Change to citizenship requirements

[iudas]

Proposer: [user]SirPaladin[/user]
Supporters: [user]Thanatos[/user], [user]Trax[/user], [user]-BulletproofTurban-[/user], [user]Arakorn-eir[/user], [user]Narses[/user]

I would like to state that [user]Trax[/user] helped me decide the details of this bill.

Citizens

Contributing members of TWC have the opportunity to become a Citizen of the Forum as per Article 2 below. Once a member becomes a Citizen, they can then choose between 3 different badges. Artifex, designed for those who are modders, Civitate, designed for those who have contributed to the debating side of the Site, whether in TW or CC, and Citizen, for those who associate with both.

To qualify for Citizen, a member must have at least two hundred and fifty posts, been a registered member for one two months, and have no warnings within the last three months. The member's contributions must be consistent and repeated, the validity of which is to be decided by the Consilium de Civitate.

All Citizens have the rights associated with Peregrinus, but in addition may post within the Curia, subject to the procedures in Section 2; may post with the Symposium and may patronise other members as per Article 2

I also added an exception to the Opifex section because a member modder may have an insufficient number of posts but deserve an honour (such as grumpyoldman, the modder behind the .mesh conversion application, which was extremely beneficial to the modding community). I would personally nominate such a member for Opifex if citizenship has not yet been granted.

Opifex

To qualify as an Opifex, the nominee must have served the Total War Center or Total War Community with exceptional input to any of the boards or mods in any capacity other than that of a Staff Officer. A member of any Rank is eligible to receive an Opifex award, but must also meet the criteria to become a Citizen have no active warnings. His nomination must also be seconded by an elected member of the Consilium de Civitate.

Qualifying nominees shall have their nomination posted in the Prothalamos and will be moved to vote as per the procedure in Section 2 Article 3. Once moved to they shall be voted upon for a period of one week and require a two-third majority of non-abstaining votes to achieve the award. If the nominee was not already a Citizen, this Rank shall also be conferred upon them if they pass. A nominee who fails to pass his vote is not eligible to re-nominated until three months have passed.

The reasoning behind this is that I don't want the citizen rank to lose its value. Recent events have shown that someone put forward only for being able to become a moderator, with no visible contributions, is granted citizenship by the CdeC. I hope that the phrase I added might at least remind them to choose accurately.
Higher requirements would filter candidates more easily. I do not believe that anyone, with the exception of people who come up with revolusionising tools and such, can contribute enough in only one month and fifty posts. Two hundred and fifty and three months might be a bit too much, but only a very good/lucky member can achieve citizenship in lower post count and time. Even so, that member surely must extend his/her contributions before reaching the magic post count and time limit.

I humbly ask anyone opposing this to logically state why they oppose it. I didn't like how most people voted against the citizenship change bill without even posting in the debate thread. It'd only suggest a lack of reason or mental ability of theirs... which I really doubt is the case.

I also humbly ask the Black Prince, our curator, to keep every supporter's name on the list, should this be moved to the voting section. Yes, only three supporters are required, but nowhere is removing all other supporters' names mentioned.

[Thanatos]

This sounds good - I support.

[Trax]

I support.

However:

To qualify for Citizen, a member must have at least two hundred and fifty posts, been a registered member for one three months,

I think we agreed on 2 months, this way the bill is more likely to pass IMHO


Originally posted by Trax in PM to SirPaladin

The forum has grown in many ways over the years although perhaps not in quality
As you can see the increase in posting activity was 8x between dec 2003
when the Curia was created and sept 2004. Only God and the admins know how much has TWC grown since then.

I personally would like to see 500 posts and 3 months as a requirement, but I doubt it could ever pass, so what about 250 posts and 2 months.
It seems to me like a reasonable compromise.

[iudas]

Yes we did. I'll adapt that accordingly. It was more of a mistake.

[RZZZA]

I dont see the purpose of this bill, if the purpose is to up the minimum requirements then why dont we REALLY up them? going from a 50 post minimum req to a 250 post minimum req doesnt impress me.

I'm one of the minority who is really extreme on the minimum reqs, should be at least 500 posts imo, probably even 1,000. The registration time doesnt really worry me, just up the post count requirement by a lot and I'll be happy.

[Trax]

So when it comes to vote you will say NO?

[RZZZA]

probably not, im just saying what I think.

[Trax]

probably not, im just saying what I think.

If the numbers you mentioned find greater support we may change ours.

I am not satisfied by the CdeC. I believe an upping in basic requirements would do a better job than simply trusting the CdeC to make good decisions.
I also added a line as a reminder to the CdeC...

This proposal will make their job easier, the civitate canditates will now have a better chance to reveal their true nature.

