gets Worse.
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    The Weimar Republic
    Posts
    9,512

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bavarian Noble
    I disagree about centering it around a political orientation though.
    Well that happens anyway. People are more likely to like people they agree with. Besides, who's to say you can't do that?
    The common culture of a tribe is a sign of its inner cohesion. But tribes are vanishing from the modern world, as are all forms of traditional society. Customs, practices, festivals, rituals and beliefs have acquired a flut and half-hearted quality which reflects our nomadic and rootless existence, predicated as we are on the global air-waves.

    ROGER SCRUTON, Modern Culture

  10. #10
    Søren's Avatar ܁
    Patrician Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Library of Babel
    Posts
    8,993

    Default

    Well that happens anyway. People are more likely to like people they agree with. Besides, who's to say you can't do that?
    No-ones to say that you can't do that, just that I think that it should be discouraged.

    I think it's best if Manji makes the poll for his house (Manji ?) and then we can get a good idea of what exactly he means.

  11. #11
    Sulla's Avatar Sulla
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Aussie in Denmark
    Posts
    1,648

    Default

    Traditionally staff have looked at Civitate appointments but I have been looking to change this around a little. Some may also recall a proposal I made to make Civitates more accountable to their patrons (which was not popular at the time).

    As per the Legislation Act,
    Any Civitate is able to present a Bill provided that his motion is supported by at least three other Civitates, including one Patrician, Curator or Senatorii Vechii.
    I will be happy to support this motion depending on the final proposal you lot come up with. I get the feeling this will be an interesting discussion nontheless .

    While I would like to see the requirements for civitateship amended, I cannot get in my mind this house thingy. What if a prospective Civis does not conform to the rules of house A and he's the perfect candidate for house B. Isn't this bound to create fiction?
    If a candidate is unsuitable for house 'A' then I suppose house 'B' could submit their interest to the Curia.

    I will post a poll soon to all members of House of Manji, asking for a change in inner House policies regarding sponsoring of new civitates).
    Are you also implying a house can remove a member (ie. remove Civitate status of) of a house? Now that would be interesting :wink: .


    One thing the Curia will need to do here is make sure it makes a fair assessment of the member in question.


    EDIT:: Proposal. Moved to Prothalomos.

    Under the Patronage of the noble Senatorii Wild Bill Kelso
    Brother Of Necrobrit, Scrappy Jenks, eldaran and Oldgamer
    Patron of the Senatorii cunobelin & the CivitateLegio XX Valeria Victrix

  12. #12
    Søren's Avatar ܁
    Patrician Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Library of Babel
    Posts
    8,993

    Default

    IMO it would be better if Manji made this poll and then we discuss it afterwards.

    I think this because it is not necessary for this tol become an Act of Law or ammendment, as yet, unitl we have seen the precise co-sensus on it.

  13. #13

    Default

    you also implying a house can remove a member (ie. remove Civitate status of) of a house? Now that would be interesting
    No no no no! I would most centainly protest against this. Civitates are never demoted unless they break the rules. Demoting civitates because their house doesnt like them anymore? Not unless they break the rules!

    I will be happy to support this motion depending on the final proposal you lot come up with. I get the feeling this will be an interesting discussion nontheless
    It has my full support, we have too many ideas floating about and we have to moderate it so as to divert time to the important stuff.


    Are we suggesting the Curia voting in civitates?
    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

  14. #14

    Default

    This concept of "Houses" appeared out of extended "families" who appeared by the usage of civitateship and patronage.
    Houses don't represent a political/religous/social orientation but they are to some extent composed of like-minded individuals because after all we patronize those we like and we feel connected to. I don't think there should be a forced "tag" to each house (ex: the liberal house, the communist house,. etc) because each House is highly independent even within it's limits and members are not completely obedient to a certain standard of laws.

    My idea is this:

    TWC can never be a representative democracy because we are subject to a higher rule (Ogresnet). What this means is that, like many other sites, a certain elite who is subordinated to the high powers rules, usually despotically.
    Houses would enable one to be able to (to a certain degree) shape how TWC is structured because some houses are more rigid than others, some are more liberal than others, etc, and to some extent the Houses would become the representation of a esprit de corps, if you will.
    Anyway, this should be debated, of course, and some members of a particular house may no longer feel part of it's ideals and wish to leave.
    浪人 - 二天一

  15. #15
    MareNostrum's Avatar Wanted: Dead or Alive
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands. For those white trailer trash who dont know: Its a small country in Europe.
    Posts
    1,902

    Default

    Are we suggesting the Curia voting in civitates?
    I will resign if this happens..

    over my dead body...
    be kind when you are walking over it..

    Civitates admission must remain a decision made by staff..
    demotion.. by means of Ostrakon.. or staff..

    House criteria's for civitates admission?
    Dont like it... but either way staff should vote...

