Constitution placement - removal of unnecessary restrictions

[makanyane]

For existing text of section in a manner I can easily link to see:
http://www.twcenter.net/wiki/TWC_Off...tion#Amendents

Now apart from the fact that it would be nice if eventually we could legally put an 'm' in 'amendents', that section seems unnecessarily restrictive, and probably unintentionally so about where the constitution should actually be placed. I'm proposing this amendment in the hope that the official version could get moved to the Wiki so everyone can easily view the changes made between various versions, see: http://www.twcenter.net/w/index.php?...835&oldid=7825
for how changes are visible in history (please ignore some of the aarggh got it wrong again from me trying to set up the thing originally) it is rather a long document!

Anyway suggestion is to change the amendment section purely so it doesn't specify where constitution is kept, to provide some flexibility on this. I don't want to change it to say it must be on Wiki in case there is some unforeseen problem with that later (or we can't persuade curator to learn to edit it - though looking at all the /Fieldset - /Legend bumf I can't imagine its any worse!)
For posting segments here Mimirswell did also post in the opening the consitution thread discussion about how you can copy text easily from Wiki to forum by using a WYSIWYG setting in preferences (that post got lost in forum glitch last week so I can't point you to that at moment - hopefully he'll repeat info. later)

Option one just changing constitution bit:

Amendments

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.

Option two make whole thing more flexible:

Amendments

The Curator shall post a compiled list of the texts 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 a compiled list of the texts 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.

[Simetrical]

Support option two. I'd rephrase to make it clearer/more flexible, maybe I'll give details tomorrow. If I don't find the time, this version's fine too.

[the Black Prince]

well, the missing m can be added to the list of formative changes, i'll do it today along with all the others i noticed and tried to fix last week, thats not a problem

yes, the section is very explicit and restrictive. its intentionally written that way. In the past, and i won't name names, we've had (pro-)curators who, however admirably they did the rest of the job, had problems keeping records and archives up to date. When the legislative reform was undertaken by myself and profler on Sulla's instruction, part of that reform was setting up an archive system where it would be possible not only to view the current constitution in its most modern form, but also be able to compare it to the original version, and see a list of all the amendments as a sort of change log, so you could look back and see whats changed, and if the change has been an improvement or not.

subsequent to Profler moving on, that Archive system fell into disuse probably because there's a lot of editing involved in closing a successful vote, as opposed to simply moving it the tab.

The codified version was created to ensure a consistent system of archiving was used and that these records were maintained. Looking at the tabularum, i think its definately been successful.

Obviously though, it was created before the wiki project either existed, or grew to such prominence.


to be honest mak, i'd prefer a third option, that maintains the current forum based archives but includes a line in both Decisions and Amendments requiring the Curator to update "such other records and archives as our maintained that include the Constitution"

That then requires him to also keep the wiki updated, any other future archive we may create, or none at all if (and i hope not) the wiki fails or is closed.


this gives you an option 3 of

Section 2 Article 3

Upon passing a vote:

Amendments

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. The Curator shall additionally update all other such records and archives that relate to the Constitution. 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, and shall update any other records or archives that relate to Curial Decisions. The poll is closed, moved to the Tabularium, and renamed to reflect the whether it passed or failed, and the numbers of votes.

EDIT
missing m added by August 2007 Minor Formative Changes

[Simetrical]

When the legislative reform was undertaken by myself and profler on Sulla's instruction, part of that reform was setting up an archive system where it would be possible not only to view the current constitution in its most modern form, but also be able to compare it to the original version, and see a list of all the amendments as a sort of change log, so you could look back and see whats changed, and if the change has been an improvement or not.

You can do that with the wiki automatically. It keeps a history of changes for each page, and by fiddling with the buttons on the history page, you can view the differences between any two revisions of your choice. So if you update the wiki, you'll automatically have your archive without updating threads at all. I would support stopping the maintenance of the forum threads altogether, due to the superiority of the wiki for this kind of thing.

[makanyane]

hmm, @tBP your option 3 really would require a name change to the bill, as instead of removing restrictions it just adds some more requirements...
I don't mind and in fact would be grateful if you'd undertake to update some of the non-official content on the Wiki, but don't think we need to enshrine that in legislation!

You left in the part about a stickied constitution thread in the curia, are you really objecting to the possibility that its held on the Wiki instead? Or were you just trying to keep the stuff about the numbered amendments etc...?


Intention of raising this was really to allow flexibility in the way it could be handled so things could be worked out between curator and technical staff to use the most technologically efficient and reliable option available at the time.

What I don't want to end up with is a requirement that two parallel 'official' versions of things are maintained long term, its always likely that there would be some slippage between two versions which could cause confusion, its also a bit of a waste of every bodies effort.


Please note I'm not suggesting doing anything about changing The Tabularium's main role as a storage forum for closed voting threads and the retitling of them with the passed fail is obviously something sensible and worth maintaining.

