Expanding the role of the CdeC

[Каие]

I was reading through the Constitution (DON'T ASK WHY) and I came across Section II, Article IV;

The Consilium de Civitates manages the granting and removal of all Curia Ranks by voting. The Consilium de Civitates may also function as an advisory body to the staff of TWC in matters concerning the Curia and its Citizens.

The rest of the section and article don't expand on that in anyway. I've been on the CdeC a while, but I've never ever engaged in anything in a role resembling the bold above. I was thinking of somehow making it more relevant.

My idea was to create a new sub-forum in the CdeC, whose only intention is to be a place for Councillors or the Curator to write ''reports'', ''open letters'' or ''statements'', so to speak, to the Hex or any branch of staff, on behalf of the Curia.

It would operate by having a sub-forum, any CdeC councillor, or Curator/assistant opening a thread and typing out what they want to say, adding any testimonies, quotes from citizens, or links to any threads they need and posting the thread. Once the thread is posted it would be read by and critiqued or commented on by the other CdeC councillors. If the report gets at least 4 signatures, one third of the CdeC... it is put to vote in the Curia Votes forum. If it gets 7 or more signatures, it is automatically accepted as official and sent off to the Hex/Staff. concerned.

An example would be lobbying the Hex, who essentially at the end of the day have sole control of the forum (the Curia exists only because they allow it and tolerate it), on any issue of relevance to the Curia or Citizens or the Site that is not involved in any vote. E.g. Overturning a Hex Veto. Suggesting radical reforms concerning staff, such as ToS... or even simply an official word on a recent issue or controversy relating to the Curia or Citizens.

Just a thought.

[Harry Lime]

To use your example, how would matters of the ToS or staff reforms (beyond the Curator) be matters solely concerning the Curia or Citizens? That's how I read it anyway.

[Каие]

Elected Staff members for instance. Moderation staff are recruited from amongst the Citizenry, anyway. I'm not putting any ideas specifically with this, merely hypothetically creating that outlet for the future.

[Harry Lime]

So as an advisory body the CdeC could say to Hex "We advise you to elect moderators" and "We advise you to reverse your veto" ?

This sounds less like an expansion of the CdeC and more like an annexation of the Curia. Wouldn't it be more democratic and open to wider scrutiny to put those proposals through the normal channels?

To be honest I'm not sure why that clause is in there. I've been doing some research into the history of the CdeC (lol bored) tonight but haven't reached that addition yet.

[Каие]

If worded in a certain way as to refer directly to the Curia/Citizenry... but as I suggested perhaps a ratification process requiring a majority from the Curia? It wouldn't be the same as a formal bill or amendment or anything, but merely like a press release or official report on some matter.

[Каие]

What happened to that report idea that Bel started up? Where the Curia would write reports to staff on behalf of the Citizenry, and in return the Staff would also write reports to the Curia on staff matters... ? It passed, and wasn't vetoed... I was Curator at the time, I remember.

My OP and that report thing could be merged somehow.

[Augustus Lucifer]

The report proposal passed but Hex approved it as a voluntary thing. I wrote a report for Tech Staff a few months ago, but I'm not sure the lack of Curial response justified the time it took to compile and simplify it, so I didn't bother writing another. The point of the reports was for staff to post about needs and concerns or positive happenings and for the Citizens to comment or attempt to address them. In theory this is good, in practice there doesn't seem to be a lot of desire or initiative in response to such things.

That pretty much ties into the usual way the Curia seems to work. There will be a clamor for this or that, but whether or not anything comes of it always depends on if one user decides to make it formal. I've been that user on a number of occasions, such as with the Board of Historians, and Justinian is also a frequent proposer. Other times the light never flicks on that something discussed should be discussed more formally as an actual means for change. I don't know how to address that, but it's one of the reasons the Curia can be stagnant at times.

Regarding expanding the role of the CdeC, the problem I have is then we gradually make the qualifications for being a CdeC member more broad and ambiguous. As it is now all actions taken by the CdeC can basically be expressed as a ratio, contributions:transgressions. This ratio is how we determine Citizen applicants, disciplinary cases in many respects, and even preliminary votes on Divus candidates(if we were doing it mathematically though, transgressions would always need to start as 1 for obvious reasons, and the elusive 'bar for Citizenship' would need to be in direct proportion to n:1). When we start adding in things like challenging a Hex veto or amending the ToS, the qualifications for the position become much broader than a proficiency in gauging that ratio, good work ethic, and solid basis of reasoning.