[iudas]

250 is fine for now.
500 or 1000 is a bit too much. Many received their citizenship around 500 and they still deserved it (according to me, at least).
IMO the registration time is at least as important. Someone who registered in 2005 but only has 78 posts is clearly not too much of an active member, but registration date is nevertheless a rather precise indicator on experience.

[Publius]

Funny how a few months ago there was a big push to make them lower. Now let's see if we want to see-saw back in the other direction...

For the record, I think this is an ill conceived bill. Post count as some kind of quality control mechanism is somewhat unecessary given you have the CdeC.

[Tom Paine]

Funny how a few months ago there was a big push to make them lower. Now let's see if we want to see-saw back in the other direction...

For the record, I think this is an ill conceived bill. Post count as some kind of quality control mechanism is somewhat unecessary given you have the CdeC.

I cannot disagree. I would like to further add that this would prevent some of the outstanding modder members of the site from becoming citizens; the fact that they do not post has no bearing on their contributions to the site as modders, since modding does not require one to post or have a high post count. This bill is illconceived and attempts to use the wholly wrong criterion to up the quality of citizens, and is therefore overall appalling. Post count is useless as a measure of quality or ability.

[iudas]

I am not satisfied by the CdeC. I believe an upping in basic requirements would do a better job than simply trusting the CdeC to make good decisions.
I also added a line as a reminder to the CdeC...

[Publius]

I am not satisfied by the CdeC. I believe an upping in basic requirements would do a better job than simply trusting the CdeC to make good decisions.
I also added a line as a reminder to the CdeC...

What are you unhappy with?

And "simply trusting"? They are, after all, a peer elected council that you and every other person can vote for, or potentially run for yourself. The terms are finite so it is not to say there is no accountability.

[iudas]

What are you unhappy with?

And "simply trusting"? They are, after all, a peer elected council that you and every other person can vote for, or potentially run for yourself. The terms are finite so it is not to say there is no accountability.

I am unhappy with the number of people with very little contributions that are given citizenship.
I can't say I think the people in the CdeC are bad. I wouldn't dare say that. Just that the habits that have become rules are wrong. The CdeC must also become harsher. We are a big community. It wouldn't work to make just everyone active citizen...

@Ozy
It's useless alright, but since the CdeC is doing a bad job, what can I do? The CdeC won't listen to me...

[RZZZA]

If the numbers you mentioned find greater support we may change ours.

they wont find greater support, I've always been in the radical minority on these post count issues. Frankly, I'm always a little put off by these citizens who ive never seen or heard of before with like 300 posts.

Whats the rush? Stick around, post some more, get known, then become a civitate. I'm a big advocate of the "community-feel", I like a board where everyone knows everyone else, and any legislation that I feel helps that along is legislation I will most likely support.

[RZZZA]

while we're at it, members who contribute nothing to the community except mods should not pass the civ vote either, imo.

Mods are great, thank you very very much for modding but theres more to civitateship than that. I'll take someone I see hanging around the TD often and saying good things as a civitate over some 50 post anonymous guy who, granted made an excellent mod but who nobody knows and who isnt interested in the politics.


comes down to what you personally think civitateship should mean

[Tom Paine]

Name some, then, SirPaladin. And remember, when you do, that postcount is not contribution. I could run a thousand posts up over the course of a few days, a week at the outside, without a meaningful one amongst them.

-Bpt-, I totally disagree. Modding is as important to the site as posting. Citizenship is not about politics or participating in the site politics. Its about rewarding all forms of contribution. Simple.

[iudas]

Name some, then, SirPaladin. And remember, when you do, that postcount is not contribution. I could run a thousand posts up over the course of a few days, a week at the outside, without a meaningful one amongst them.

Some what? Please be clear.
And if you mean some citizens who don't deserve the rank, I do not wish to insult them...

[Tom Paine]

Some what? Please be clear.
And if you mean some citizens who don't deserve the rank, I do not wish to insult them...

You have just insulted every citizen who became one with less than 250 posts or less than 2 months on the site by saying they are simply unworthy. At least this way you are insulting fewer people, no?

[iudas]

You have just insulted every citizen who became one with less than 250 posts or less than 2 months on the site by saying they are simply unworthy. At least this way you are insulting fewer people, no?

I don't think I have insulted them. I didn't call them stupid, idiotic, retarded. I just called them unworthy of citizenship on TWC. My life wouldn't be ruined if someone who's been citizen for less than a month called me unworthy of citizenship...

@Trax
That would be too subjective... and too much if we deal with meaningful posts.
50 MEANINGFUL (read carefully) posts would be more than fine to me...