Life, Liberty, and Fraternity?

[Sosobra]

No way. Why?

1.) Most regular members don't know enough about TWC to guide it appropriately.
2.) N00bs will come in.
3.) Too much tolerance for stupidity will start to become the rule.

Those very perceptions of the General membership are what is wrong with the current system and its members.

[Professor420]

1.) Most regular members don't know enough about TWC to guide it appropriately.

For every citizen who knows, I can find you a general member. For every member that doesn't, I can find you a citizen. Furthermore I think you'd have trouble demonstrating that citizens have done any job at all in guiding TWC.

2.) N00bs will come in.

We have a "noob" as our chief of moderation right now. Because someone is a noob does not mean he is talentless or potentialless or not able. Because someone is a citizen does not mean someone doesn't stay a perennial 'noob.'

3.) Too much tolerance for stupidity will start to become the rule.

Stupidity in matters of what? Have you looked at the bills up for debate recently?

The current system, as ineffectual as it is, is still prudent in the way that it goes about changing the forums.

The Curia changes the forums? Can you point out where?

The forum hierarchy has developed into an experienced, and tactful organization. The only fault in the system is the bureaucracy, which I have so adamently gone against.

What does this have to do with the Curia?

The fact is, the Curia is largely ineffective and irrelevant; it was tried as a meritocracy, and failed, it had no more 'trust' and took no more active attempt to improve the site than before, and after. So it is in a lurch; it is an RPG. We can either try, again, a meritocracy and have a Curia full only of civil servants and active Patricians, or, we can let everyone in the Curia in order that it can claim some actual mandate (if not one of merit or ability than one of democracy and majority and representation of the membership). Citizenship works in one facet only, in its first plateau on the way to staff and Hex and providing a pool of volunteers for officer and staff positions. As a governing body the Curia and citizens are woefully ineffective and irrelevant.

[happyho]

Voted no. Not because I am an elitist, nor because I feel that there should be fewer Citizens, I voted no for several reasons. One of the reasons is that quite a few members don't deserve Citizenship (spammers, flamers, trolls and such) others don't want Citizenship or to be Patronized. Another reason I felt it was necessary to vote no is that if Citizenship was universal, if it were simply given out arbitrarily after a certain amount of time it would lose all meaning to the person that gained the rank.

Now the way the system works, if a member is offered Patronization and passes his or her vote it actually means something to that person. At least that is how it was for me, when I was offered Patronization it was a surprise and an honor. It certainly would not have meant anything to me if it was a rank that was given out for simply having a pulse and visiting the site occasionally. If anything I would likely have been one of those members that eschewed having the rank if it were universal.

If there is anything that I feel should be almost universal, it is the privilege to vote in the Curia. The Curia vote section should be opened up to the regular members that are in good standing here at TWC. Since these are votes that may impact their experience here at TWC, I think that it would only be fair to give those members that want to vote the ability to do so. Also seeing which regular members left their 'voted' would perhaps be a good way to see who has an active interest in helping make TWC better. As it is now, not enough people that can actually participate in the discussions in the Prothalamos, or vote in the Curia vote section actually do. On average most proposals up for vote rarely generate more than 30 to 40 votes unless it happens to be a 'hot' issue.

Now the only question is, is having the ability to vote in the Curia something that would interest regular members here? If there isn't an interest then opening up the voting section of the Curia would be pointless. I've stated this several times before, if someone has the right to vote in the Curia and doesn't use it what is the point in giving them such a right or privilege?

One final note,

1.) Most regular members don't know enough about TWC to guide it appropriately.

They can undoubtedly learn, you sound quite the elitist with that statement, must be that Divus badge's fault. I think you need to give regular members more credit, they're not all drooling Neanderthals after all.

2.) N00bs will come in.

Isn't that what happens when someone is Patronized and makes his first post
here?

3.) Too much tolerance for stupidity will start to become the rule.

Um, whatever.

[Scorch]

Perhaps a compromise could be reached then. Allow member participation in government decisions, but still have some form of "civiateship" for distinguished members.

We're not trying to steal your "elite status" here. Just trying to improve government.

I find two things about this post ironic:

a) You act like you are in a position to compromise with the people who run this site and pay for it to still be here every day.

b) You act like you have a supporting party. In both ranks, the no votes outweigh the yes.

Citizenship should never be automatically granted, but funnily enough, I find myself agreeing with Prof.

This is not an issue of ethics, liberty, fraternity, equality, happiness, life, or fairness. Nor is it about whether we should have a democracy or not, or a meritocracy or not (well it is, but not directly).

It is about whether there can and should be a government where the members have a say. As it stands, the Curia is woefully ineffectual as a site government. A popular mandate by the membership of TWC is one of two ways to correct this; the other way, a meritocracy, has been tried to varying degrees and has failed miserably each time.

