Too many Estates, not enough parks.
I joined the site a few years ago and never dreamt that I would be in the situation I now find myself in. I wish to thank the Community for their support and patience. I also wish to thank those who have sent me messages of support. It is appreciated. Since Ogre announced that he was going to sell the site there has been an upsurge in debate over the direction that the site was going in. Some want massive change whilst others want a gradual change from our current set up. I think there are a few who want no change at all. Forgive me whilst I present you a wordy post.
I have spoken to people. I have listened and I have read. The result is what I am about to propose now. I present it to the Curia, not as something that is to be imposed but something that I would like for us to go to quickly. Being a Brit, I generally prefer for an evolution of processes and structure. I note that this is already happening in part in the Curia with the discussion over committees, for example. The Curia is, I am pleased to observe, developing key infrastructure in to do what it should always have been doing. It should be driving forward site policy if there is an issue. It should be the home to all within our Community and so many feel disenfranchised. At the end of the day, the Curia is part of the Community and the Community needs to use it to make its life here as rewarding as possible.
My suggestion, inspired by WBK’s vision, is predicated on the following observations –We are now in the situation where we no longer have to appease ON. I now find myself asking questions. Why is the Curia having a voice at the highest levels so wrong? So long as we follow a certain format for elections – no different from the system we utilised in September onwards - I fail to see a problem. It will be incumbent on us weeding out the more serious problem people and even then, look at the results. The Curia is more clued in than we think when you look at the result of any election.
- The Curia is interested in elections. OK. Let them have say in the areas they do have a valid role in - policy and Community. Moderator elections are an incredibly minor aspect.
- The Curia has been brow beaten into submission over years. This accelerated this year. They need direction and input. This forms part of that. By focussing on policy and community affairs they should enhance the site in an effective way AND bring back meaning to the ranks in a tangible sense.
- We are well resourced in capable people who can moderate etc - you are an excellent body of people who maintain a good level of conduct. It is testament to your colective efforts (and those who have since retired) that even during the troubles, people generally did not take advantage. We do have an achilles heel in the Technical arena and depend on Sim enormously (something I am highly indebted to personally). Mim has offered to help out in times of need, but a goal should be to ensure a level of indepedence and self reliance.
- I bought this site for the Community. To horde all influence and power in the current setup is not tenable imo. Something needs to be given back - a carrot for the collective effort.
- Hex has been very successful in guiding the site towards success.
- The Curia has not actually harmed the site.
- The Curia has actually been highly responsible in who it votes for in elections.
- None of the problems over the past year have stemmed from the Curia
- Staff discontent
- ON interference
- Some individuals from Staff playing to the crowd
I ought to state now that the names I have used are not binding.
1st Estate
Made up of 4 Staffers, 2 Technical people, 1 Content, 1 Curia
At its heart, the work of Hex is split. It continues to deal with many site issue but policy issues are taken out into a new body – the first Estate. Hex also provides 4 members of the new body. They choose. Hex can also deal with minor policy discussion within its own people, major policy discussion shall be referred to the First Estate.
Hex has Primary control over the determination and enforcement of the Tos. They also deal with all Staff affairs, including the hiring and firing of Staff. Moderators do not need to be elected at the moment. I genuinely feel that they are a distraction from the Curia’s primary focus. Hex also has the technical responsibility taken away from it. It is so highly specialised that it warrants its own little department.
Hex determines its own size. Any who are not on the 1st Estate still hold an equal say withihn Hex and have admin rights that their roles demand. Hex determines who is a member of Hex. It should be as flexible as possible to take into account the demands of the Site which do change over time.
The remaining two places on the 1st Estate are the province of the Curia. One deals with Content and the other is the Curator. Both are expected to abide by the staff nondisclosure agreement. Sitting on this body confers no extra admin rights beyond those demanded by the roles elected for.
Ultimately I am hoping the site is self financing. If so, I’d like that group to have a major say over the finances too. But we need to see how that side develops.
2nd Estate – CDC
Made up of 16 elected members of the Citizenry
3rd Estate – Citizenry (1 rep)
The Citizenry – the current Curia.
The Community is lumped together in the form of the 3rd Estate. It’s political home is the Curia (I’d like that renamed to a more appropriate name). This also elects the 2nd Estate (CDC) which fulfils the duties it currently deals with. As current, Patricians should make up this group as they represent experienced members of good standing.
I also would like to make use of the Senatorii to take over the role of the Tribunal. They have a lot of experience, why not use it? I’d also like them to advise on the ToS - it is available to be changed as we see fit. This requires a seachange in terms of culture within Staff - whilst we should not be beholden to the Curia over our decisions, those retired people can still help us maintain a decent level of service. We should not be afraid to both accept this and justify our own decisions at times. I’d also ideally like them to have 4 seats on the 2nd Estate, though this was not successful before. If the Senatorii prove unable to fulfil the Tribunal function it will get reabsorbed by Hex, along similar lines to now.
4th Estate – Content (1 Rep)
Deals specifically with content. Drawn from Estates General too (writers). 3rd Estate has input via editors (perhaps choosing them?)
Content is a key area that has developed recently. Belisarius has been an amazing developer of this side. He follows on from the advances made by Justinian earlier last year. I have always taken the view that we have some amazing writers. Give it some autonomy. It still needs to be overseen by Hex. The debate ovcer the Freedom of the Press Bill demonstrates to me that this is the right approach. It is good to remember that Content published is 'Official' and mechanisms need to be emplaced to ensure that this continues. The current set up, I feel is the way to go. It protects the site and gives the 3rd Estate freedom of action.
Estates General – General membership.
General membership. The most important and least remembered group. I’d like for the old system of self proposals to be allowed just as was the case when the system started.
Technical
Current members of Staff who deal with the software directly. Very highly specialised but have access to all places. This is an area we are terribly vulnerable in as it is so specialised. I’d like for it to be thought of as being separate so that Sim and Mim get replacements who are not burdened by being Staff etc.
Of course, members here will have access to both Staff and Senior Staff forums or just Staff depending upon their experience within the site. This is left to the discretion of the concurrent technical expert (currently Sim).
Now we come to how it looks…
The two images are not alternatives but used as it was getting too complicated.
Ultimately, the guiding principle that should be implemented is:
This is not a fully fleshed out proposal but it is almost there in many ways. This attempts to deal with structure only, the processes (many of which are in place or proposed) are outside of this particular discussion (unless something is impossible to implement.
I support. I think Scottishranger is right, but with the new level of activity and no ON, I think this will work well
Originally Posted by Last Roman
- It's my smilie and I'll use it if I want to...... 