    Although I like a simpel version of belonging to a House..
    its my personal opinion that we take it a bit too far with...
    "Every house has its own criteria" "or a role in voting or demoting a new candidate"

    There will be rivalries and plotting, and politically orientated moves regarding the Curia. Alliances, wars being declared, transfers... .members being approached at post count 50..in other words .. "Cyber Forum Behaviour"

    Let people just post...
    if you see a good candidate

    then patronize him...dont think of your house, criteria's, expansion..
    simple..thats it...

    Relation between Patron and Civitate.. is central
    not the one with "grandfather, or uncle, or whatever"

    Houses would enable one to be able to (to a certain degree) shape how TWC is structured because some houses are more rigid than others, some are more liberal than others, etc, and to some extent the Houses would become the representation of a esprit de corps, if you will.
    That doesnt change the relation between a member and Ogresnet. You are still under their T.O.S.
    It doesnt enhance any democracy... in case of having influence on the structure at TWC.. then the majority opinion counts and the will of ON / senior staff.. not the power of a "house"..

    I will await the debate and give my full opinion.
    Last edited by MareNostrum; September 26, 2005 at 10:37 AM.

  16. #16
    wilpuri's Avatar It Gets Worse.
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    The Weimar Republic
    Posts
    9,512

    Default

    This concept of "Houses" appeared out of extended "families" who appeared by the usage of civitateship and patronage.
    Houses don't represent a political/religous/social orientation but they are to some extent composed of like-minded individuals because after all we patronize those we like and we feel connected to. I don't think there should be a forced "tag" to each house (ex: the liberal house, the communist house,. etc) because each House is highly independent even within it's limits and members are not completely obedient to a certain standard of laws.
    the politics thing was an example, but as you said, it is a collection of like-minded individuals. I'm not entirely certain however what, if any, 'legal' implications your ideas will have? I mean this all seems very voluntary/unofficial.
    The common culture of a tribe is a sign of its inner cohesion. But tribes are vanishing from the modern world, as are all forms of traditional society. Customs, practices, festivals, rituals and beliefs have acquired a flut and half-hearted quality which reflects our nomadic and rootless existence, predicated as we are on the global air-waves.

    ROGER SCRUTON, Modern Culture

  17. #17
    Søren's Avatar ܁
    Patrician Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Library of Babel
    Posts
    8,993

    Default

    As far as I understand Manji's proposal, it would not, as yet, require any form of legislation as no-one would be bound to it.

    I suggest that Manji makes a hose of Manji thread, so that we can see exactly the extent of his idea. i.e. the members of the house of Manji can decide on the procedure e.t.c. The house of tBP, WBK e.t.c. could make up their own rules and prcedures, the Leader of the house could "kick someone out" or invite someone un-connected to a house in, but this would not mean any cessation of priveliges e.t.c.

    Perhaps a sub-forum in the Curia could be made for stickyed threads of the various houses. Or even better sub-sub-forums inside that for each house. As I have already said, this is not part of legislation and should be a simple adminCP job by the Imperator. Pending his approval.

  18. #18
    Profler's Avatar Shaving Kit
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,076

    Default

    The idea is intriguing, I for one would quite like to see the Civitates vote pass to the Curia from Staff, I rather like the idea of an electoral college system in this context.

    However, I think we should take the opportunity to re-establish 'orphan' Civitates, candidates who can be proposed to the Curia and voted in by the Civitates as a whole rather than being tied to a family. A number of very distinguised Civitates have remained effectively outisde of the patronage system and I think it would be foolish to suggest that future Civitates could not do the same.

    In short, I like the idea of 'House admissions', but would like to see the system diversified as well, otherwise we shall find ourselves grouped solely into a handful of great houses and loose the diversity that is currently present.
    In patronicvm svb wilpuri
    Patronvm celcvm qvo Garbarsardar et NStarun


    The Bottle of France has been lost, the Bottle of Britain has just begun...
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Mr. Speaker, do you approve of donuts?" - Hon Eric Forth MP (deceased)
    "You might very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment" - Rt Hon Francis Urquhart MP

  19. #19

    Default

    The idea is intriguing, I for one would quite like to see the Civitates vote pass to the Curia from Staff, I rather like the idea of an electoral college system in this context.
    So did I, as you know, but I found no way to implement it and not make it a popularity contest which is not what the civitates system is about! Maybe later and I have suggested one think similar which will be present in the civitates proposal. :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

  20. #20
    Dirk Gently's Avatar Civitate
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    A comfy chair
    Posts
    123

    Default

    I'm personally in favour of this proposal. It will go a long way to developing a 'house' spirit. I, however, do disagree with regards to self-regulation of admissions. A far better idea would be to allow further rules on top of standard admissions rules; if we were to persist with the idea of self-regulating admissions, Houses should take full responsibility for patronising people who turn out to be idiots - Civitate status should be able to then be put up to vote in the Curia, if a petition of a set number of members could be put forth to someone of status.
    "Many a man can seem respectable and hide at will behind a spiral staircase" - Wodehouse
    My Patron is Wilpuri.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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