I should add, citizenship wouldn't, in effect, have a baring on the ideas of opening up the Curia and extending the vote to all members. I feel citizenship works as a fine way of culling prospects for staff and officer positions, but as far as site governance goes, it is a complete and utter failure.

If we were to open up the Curia (under heavy supervision and some limitations of course) then we could solve the problem of under-representation and give the Curia some recognizable power. Citizenship would stay as it is, except access to the Curia wouldn't be a perk. Perhaps you may need Citizens to propose and support bills, but everyone should be able to debate and vote.

That would subsequently render the Patrician rank useless.

Does anyone know what happened to that bill? I thought you said you were giving it a go Prof, but if you don't, perhaps I might.

[Sosobra]

I find two things about this post ironic:

a) You act like you are in a position to compromise with the people who run this site and pay for it to still be here every day.

b) You act like you have a supporting party. In both ranks, the no votes outweigh the yes.

Citizenship should never be automatically granted, but funnily enough, I find myself agreeing with Prof.



If we were to open up the Curia (under heavy supervision and some limitations of course) then we could solve the problem of under-representation and give the Curia some recognizable power. Citizenship would stay as it is, except access to the Curia wouldn't be a perk. Perhaps you may need Citizens to propose and support bills, but everyone should be able to debate and vote.

.

So a lack of 3 stars prohibit him from making suggestions, interesting i wasn't aware that we needed to pay for TWC....

Like I said earlier in the thread if this poll is to mean anything it should be posted on the front page so every one has a chance to see it when they come to the site.

Why exactly are heavy supervision and limitations needed? If someone can post surly they can have some sort of input onto the workings site at par with everyone else (excluding the owner and staff) .

[Scorch]

So a lack of 3 stars prohibit him from making suggestions, interesting i wasn't aware that we needed to pay for TWC....

Like I said earlier in the thread if this poll is to mean anything it should be posted on the front page so every one has a chance to see it when they come to the site.

Why exactly are heavy supervision and limitations needed? If someone can post surly they can have some sort of input onto the workings site at par with everyone else (excluding the owner and staff) .

Perhaps I should have been more clear.

When I mean heavy supervision I mean the increases in numbers will require more moderation in the Curia, and I'm sure that the moderating staff will be able to look out for it. By limitations I meant that, well, TWC is a meritocracy. Citizens are the more experienced members of the community, and as such should be the ones that are able to pledge their support to bills (right now it's Patricians only, but since that rank will need to go along with these reforms, the right should be conferred to Citizens).

Also, it is a means of safeguard. That is, with the curia open to all, it is fairly susceptible to duplicate accounts. As a postcount limit would restrict many modders who work hard at TWC, perhaps the best way of countering this is to allow only Citizen support of a bill to be recognised. So a normal member can propose it, but a Citizen must support it first.

If you check the 'open curia for all' thread in the Curia in the next few hours you may see a draft proposal based on that idea.

[happyho]

Citizens are the more experienced members of the community, and as such should be the ones that are able to pledge their support to bills (right now it's Patricians only, but since that rank will need to go along with these reforms, the right should be conferred to Citizens).

Scorch, your wrong. Weren't you aware of this proposal having already passed awhile ago?

[Scorch]

Scorch, your wrong. Weren't you aware of this proposal having already passed awhile ago?

Oh, I'm mistaken then. I wasn't actually aware of that. Hmm ....

Nonetheless, the point stands that Citizens support should be carry more weight, if not for the fact that people could create multiple accounts for supporting their own proposals and rush it through the system.

Perhaps a minimum post count of 10 or something would make the system less susceptible to duplicate accounts for voting? Or else it would take some hard work by the moderating team to check duplicate IP addresses.

[Atterdag]

Why would this be a problem? TWC already has many, many ranks. Why does having one less rank present such a huge problem?

Citizenship is something that encourages good posting and hard work.
If you post well, post articles/AAR's or work for the Eagle Standard or the Helios you'' eventiually be spotted and granted citizenship.

This system along with the curia is what makes TWC uniqe. If you don't like it then go to one of the other v-bulletin boards.

[Siblesz]

If you guys think that the Curia is a mess now, then imagine how much of a mess it will be if it's open to everyone. Now, people misunderstand me. They think I call all general members n00bs. They aren't. Some are pretty well-natured and smart chaps. But from what I've been seeing in the Thema Devia as of late, most aren't. This concerns me. For those who go on rebelling for egalitarian ideals and who follow utopian philosophies, there is little good that would come from letting everyone in. If apathy is high now, it will be higher with universal suffrage. If ignorance is the rule now, it will be the definite rule with universal suffrage. If the bureaucracy is bad now, it will be worse later. Everything will be less manageable. It will be overwhelming to control such a system. For those who call me elitist, I wouldn't be so quick to judge. I may have a a divus badge, but I don't give a damn about this forum anymore. To me, it's all the same. The forum has changed so much already that I almost can't recognize it. But if you actually think that there is anything to gain by giving suffrage to all members, then you are clearly deluded. There'd be nothing to gain, except more trouble, more red tape, and more inefficiency.

