[DISCUSSION] A place to discuss about awards

**Flinn** · November 30, 2015, 09:17 AM

As the title says, we probably lack a thread, similar to the one for suggesting potential clients, where one can point out regular members (not citizens) that look to have the potential for one of the major awards granted by the Curia.

Reason: there's plenty of potential awards out there I believe, but many of them are invisible to the Curia because they are out of its circles; to make it worse, I'm sure many of us see interesting members around, but lack the experience/knowledge of the field to be sure if proposing them or not. Furthermore, nobody likes to be rejected or likes to delude someone you promised an award, so fear is a factor here IMO. Ok you can move on directly with the proposal, but this is exacting what is not happening much, for the reasons above.

With such a thread, one could point out interesting dudes, so that others, more experienced citizens might make an evaluation about (i.e. I know nothing about debating, but I see many members who are heavily involed there and might be worth a Phalera for instance); this way we could avoid embarassing situations and, most important, ensure that the right proposer will meet the right candidate.

Furthermore, IIRC, a member that is proposed for an award should be complying with the same requirements as per citizenship applications, which in this case tunes down to the moderation part: how to deal with this then? Do we have to proceed like in the new procedure for new citizens? It would be interesting to have a place whether to confront about this point too; also, if anyone has a question specifically related to an award (such as: do you guys thinks that posting smurfs' pictures

all the day long is worth an Asterix's?) it can be posted there.

It could be put as sticky in the Prothalamos and have a title such "Awards: questions, discussions, suggested candidates, etc" or whatever title our most skilled word-crafters might come out with

**Aikanár** · November 30, 2015, 09:35 AM

I'm not too sure about the Discussion prefix of the thread. Discussing other members is heavily restricted, so basically, all you are allowed to do here is post the name and award you think the person might deserve and maybe some supporting material, but you cannot start a discussion about whether people might or might not think somebody would be worth an award. So the purpose of this thread is rather limited and we already have the patronization candidates thread, which can be used for other rewards/awards too.

**Flinn** · November 30, 2015, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by Aikanár

So the purpose of this thread is rather limited and we already have the patronization candidates thread, which can be used for other rewards/awards too.

that's exactly what I was looking for; I wasn't aware that that thread can be used for this purpose too, I'm perfectly fine if it so, I just believe that this should be stated clearly on that thread then (it is not so now, or I can't see it in any case).

Discussing other members is heavily restricted, so basically, all you are allowed to do here is post the name and award you think the person might deserve and maybe some supporting material, but you cannot start a discussion about whether people might or might not think somebody would be worth an award.

I'll always be confused about this rule, as we do it when we decide about citizenship and awards or when we evaluate Voncs; it might be me that I don't understand what "discussing other members" means exactly, but in this specifc case I agree perfectly with you, it won't be needed to discuss anything but to just simply point out a name and some contributions.

edit: I now see that you probably referred to the fact that I spoke about moderation history above, as usual my english betrays me

What I meant is not to discuss moderation history of a member anywhere, but just to discuss how to approach potential members for awards and ask them if they have a moderation history because it is not stated anywhere at the moment, unless of course it's the same procedure as per new citizens, as I guessed above.

edit 2: and in any case I'd like to know if there's a place where one can ask general questions about awards, not related to anyone in particular, but as a general approach to the matter.

**Sir Adrian** · November 30, 2015, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by Aikanár

I'm not too sure about the Discussion prefix of the thread. Discussing other members is heavily restricted, so basically, all you are allowed to do here is post the name and award you think the person might deserve and maybe some supporting material, but you cannot start a discussion about whether people might or might not think somebody would be worth an award. So the purpose of this thread is rather limited and we already have the patronization candidates thread, which can be used for other rewards/awards too.

But that's exactly what citizenship application are about. Are you saying we've been breaking the rules the whole time.

**mishkin** · November 30, 2015, 03:01 PM

In citizenship applications the person concerned has give permission to be pubilcly "commented". (He knows what is going to happen).
If I remember correctly there were some complaints about the other thread. Now we can only provide a name and "curricula" without comments. I guess we could do the same for awards if there is interest on it

**Flinn** · December 01, 2015, 02:41 AM

I never gave or asked any permission of this kind, to be honest. Not that this means anything for me, I'm for transparency and less concern about privacy in general, so I won't personally complain if someone would discuss about me (we do this continously at the PH&A fora too, for instance).

