CdeC Debate Thread (Closes January 8th)

[Justinian]

Post your questions to the applicants here.

[Soulghast]

What are the applicants' views on disciplinary cases? In the case the accused presents an apology along with his/her defense, would you be willing to be more lenient?

[Captain Blackadder]

In my mind it compares on the the background of the case if it is someone who has been before us many times in the past then I will view any apology for what it is, hollow. However if it was the first time that it happened and it was one of those in the heat of battle moments that many of us have I would most likely be fairly lenient in that case.

[Pøntifex]

Originally Posted by Soulghast

What are the applicants' views on disciplinary cases? In the case the accused presents an apology along with his/her defense, would you be willing to be more lenient?

I am willing to be more lenient because the apology shows that the member knows he or she did something wrong and readily acknowledges that. In my opinion this warrants some leniency.

[y2day]

An apology goes along way, but each case is different. The history of the member and the offense in question would weigh heavier on my decision. An apologetic person that has a history of infractions that warrants disciplinary action still should be dealt with harshly.

y

[Jubal_Barca]

An apology goes a long way on the internet. We need people who can acknowledge their weaknesses as well as their strengths.

[Soulghast]

What do you consider a positive contribution to the site?

Do you feel you have something to new to introduce to CdeC deliberations? If so, what?

[Captain Blackadder]

Well I shall answer the second question first if I may. I frequent some of the lesser known sections of the site such as the aar and coliseum section so in that way I will be able to pass some kind of judgement of a potential citizen from those sections better then someone who normally frequents the traditional triumvirate of pit,academy,ethos or someone who looks at the modding sections.

Now as for the first question there are many things that I consider positive contributions. These range from modding to great debating skills to working in the Helios, Eagle Standard. Been a nice pleasant person is a positive contribution. Role playing in the aars or running a game in the coliseum. Taking the time to answer a newbies questions. These are things that are positive contributions However in my mind a citizen needs a combination of these things and excelling in one of these areas is not enough.

[Jubal_Barca]

What do you consider a positive contribution to the site?
A good modder or adder of content is the highest contribution, people who run games, wirte AARs, anything like that. Also people who debate thoughtfully; we need good people for the Curia, and so we ned active people, dynamic people and thinkers. Quietly sitting around accumulating post count is fine, but it's not the only important thing.

Do you feel you have something to new to introduce to CdeC deliberations? If so, what?
A perspective based on helping the curia. I'm not here to slap 'good boy' badges on people; if someone will be a real asset to the curia that has to come before at least more minor infractions or annoyances they may have committed.

[Pøntifex]

Originally Posted by Soulghast

What do you consider a positive contribution to the site?

There are many different ways to contribute to the site. There are many paths to citizenship. There are obvious contributions like modding and debating (well, intelligently and civilly) to the more obscure contributions should as moderating a community AAR, organizing the various site competitions such as PotW. Submitting personal essays, a thesis, anything for storage in the Scriptorium. There are many, many ways to contribute.

Do you feel you have something to new to introduce to CdeC deliberations? If so, what?

As I am fighting to retain my seat, probably nothing I will bring is new, but I did have a 100% perfect voting participation record for my term. I am able to bring the same kind of energy I did when I first took office in November back to the CdeC.

[Desperado †]

What do you think makes a good debater, worthy of Citizenship?

If you had to say which was most important in a debate would you say politeness, or debating skill?

[y2day]

What do you consider a positive contribution to the site?

Even though I am not eligible for the CdeC seat. (Only been a citizen for little over 2 months, I didn't know this rule when I applied) I would like to answer the contributor question anyway. Being a Civitate, Artifex, Citizen, Mod Leader, Content Artist, and Local Moderator of 3 forums, I think I have a good idea. The guys above have listed all the positive ways to contribute, and anyone put up for citizenship has contributed. It is the job of the CdeC to judge the contribution as well as the character of the member. If you are a polite, well mannered, helpful, and intelligent contributor then you qualify for citizenship in my book.

Do you feel you have something to new to introduce to CdeC deliberations? If so, what?

As I've never been apart of a CdeC deliberation I really couldn't say. All I can say is I would hold my qualification for citizenship to a very high level, and look past friendships or disagreements in my decision.

y

[Captain Blackadder]

Originally Posted by Caradog

What do you think makes a good debater, worthy of Citizenship?

If you had to say which was most important in a debate would you say politeness, or debating skill?

Personally I think both go hand in hand a truly good debater should be polite and respect his/her opponent. However if I had to pick one I would say debating skill is slightly more important then politeness. However I would be unlikely to vote for someone who constantly belittles their opponents.

[Pøntifex]

Originally Posted by Caradog

What do you think makes a good debater, worthy of Citizenship?

See Bovril and Rome kb8.

If you had to say which was most important in a debate would you say politeness, or debating skill?

Seriously though, In a Civitate rank I look for the following qualities:

-Detailed. analytical posts that are convincing and make sense

-ability to effectively counter points

-Do so without being aggressive or breaking any rules

-Admit when you are wrong and be cordial

That being said it should ideally be a combination of the two, but moreso debating skill. granted, if the user has racked up infractions in the past for insulting other members or off topic posting, this could play a part in the judgment.

[Hunter Makoy]

Between the ranks of Civitate and Artifex, which would you consider yourself more acustomed to, and which do you feel would be harder to judge?

[Captain Blackadder]

I am more acustomed to civiates yet I feel they would be harder to judge. With artifexs there is normally a lot more evidence and it is easier to find one just has to look at the mods the person claims to have worked on and see how much of it is produced by the candidate then it is fairly simple to determine whether he/she deserves it or not. However with civiates it is harder moslty because you are focussing on something that may only happen one in 50 posts and that is true debating of a good length so in that way it would be harder to research those candidates .

[Soulghast]

When judging a citizenship applicant, would you take his potential into account? Would you just judge them on what they already have presented? (Example: A modder who has done much work on an unreleased mod.)

EDIT: Rereading the second question, I realised it didn't make much sense. What meant to ask was: In the case of modders, would you take their ongoing unreleased projects into account, or would you judge them on what they already have released?

[Pøntifex]

Originally Posted by Hunter Makoy

Between the ranks of Civitate and Artifex, which would you consider yourself more acustomed to, and which do you feel would be harder to judge?

I am more accustomed to civitates, since I spend most of my time in the CC, I know members better. I suually have already seen a member debate in the D&D forum before they come knocking on the CdeC doorstep.

Artifex are harder to judge. Many times they are new faces and I am not a modder. Sometimes it is hard to judge their work. However my colleagues are helpful and can help determine if the modding work is good. I have become better at judging the work as time went on, but it still remains difficult.

Originally Posted by Soulghast

When judging a citizenship applicant, would you take his potential into account?

To some extent yes, but citizenship is awarded for contribution, not promises of contribution.

Would you just judge them on what they already have presented? (Example: A modder who has done much work on an unreleased mod.)

Absolutely. That is a contribution.

[Hunter Makoy]

To tack on to Soulgast's question about potential. How much would you judge based on Curial participation potential? As in, if you see someone who's contributions on their own might not be enough, but who has spent alot of time in the Q&S asking worthwhile questions about how the site is run, making good proposals, etc, would you take that into account?

[Pøntifex]

Of course. An excellent example of this is Powerwizard's contributions to the creation of the AAR forum before he was even a citizen. I think its great to see members get involved in site policy and structure before they technically have the right to directly and officially voice their say.