Opening the Curia proposals

[enoch]

Still hoping for you to post yours as well Kage's, when you are next on.


The Opening the Curia thread is hard to navigate at this point. So I have suggested posting the various proposals here, and seeing who supports what.

Lets try to keep the debate in the original thread, and use this as a way to figure out who exactly supports what.



Proposal 1

A simple, non bureaucratic trial, that leaves many future options open and does not bear the risk of giving people the vote only to take it away.

Opening up the Curia Amendment

Proposer: enoch
Supporters:

Article 1 - Normal Ranks: Peregrinus

The Rank of Peregrinus is conferred automatically with registration to the TWC Forums. It confers posting rights in the General Fora. Any Peregrinus has the right to ask questions and suggest changes in the "Questions and Suggestions" Forum. In addition to this any Peregrinus who has been registered for one month, has made 20 posts and has no active warnings may post in the Curia or Prothalamos.

Decision

3 months after this has passed a vote shall be opened entitled:

Shall the 'Opening up the Curia Amendment' remain in effect?

If the vote fails to gain a simple majority of yes votes this bill shall be reverted.

[The Walrus]

Greetings Enoch,

I have mixed feelings on the 10 posts. While this will make sure modders get to participate, it will also mean spammers can get in easier or people who just post one liners. Personally, I think in a month, a modder can get more then 10 but that is just my idea and to be honest, I haven't been as active on TWC so I'm not as aware of the whole atmosphere so please correct me if I'm wrong.

PS: You misspelled "warnings" as "wanings"

EDIT: I would be more in favour of keeping the post amount at 35 or somewhere between 20-35

[enoch]

Thank you - changed it to twenty (20) - lets try to keep the debate in the open curia debate thread.

Kage, Scorch, and Ozy, anyone else, please post here for those like me who are having trouble following who supports what


I think two sentences at the top quickly identifying some of the key points of the various proposals would also be a nice addition, but summaries, not debate points, in the interest of trying to keep this thread from becoming the current open curia debate.

[Scorch]

Well this is mine. It's open to suggestions, but the number of proposals is getting rediculous. If you wish to propose a change to mine, either do it in the other thread, PM me, or add me on msn (darkrainofterror@hotmail.com). Another proposal is really unnecessary.

Opening up the Curia Amendment

Proposer: Scorch
Patrician Supporters: Perikles, Ozymandias, makanyane, Aristocrat, Garbarsardar
Citizen Supporters: sapi, Arakorn-eir

Article 1 - Normal Ranks: Peregrinus

The Rank of Peregrinus is conferred automatically with registration to the TWC Forums. It confers posting rights in the General Fora. Any Peregrinus has the right to ask questions and suggest changes in the "Questions and Suggestions" Forum. In addition to this any Peregrinus who has been registered for one month, has made 20 posts and has no active wanings may post in all the Curia forums except the voting area for Citizens. They shall instead vote in the 'Peregrinus Vote' section.

Section 2 - The Legislature

The Executive shall create within the Forum a place for all Citizens of the Site to discuss and propose Decisions that affect the governing of the Site and Site Policy, and also to amend this document. This place shall be known as the Curia and shall be a place for an exchange of ideas. As the Curia is considered the heartland of the Citizens right to influence their community, infractions of Forum Rules and the Terms of Service made in this forum are considered to be doubly serious.

Article 1 - Curia

The Curia is broken into distinct sections.

• Curia - For general discussion of governance matters. Polls are not permitted within the Curia main.
• Prothalamos - An area specifically for the proposal and discussion of legislation and decisions. Polls are not permitted within the Prothalamos
• Curia Votes - An area strictly used only for Citizens to vote on matters that bind the Curia This will be divided into two subforums:
  
  • Peregrinus Votes - An area strictly used only for non-citizens to vote on matters that bind the Curia
  • Citizen Votes - An area strictly used only for citizens to vote on matters that bind the Curia
• The Tabularium - A record chamber and archive.
• Consilium de Civitates - A special council chamber visible only to those elected members of the council as defined in Article 5

Additional areas may be added at the discretion of the Citizens following an appropriate Decision being passed.

Article 2 - Election Procedure

When the Curia is required to elect an Officer or Rank, or ratify an appoint, the following process shall be applied.

Ratification Votes

When a member has been duly appointed as a Staff Officer, and where required, ratified by his branch, the Speaker of the House shall post a poll in the Curia Citizen Votes forum. The Speaker shall state which position the member has been appointed to, and that they have been ratified by their colleagues if appropriate. The vote shall last for one week, and the member shall be ratified if they receive a simple majority majority of non abstaining votes.