Anyhow, backing to the OP, can I take for good that we are allowed to use the "members suggested for patronization" thread to also propose awards for Peregrini?
Furthermore, if anyone could confirm me that the procedure to ask for moderation cleareance is the same whether we are speaking about citizen application or awards for peregrini, I would forever be grateful to him

**Aikanár** · December 01, 2015, 08:19 AM

Originally Posted by Doctor Shuu

But that's exactly what citizenship application are about. Are you saying we've been breaking the rules the whole time.

Originally Posted by mishkin

In citizenship applications the person concerned has give permission to be pubilcly "commented". (He knows what is going to happen).

^That.

The moment you apply for citizenship you know or ought to know that you will be discussed in one way or another. You have given your concent to be discussed by applying while people who are proposed in a thread as this can't do anything about it.

**mishkin** · December 01, 2015, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by Flinn

Anyhow, backing to the OP, can I take for good that we are allowed to use the "members suggested for patronization" thread to also propose awards for Peregrini?

This would be better than opening a new thread in my opinion. If no one gives arguments against, tomorrow I will change the title of the thread.

Furthermore, if anyone could confirm me that the procedure to ask for moderation cleareance is the same whether we are speaking about citizen application or awards for peregrini, I would forever be grateful to him

It is not specified in the constitution but I would say yes. (So this is what youshould do "The patron confirms the candidate meets the requirements and with the candidate's consent moderation is requested to inform the patron and the Curator whether the moderational requirement is met.")

**m_1512** · December 01, 2015, 10:26 PM

Main point -> great idea that can be implemented without much paperwork (in a manner of speaking). After all, all that is required is to nominate a name and list a brief summary why. The Curator or any interested citizen can then propose it backed with research on contributions; and the person notified about his nomination. Then the person can decide whether to decline or not.

One more thing, if you are talking about awards, I would not just divide the recipients as peregrini only or vice versa. In fact, I'd not even care if they were a citizen or not.

**Flinn** · December 02, 2015, 03:55 AM

Originally Posted by m_1512

One more thing, if you are talking about awards, I would not just divide the recipients as peregrini only or vice versa. In fact, I'd not even care if they were a citizen or not.

I agree, but the Constitution says

"Any member is eligible to receive the Opifex(Phalera, Asterix's) award, but must also meet the criteria to become a Citizen."

which means that

"To qualify for Citizenship, a member must have at least fifty posts, been a registered member for two months, and have not received a Moderation Warning or Curial Warning within the past six months."

so in a case or another the proposer need to know at least that the candidate has moderation cleareance (and this before he starts to write the presentation, I guess nobody wants to waste his own time no?

), therefore we need a clear procedure about, or, in this case, just a confirmation that it's the same with the two different situations

@ Miskin, thanks for the feedback mate, that's exactely what I'm looking for

**mishkin** · December 02, 2015, 04:47 AM

I changed the title of the original discussion (Members Suggested for patronization) and made minor changes in the original message. If anyone can tweak better the OP or the title, please post here your version or what you think should be corrected.
The thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...0#post14057820

**PikeStance** · December 04, 2015, 07:08 AM

There was never a "no comment at all policy" when that thread was created. moreover, what I stated was that I already approach that person and stated why it is not going forward. After all, what am supposed to do.... quote the post and put a line through the name? If this is what you want, then you need to reword AL's instructions.

**mishkin** · December 04, 2015, 09:03 AM

No way you can post negative comments (btw, comments based on observation, not in some alleged conversations) about users. It seems so obvious that I do not think it is necessary to alter the,I repeat, maybe a little confusing opening post. (If in the future a "real Curator" wants to change it, of course, go ahead).

**PikeStance** · December 04, 2015, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by mishkin

No way you can post negative comments (btw, comments based on observation, not on conversations) about users. It seems so obvious that I do not think it is necessary to alter the,I repeat, maybe a little confusing opening post. (If in the future a "real Curator" wants to change it, of course, go ahead).

I stated facts. Moreover, the OP makes no differentiation between a positive or negative, so it's irrelevant. Lastly, the OP is not at all confusing. It is very clear that general comments are allowed just not a discussion that could divulge into an argument or a prolong discussion. The discussion that lead to the creation f that thread is also very clear about what is allowed and not allowed. The fear of the thread is that it would become a "mini" application type thread. The thread was never met to just be a depository of names. AL and everyone one actively discussing it wanted something to be said, but not a debate.