I do agree that the Curia is pretty much useless. It's always been that way. That is why I tend to never post in it. But the Curia is not there to change things, it's there to train members. I have nothing against new members, but new members bring both good and bad things to a forum. Most who arrive are untame. They need to learn the system. That is my only point. Every member can reform himself, but this needs to be done through a cogent process that necessitates a system of merits. I was once like many of the members here. I flamed, I spammed, and I trolled. After a bit of training, however, I adapted quite well and became well-mannered and more of a logical thinker. I learned to respect others.

That is what the Curia is for: to help members understand respect, and to instill in them a sense of motivation and loyalty so as to help the forum incease its quality of posting. It's a training ground, not a democracy. It was intended as such, and it remains such. So keep deluding yourselves with your ideological dreams, but the Curia was not built from ideology, but for practical reasons. It may be a mostly useless institution for direct change, but the Curia has trained countless members to contribute extensively to site progress, and it has provided the basis for what it means to be a TWC member. No one can deny this, and the only thing that can change that is a move such as universal suffrage, which would undoubtably act as a virus to the very premises that have made this site as successful and intelligent as it is (or as it was).

[deRougemont]

-Everyone should be a citizen. Ranks, punishments, etc. will be discussed in the bulletin points below...

If we went this far, there would be no need for a rank system at all.

-"Naturalization". In many forums, you don't get full membership until after a period of time and post count (This is done to prevent spammers). I think this is a wise policy to adapt. Everybody is a citizen, but not until he's proven he's not a spam-bot, or some other unpleasant character who needs to be banned.

Unnecessary, since the current citizen system already does this filtering work.

We could take this a step further, and maybe have an "initiation" that everybody needs to go through. I'm not sure what that would entail, but it could be an interesting idea to incorporate into the system so people value their citizenship more.

Again, this is what the current citizen system does.

-Other ranks. Of course recognizing merit is still a good idea. Many v-bulletin boards (If you need an example, browse the link in my sig) have "advanced members" - people who have put unusual effort into the operation of the forum. We could keep the higher ranks, like "senatorii", in recognition of productive people. This way, nobody gets left out in the cold, but we still recognize hard work (Not to mention it's fun to get a cool title )

The current rank system does this as well.

-"Probation". We don't have perma-bans (Which I think is a wise decision). Perhaps it would be worth experimenting with probation - stripping a particularly troublesome person of his citizenship for a certain period of time. That would mark him as bad news, and perhaps deter him from future infractions. This idea might be too easy to abuse, but I think it's worth thinking over if we adapt widespread citizenship.

We do this as well, though we do it better: if you have warnings, etc., you must wait until they are spent to become a Citizen.

The current system has already tackled all your points Behemond. We are just much more careful with who becomes Citizen. Becoming one is, however, a fairly easy process. You just have to want it first, and then work for it. You are essentially proposing that no one should have to do anything for the site to become a citizen?

[Lord Bohemond]

If we went this far, there would be no need for a rank system at all.

That's a very strange line of reasoning - considering there are many forums on the web that don't abuse the lower ranking members, yet still have a ranking system.

Unnecessary, since the current citizen system already does this filtering work.

Wrong.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=97407

Again, this is what the current citizen system does.

The vast majority of the users aren't even given the opportunity at all.

The current rank system does this as well.

Try to pay attention.

"We could keep the higher ranks, like "senatorii", in recognition of productive people. This way, nobody gets left out in the cold, but we still recognize hard
work (Not to mention it's fun to get a cool title:wink: )"

We do this as well, though we do it better: if you have warnings, etc., you must wait until they are spent to become a Citizen.

If everybody was a member to begin with, obviously that wouldn't work.

The current system has already tackled all your points Behemond. We are just much more careful with who becomes Citizen. Becoming one is, however, a fairly easy process. You just have to want it first, and then work for it. You are essentially proposing that no one should have to do anything for the site to become a citizen?

Let's be realistic about this. The vast majority of the "citizens" I've seen are no smarter or better posters than everyone else. The curia is a mess. Your system has failed in every respect, except to make some people feel more "elite" than others. That's all it has accomplished.

If this is your idea of success, I hate to imagine what your idea of failure is.