If the possibility of changing the way amendments and decisions are recorded is too contentious I'll settle for trying just to get option one through, solely related to the constitution thread. And leave anyone with more time / energy to dedicate to this to argue the case for anything else... *cough* Sim... ?

[sapi]

I like the third option - it takes the flexibility of mak's proposal, and the tradition/convenience of the current system, and puts them in one

[jimkatalanos]

I like the third option. What sapi said.

[the Black Prince]

The reason i want it enshrined so clearly that this has to be done is to prevent the possibility that a future curator won't like the fact that the position he's been elected to involves a great deal of administrative tedium and no glory. I don't want to be in a position where the maintenance of the archives ceases once again because the only person in a realistic position to do so doesn't feel like it and isn't constitutionally compelled to do so.

A lot of the Curators job is based on precedent and tradition and the fact that he's the logical person to do it, but the thinks he's supposed to do that actually need to be done i'd prefer to have enshrined. It also leads to consistency, we know that the archives will always be maintained in the same way, in the same style, no matter who holds the job.



From a technical point of view, it seems to me to be much easier to maintain things on the forum. When a bill goes to vote, the formatting is almost always in place. when the vote is completed, i can hit edit post and copy the sections, format, code and all, into the constitution. If it was on the wiki, i'd have to reformat it everytime...

Of course, i'd have to that if it was on both, but thats not such a chore if its just the wiki's copy of the constitution thats being updated, and not all the archives being on the wiki.

[Simetrical]

From a technical point of view, it seems to me to be much easier to maintain things on the forum. When a bill goes to vote, the formatting is almost always in place. when the vote is completed, i can hit edit post and copy the sections, format, code and all, into the constitution. If it was on the wiki, i'd have to reformat it everytime...

Something I hadn't thought of. Well, most bills aren't too long, and really, the formatting should be simplified anyway.

Of course, i'd have to that if it was on both, but thats not such a chore if its just the wiki's copy of the constitution thats being updated, and not all the archives being on the wiki.

See my last post. Updating the wiki will automatically create an archive of all changes. No separate archive need by maintained.

[Mímirswell]

From a technical point of view, it seems to me to be much easier to maintain things on the forum. When a bill goes to vote, the formatting is almost always in place. when the vote is completed, i can hit edit post and copy the sections, format, code and all, into the constitution. If it was on the wiki, i'd have to reformat it everytime...

No, as long as bills were formatted with the expectation of being moved to the wiki, it would be quite easy. Once you get the knack of it, you can help format bills yourself to ensure compliance with the wiki just like you ensure compliance with the current formatting now.

[Simetrical]

Then they'd look all screwed up in the proposal/vote threads . . .

[Mímirswell]

Then they'd look all screwed up in the proposal/vote threads . . .

Remove Suspension of Constitution Amendment
Proposer: Mimirswell
Supporters:

Change:

Preamble

This document exists to define the roles of the bodies that run and govern this site and community. The guiding principle of the site is to be that barring technical or fiscal obstacles, any considered mandate from the appropriate legislative body of contributing members will be implemented by the administrators.
This document is not absolutely authoritative. It is a compilation of the Curia, written and approved by the Citizens, which may become outdated or contain oversights. Furthermore, this document may be suspended by the administration by the procedure outlined herein.
Section 1 of this document and the procedure for a vote of No Confidence lie outside the remit of the Curia to modify or amend, unless such amendment is commenced and wholly authorised by the executive. The only exception to this is where an amendment changes the name of an Officer

To this:

Preamble

This document exists to define the roles of the bodies that run and govern this site and community. The guiding principle of the site is to be that barring technical or fiscal obstacles, any considered mandate from the appropriate legislative body of contributing members will be implemented by the administrators.
This document is not absolutely authoritative. It is a compilation of the Curia, written and approved by the Citizens, which may become outdated or contain oversights.

Section 1 of this document and the procedure for a vote of No Confidence lie outside the remit of the Curia to modify or amend, unless such amendment is commenced and wholly authorised by the executive. The only exception to this is where an amendment changes the name of an Officer

Wiki Conversion:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

<div class="section">
==Preamble==
This document exists to define the roles of the bodies that run and govern this site and community. The guiding principle of the site is to be that barring technical or fiscal obstacles, any considered mandate from the appropriate legislative body of contributing members will be implemented by the administrators.

This document is not absolutely authoritative. It is a compilation of the Curia, written and approved by the Citizens, which may become outdated or contain oversights.

Section 1 of this document and the procedure for a vote of No Confidence lie outside the remit of the Curia to modify or amend, unless such amendment is commenced and wholly authorised by the executive. The only exception to this is where an amendment changes the name of an Officer

</div>

That took just over two minutes to do the entire thing.

[Simetrical]

Well, yes, for a single simple deletion. I don't think it's a big issue, no. I would drop the forum thread/archive entirely, just update the wiki (with a good edit summary) and move the vote thread to the Tabularium.