Resignation of Citizenship Amendment

[Tom Paine]

In light of the resignations of various members from the Curia, some (eg Narses) who reversed their wishes, some who appear to have no wish to (eg makanyane), and many of whom will be missed from the Curia and by so many individuals. So, resignation methods need to be altered; a cooldown, reconsideration period during which the member may reverse their decision. All resignations shall be privately communicated between the Speaker and the member in question, to ensure those reversing their decisions are not humiliated unfairly in public or, due to fear of losing face, pressured into not changing their minds.

Section 3

Article 3 - Resignation of Citizenship

In resigning citizenship, the member PMs the Speaker notifying them of the resignation. At this point the Speaker shall remove all their ranks for the period of one month; at any time up to the end of this month the member may PM the Speaker and ask to have their rank restored to them. No penalties shall be attached to such restoration, and it shall be granted automatically.

Disciplinary actions still begin as normal against members during this month, either brought by other citizens or automatically instituted on receipt of a warning.

The present Article 3 shall be renumbered Article 4

This Amendment shall apply retroactively to all who resigned their citizenship within a month before its passage, the period of grace beginning from the time of their resignation.

Supporters: Muizer (post 4); Narses (post 7); gigagaia (post 22)

Proposed: 1941GMT, 13th August 2007

[iudas]

Support.
People say things in anger that they do not mean.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Yes, I'm that original all the time

[the Black Prince]

Ozy, you don't need to mention renumbering, its already stated in the constitution that when an article is inserted are removed all relevant articles are subsequently renumbered.

If a member resigns, he resigns, if he posted in haste, that's his problem for not thinking first. there shouldn't BE any reconsideration. once you post that fatal words, that's it, you're done. till patronisation looms.

[Denny Crane!]

Ozy, you don't need to mention renumbering, its already stated in the constitution that when an article is inserted are removed all relevant articles are subsequently renumbered.

If a member resigns, he resigns, if he posted in haste, that's his problem for not thinking first. there shouldn't BE any reconsideration. once you post that fatal words, that's it, you're done. till patronisation looms.

I didn't realise we were that vindictive

[Muizer]

Sensible measure. I support.

Now brace yourselves for the barrage of commentary about Curia being obsessed with itself and other trivialities and accusations of over-complicating the Constitution.

[the Black Prince]

you resign, you're done


why complicate it more?

[gigagaia]

Sensible measure. I support.

Now brace yourselves for the barrage of commentary about Curia being obsessed with itself and other trivialities and accusations of over-complicating the Constitution.

Not entirely true. A positive curia is one whose foundations are strong and is populated with good citizens. Just awards and legislative procedure is somewhat circular and non-productive.

you resign, you're done


why complicate it more?

Because human beings make stupid decisions in the heat of the moment which often cannot be taken back? Perhaps you've never done so, but others have, and this saves the shame of making a mistake in frustration and then either a) not being able to retract it and being forced into accepting something which could have been prevented or b) accepting shame in pleading for it back.
I don't suppose you belive that cooling off periods to stop people from doing things they regret is a bad thing?

Obviously I support.

[Tom Paine]

Because sometimes the Curia angers people in a manner which makes their blood boil and they post, in heat, that they wish to resign their citizenship and all parts thereof, but later reconsider their words, or their actions, or even the matters that led to their resignation; sometimes the Curia hacks off the most worthy-of-citizenship individuals until they resign their citizenship, and later they reconsider the actions. This should not be held against them.

[Elrond]

I support this bill - I have found that avoiding the curia allot has helped me contribute more to other parts of the site - having said that citizenship is needed to fully contribute and therefore resigning citizenship isnt exactly the wisest option. A bill like this stops people from being permeantly punished for non rule breaking actions whilst angery / upset for non TWC or TWC reasons.

[Shaun]

I would support this bill if the time was shortened to three days to a week, otherwise not. It needlessly complicates things.

[Trax]

No, if the rank holds any value for you then you will not throw it away in anger.
And if you throw it away in anger then you deserve what you get.


I wish you luck finding a new patron.

[Shaun]

No, if the rank holds any value for you then you will not throw it away in anger.
And if you throw it away in anger then you deserve what you get.


I wish you luck finding a new patron.

I agree. I totally withdraw my support for any sort of bill like this.

[Denny Crane!]

Because no one has bad days, bad times in their life which may adversely effect their decisions or moods.

I am not suggesting complete amnesty for all crimes that would be silly, but a hasty resignation. Is it so serious that if someone realises they have made a mistake that a concilliatory attitude couldn't be adopted.

[Serious Spamurai]

Because no one has bad days, bad times in their life which may adversely effect their decisions or moods.

I am not suggesting complete amnesty for all crimes that would be silly, but a hasty resignation. Is it so serious that if someone realises they have made a mistake that a concilliatory attitude couldn't be adopted.

They do, however why would that influence you to resign your citizenship? Anyway, as said prior, if you decide to get rid of your citizenship it obviously means little to you, if it means little to you, why would you want to get it back, unless you were being a drama queen when you resigned it, just the type of thing we should prevent, it devalues the value of resigning citizenship, so that the resignations of people like Mak would mean less, when in fact they should mean more.

[Shaun]

Because no one has bad days, bad times in their life which may adversely effect their decisions or moods.

And if I have a bad day and tell some "I would tell you to STFU, but that is against the rules, so I cannot and will not", the **** would still hit the fan. As a citizen, you are expected to be at a certain level of maturity and rationality, which means you are not expected to make totally rash decisions. If my dad was to be pissed off one day, and resign from work, well, too ****ing bad for him (and me) really, his choice, he had better find another job. Same with citizens: if one resigns, then it was their decision, they had better have luck finding a new patron...

I am not suggesting complete amnesty for all crimes that would be silly, but a hasty resignation. Is it so serious that if someone realises they have made a mistake that a concilliatory attitude couldn't be adopted.

As said above, we all make mistakes, yes. But that does not mean that we are all forgiven and the **** wont hit the fan.

[happyho]

I do not support this either, if someone wants to make a melodramatic statement such as resigning their Citizenship for whatever reason, they should be prepared to hold to that. Getting angry and making a post in haste is no exscuse in my opinion, a person that has attained Citizenship should be mature enough to understand that there are consequences for their actions. If they want their Citizenship back they can wait like everyone else for Patronization to be offered again, or they can appeal to a friend that is a Citizen for re patronization, no special treatment for anyone is the best way to proceed.

[Muizer]

No, if the rank holds any value for you then you will not throw it away in anger.
And if you throw it away in anger then you deserve what you get.

Personally that's how I look at it as well, but I don't presume this is some universal value that must be imposed on all citizens.

[Serious Spamurai]

You resign, you resign, if you change your mind then that's too bad, resignation isn't something to be thrown around lightly, it devalues it. I don't support.

[Simetrical]

I'm noncommittal. But change instances of "PM" to "contact" or similar. Don't overspecify. And I'd clarify that for the duration of the month they're still Citizens, i.e., the resignation just doesn't take effect for a month. Otherwise you get questions like whether people have held their rank for three months for the purposes of patronization.

[Denny Crane!]

Citizens are not by any level or rationale held to the same standards as moderators, the differences in responsibilities and perspectives are major and you should know this being a moderator.

Even moderators are forgiven mistakes, should citizens not be given the same rights?