[deRougemont]

Let's be realistic about this. The vast majority of the "citizens" I've seen are no smarter or better posters than everyone else.

Regardless of whether that's true or not, they will be patronized, or should ask for it themselves if they have interest in being citizens.

The curia is a mess.

Really? That's news to me. Please inform as to why it is a mess, and how allowing everyone to vote will solve the problem...

Your system has failed in every respect, except to make some people feel more "elite" than others. That's all it has accomplished.

Really, one of the most successful game forums on the web, and the most popular for the Total War series? That's strange logic.

If this is your idea of success, I hate to imagine what your idea of failure is.

If this is your idea of failure, I hate to imagine what your idea of success is.

[Professor420]

If apathy is high now, it will be higher with universal suffrage. If ignorance is the rule now, it will be the definite rule with universal suffrage.

What's your point? We already have a majority of apathetic voters (see: Asterix's election, and the Tribunal elections), who don't read discussion, at least we can bring some mandate to that apathy and ignorance by saying 'this is what the people want.'

But if you actually think that there is anything to gain by giving suffrage to all members, then you are clearly deluded. There'd be nothing to gain, except more trouble, more red tape, and more inefficiency.

Right now the Curia decides nothing and things outside of the Curia barely fall into its remit. There is nothing to lose, as the Curia is already broken as a governmental entity, increased beaurocracy or any such thing like that is irrelevant. It has been sitting on rock bottom for a long time now, please, no empty words about how it can fall any lower. This provides one of the two choices we have to actually make the Curia more important, not less. It is now a glorified RPG, by your very description.

I do agree that the Curia is pretty much useless. It's always been that way. That is why I tend to never post in it. But the Curia is not there to change things, it's there to train members.

Perhaps you need a refresher course by reading the original few months of the Curia? The evidence speaks against your recollection.

That is what the Curia is for: to help members understand respect, and to instill in them a sense of motivation and loyalty so as to help the forum incease its quality of posting.

And, once again, I fail to see how allowing everyone into the Curia would damage that function, while it stands to right the ship pertaining to Curia-government. You would call the idea a virus, without an explanation how it would work to destroy what you have said is a good thing?

[Atterdag]

That's a very strange line of reasoning - considering there are many forums on the web that don't abuse the lower ranking members, yet still have a ranking system.

Abuse?



TWC is an uniqe forum. If we change it to your version, TWC will be just another forum and lose its charm.

[Noble Savage]

No I love it the way it is ,I really want the badge and If I get it ,it should mean something. I know it may seem a little sad for a father of 3 to want something like a little badge for a site which has no use or wealth in real life,but I need something to occupy me in between working in a mundane enviroment,heavy uni work and looking after my 3 cherubs. This site is different and very intresting ,please don't change it.

[Tom Paine]

That's a very strange line of reasoning - considering there are many forums on the web that don't abuse the lower ranking members, yet still have a ranking system.

How the.... blithering heck do we abuse our lower ranking members?

[Simetrical]

Also, I pressed the wrong one.

DELETE FROM pollvote WHERE userid=7757 AND pollid=3622;

[the Black Prince]

we don't abuse the lower ranks. we simply reward the more senior ranks. Lower ranks here can do pretty much everything i can do on all the other forums i'm a member of. the citizens get to do more. they get to help run the forum. thats special, and thats reserved for those who have earned it through contributing to the community.

[MasterOfNone]

I thought - for what it's worth - I might share my view.

I believe people come to TWC for different reasons.

Over time the "common community" of TWC has taken on a life of its own, so much so that areas of the forums that have absolutely nothing to do with the series of TW games, modding or even history, have become as popular as (or even more popular than) those things related to Total War itself.

So, the questions in my mind are - is this a site for people who happen to also like the TW series? Or is it a site for people to chiefly discuss TW-related matters? Perhaps a third question might be: Is it both?

And this brings up citizenship. What is it one is a citizen of? A modding community? A gaming community? Game research? General off-topic discussion? (is there such a thing as off-topic in TWC???)

If citizenship and offices are related to contribution toward the community then what is that community and how is a contribution determined?

It feels very much to me like joining a club where you get automatic membership in two other clubs which you may or may not be interested in - or you may not even agree with in some aspects at least.

Does there have to be citizenship at all? What does it really mean to be a citizen? Are those benefits, or does it only have an application, to certain aspects of the site? Is there an assumption that people use TWC as only a social/debating area?

Isn't the contribution to the TW community as important as a contribution to the TWC community? Should not awards be independent of any contribution specifically to TWC and, if so, how does this relate to citizenship?

Lots of questions. I don't pretend to know all the answers, but I am not sure they are as easily answered as some might suspect when everything is taken into consideration.

MasterOfNone (not a citizen of TWC)