Election Votes

When a Curial Election is required, the Curator shall open a qualification thread in the Curia and the Speaker of the House shall post an announcement in any relevant forum. Applicants for the vacant position must post their reasons for wishing to hold the position and any relevant qualifications in the qualification thread. Any comments, debates or off topic posting shall be deleted. The thread shall remain open for no longer than one week.

The Council may veto applicants, and should more than six members apply for any position, may shortlist six members to stand for the election. Once applications are complete, the Curator shall open a poll in the Curia CitizenVotes. The vote shall last for one week, and the member who receives the plurality of votes shall be elected.

Where more than one of the same position is vacant, the procedure is the same, and the members with the highest votes are elected. In the case of ties, a run off vote is held between the tied members lasting 3 days.

Where the vacant position is that of Curator, the Speaker of the House shall undertake the Curator's duties in relation to the vote.

Votes of No Confidence

At any time, any Citizens of this site may initiate a vote of "No Confidence" in any Officer of the Council or any elected Officer for neglect of duty or abuse of authority by posting their case within the Curia. Frivolous use of this procedure may result in disciplinary proceedings. In all cases, a vote of "No Confidence" is exempt from veto, however the vote is non binding except in the case of staff officers. The debate and vote on a motion of "No Confidence" shall follow the same procedure as that of a bill as per Article 3 below, staff ratification, in that it shall be voted upon in the Citizen voting section, but the original proposal shall be conductedposted in the Curia
Main, and not the Prothalamos.

Article 3 - Legislative Procedure

Any Citizens may post a bill in the Prothalamos for discussion. Bills can take two forms.

• Amendments - A proposal to alter the text of the Constitution. Amendments can alter or remove existing text and add entirely new text.
• Decisions - A proposal for the creation of an official Decision of the Curia on a topic relevant to the functioning of TWC. The Curia has authority to direct the Officers of TWC in this way on any topic of which the primary say has been delegated from the Officers, who shall take such Curia Decisions under strong advisement. The Speaker of the House shall determine if proposed Decisions fall within the jurisdiction of the Curia.

The procedure for proposing and voting on either bill is the same. Each version of the bill requires named support from at least* two Patricians and two Citizens and must be debated for at least three days in the Prothalamos before the proposer can request the bill be moved to vote. If, after three days the debate is still active, the Curator may delay moving the bill to vote after one month. A delay of longer than a month is at the Curators discretion only upon at least two Patricians and two Citizens requesting more time for debate.
When a bill is moved to vote, the debate thread is left open, and the Curator shall post the newest draft of the bill, the name of the Proposer, the Bill's 3 named supporters, and a link to the debate, as a new poll in both the Curia Votes forumCitizen Voting forum and the Peregrinus voting forum. All bills shall be voted on for one week. Subsequent posts in this thread, are limited to notification of having voted. Messages lobbying to vote for or against, including via Signatures and Avatars, are prohibited except in the original debate thread. All bills shall pass on the basis of a two-thirds majority of non abstaining votes in favour.]At the end of the period, the percentage results from both the citizen and non-citizen votes shall be averaged, and if the averaged percentage is higher than 66% than the bill shall pass. If any bill fails a vote, no re-vote on a substantially similar bill will be permitted within twenty-eight days.


All citizens are honour bound to not view the results of Curia Votes until they have themselves voted, unless necessary for the execution of any other duty to the site.

Upon passing a vote:

Amendents

The Curator shall post the text of all passed amendments in a stickied "Amendments" thread in the Tabularium and numbered consecutively in the order they pass. The poll is closed, moved to the Tabularium, and renamed to reflect the whether it passed or failed, and the numbers of votes. The sticked "Constitution" thread in the Curia is then edited to reflect the changes made by passed amendments. When a Section or Article is added or removed, all subsequent Sections and Articles are renumbered by the Curator appropriately.

Decisions

The Curator shall post the text of all passed Decisions in a sticked "Decisions" thread in the Tabularium and consecutively in the order they pass. The poll is closed, moved to the Tabularium, and renamed to reflect the whether it passed or failed, and the numbers of votes.

All Amendments and Decisions are considered to have immediate effect and no retroactive effect unless specifically stated otherwise.

Decision

Three months after this has passed a vote shall be opened in the Citizen Voting forum entitled:

Shall the 'Opening up the Curia Amendment' remain in effect?

If the vote fails to gain a simple majority of yes votes this bill shall be reverted.

*this section is reverted to what was originally stated by Manstein's Named Support Amendment, but misprinted in the constitution.

[Perikles]

This 2 citizens, 2 patricians thing is really annoying. Can't we interpret it in the old way? Where you need 4 supporters but 2 need to be Patricians. If Citizen and Patricians were 2 opposing factions I could understand us needing 2 of each, but as Patricians are a subset of Citizens it makes common sense that in supporting things they should also be a subset.

I support da Scorch.

[Scorch]

This 2 citizens, 2 patricians thing is really annoying. Can't we interpret it in the old way? Where you need 4 supporters but 2 need to be Patricians. If Citizen and Patricians were 2 opposing factions I could understand us needing 2 of each, but as Patricians are a subset of Citizens it makes common sense that in supporting things they should also be a subset.

I support da Scorch.

In fact, I agree, I've got 7 supporters, why should it matter that only one is a citizen?

[Tom Paine]

It doesn't, according to scottishranger, but some have withdrawn their support for this version of the Bill as opposed to that with mak's alterations to the voting procedure. I would therefore ask you to ascertain who supports THIS version - I do not.

[Arakorn]

I support, but it seems you already have more than 4 supporters...

[Scorch]

I support, but it seems you already have more than 4 supporters...

Thanks, I've added your support to the list.

And so matters aren't complicated, it won't override any changes made by this bill: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102665.

tBP, your claims have no base, as both Ozy, Mak and the current Curator have pointed out, and as such I've contacted ScottishRanger asking that this be moved to vote.

[the Black Prince]

i would point out scorch's bill is unlawful and cannot go to vote anyway, i wouldn't waste your time supporting it until he sorts that out.

for enochs bill, i'd suggest a minor change. you state that after 3 months there'll be a vote on whether to keep the changes. that vote should be restricted to citizens only. afterall, this is a trial to see if we like having the peregrinus in here, i imagine there will be few if any of them who vote to kick themselves out!

[makanyane]

i would point out scorch's bill is unlawful and cannot go to vote anyway, i wouldn't waste your time supporting it until he sorts that out.

According to the other thread the current elected curator does not think it is unlawful, I also haven't noticed any members of staff (who may have an interest) stepping forward to veto.

Scorch's bill does of course cover the second point you mentioned by virtue of the separated voting area.

Enoch's bill was never intended to give non-citizens any voting rights as he fairly clearly pointed out in the pre-amble:

A simple, non bureaucratic trial, that leaves many future options open and does not bear the risk of giving people the vote only to take it away.

you are therefore quibbling about the wrong thing, if you want it clarified add some wording to explain that his section on giving rights to "post in the Curia or Prothalamos" does not by implication also give right to vote in Curia Vote forum. I'm not sure that version actually had any supporters though so I haven't been too worried about the details in it...

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

Is remains as it was, a motion to disolve the Curia. I don't support.

[Tom Paine]

Is remains as it was, a motion to disolve the Curia. I don't support.

That is an interesting idea, but without a basis in reality - there is still a volume of differentiation between Curia members and non-Curia members in the vote, and that's the real concern, no?

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

The only factor that distinguishes citizens from non-citizens is the right to vote and participate in the Curia. If that right becomes universal then citizenship is meaningless. So you are correct. This is not a motion to dissolve the Curia. This is a motion to radically change the Curia through the degradation of Citzenship to an impotent honorific.

Regardless of what gets done with the Bill that aspect need not be supressed. It should be directly stated in no uncertain terms as it is above. If that is what the majority wishes, then so be it. However, let's not snow it over with a barage of copy editing. The bill will eliminate the exclusivity of the privileges intrinsic to the whole concept of citizenship and thereby also make the designation "citizen" superfluous and sentimental.

P.S. Ultimately, if citizen and non-citizen votes carry the same weight then the distinction that remains would simply be semantic. So the bicameral seperation of the two would be merely cosmetic.

[deRougemont]

No worries Oswald, from the looks of the vote, everyone is aware of what is going on here. It would be much easier to put up a bill killing citizenship altogether and work out the details later (these huge bills never pass; how many times is it necessary to stomp them to pieces before everyone realizes that?). The problem is, very few other than a vocal minority want such a thing. If we are going to create a democracy here, citizenship as we've known it will necessarily have to be eliminated. A mixture of voting rights for the peregrinii and citizens will simply make citizenship a farce (which is probably the point for the supporters of this bill anyway). Though I've opposed this idea, I can see the point of democratizing the site, with all it's many faults. But, if we eventually want to go down the hum-drum road of democracy, citizenship should at least be given it's due funeral rather than being pushed into the old-people's home before croaking.