Townhall - Curial Commentary and Chat

**Empress Meg** · April 29, 2010, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by konny

Why is this Poll considered failed? It has 35 yes votes and 32 no?

?

All bills shall pass on the basis of a two-thirds majority of non abstaining votes in favour. If any bill fails a vote, no re-vote on a substantially similar bill will be permitted within twenty-eight days.

**pannonian** · April 29, 2010, 01:26 PM

The curator needs to talk to Augustus Lucifer about a certain history forum.

**Trax** · April 29, 2010, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by pannonian

The curator needs to talk to Augustus Lucifer about a certain history forum.

Yes, let's get this thing going. It passed 2 weeks ago but nothing has happened.

**konny** · April 29, 2010, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Empress Meg

?

my bad

**Empress Meg** · April 29, 2010, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by pannonian

The curator needs to talk to Augustus Lucifer about a certain history forum.

It is indeed on my to-do list. However I wanted to finish other tasks first. I shall begin going through all of the pending bills in the Tab. shortly and seeing that they are fulfilled - including the immense Board of Historians decision.

**Augustus Lucifer** · April 29, 2010, 05:27 PM

Sounds good. Take your time, don't need to catch up for a month and a half in one day.

If you need something to cross-reference, here's a partial list:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**Empress Meg** · April 30, 2010, 11:30 AM

[Medal]Davide.cool for Phalera > Passed: Implemented
[Amendment] Clarifying the meaning of, Peregrinus > Passed: Pending
[Amendment] Voting Majority Requirement > Failed

Done.

I am updating the Annal of Amendments now. Hopefully will have that done today as well as the additions to the TWCC. There are rather a few so please have patience while I find them all and insert them into the TWCC.

After that I want to update the election lists. Because apparently people want to know when seats are open for some reason.

Decisions are last on the list but not forgotten. These aren't as pressing imo as changes to the text of the TWCC hence their lower position on the to-do list.

I hope this makes sense.

Devoirs The Empress

Edit- All Amendments have been added to the TWCC and updated in the changelog in the Tab.
Edit 2- All elections have been noted down in the election changelog.
Edit 3- Curial-lawyers: I have fixed a link in the TWCC, does that need recording in the "minor formative changelog" or is it cool to let it ride?

**Augustus Lucifer** · April 30, 2010, 06:29 PM

If a link was broken it doesn't need noting, since no text changes took place, simply a functional interface change, I'd say.

**Empress Meg** · April 30, 2010, 07:21 PM

Rgr.^

I have updated with what I hope are the correct end of term dates this.

**Augustus Lucifer** · April 30, 2010, 09:42 PM

Something for a rainy day. I ran a few queries against users with Citizen/Civitate/Artifex usergroups. The "Curial Officers, Citizens, and List of Reports" thread lists 766 users as being Citizens, presuming it's up to date. My queries return 736 users who are in one of the three usergroups. So 30 users listed either need to be added to a Citizen group(may predate groups or may be new citizens), need to be removed from the list(accidentally left in when removed/resigned), or otherwise be looked into. For cross-reference, here is the complete list of all current usernames of Citizens:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

Don't fret this just yet, as I'll look and see if I can craft an automated way to ascertain where the discrepancies lie when I can get around to it, and the users listed here may change names which would make it more confusing. For my own reference, this was the query that produced the above list:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**Augustus Lucifer** · May 01, 2010, 01:05 AM

Okay, this may be more difficult than I thought. When trying to have a script look for patron name there's four basic ways these present themselves(patron, original citizen, opifex, no record of promotion), but within those four there's at least 50 exceptions because a line is missing a ; or it's using "patron: none" instead of "original citizen" or "no record of promotion". I can see that the dates of ascension would be just as difficult to parse, because they alternate between MM/DD/YY, DD/MM/YY, MM/DD/YYYY, M. D Y, and possibly other formats.

May need to make it a pet project in the Forum Magnum to split that list up into sections and make sure all entries conform to a more standard format.

Example Format:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**Empress Meg** · May 01, 2010, 09:23 AM

Ah where would the Curia be without you AL!? How did it survive so long?

Yes, the citizen's list is not up-to-date. I do want to reformat the two stickies: Curial Officers, Citizens and List of Reports and Curator Actions and Curia Election Schedule. I found updating the CdeC term dates rather tedious yesterday thanks to the lists contained within the OP. But, that is indeed for a day when I have nothing else to do in RL and no pressing matters in the Curia.

If you like, or anyone, can start going through the citizen list now in the FM. I have no issue with help on this task! Thanks for the updates.

Cheers, Meg

**Augustus Lucifer** · May 03, 2010, 10:34 AM

Regarding the vote threads in the Curia Vote forum. By adding "." to the end of the options it will break the hack which displays the vote count on the forum display to users who have already voted. This should probably be stated clearly somewhere. In order to make the hack work, the options need to be exactly:

Yes
No
Abstain

I think the reason for this was to insure that it only displayed for specific things, those being the Curia and CdeC. Though this is also handled by forum id I believe, so I may fuddle with the hack in the future to see if I can remove some of the specificity without removing the limited cases where it happens.

**Каие** · May 03, 2010, 01:12 PM

The election schedule thread needs updating.

**Empress Meg** · May 04, 2010, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by Яome kb8

The election schedule thread needs updating.

It was done a few days ago as mentioned above. Please see here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...26071#officers

and here for future plans on this two misleading threads:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=354181

Originally Posted by Augustus Lucifer

Regarding the vote threads in the Curia Vote forum. By adding "." to the end of the options it will break the hack which displays the vote count on the forum display to users who have already voted. This should probably be stated clearly somewhere. In order to make the hack work, the options need to be exactly:

Yes
No
Abstain

I think the reason for this was to insure that it only displayed for specific things, those being the Curia and CdeC. Though this is also handled by forum id I believe, so I may fuddle with the hack in the future to see if I can remove some of the specificity without removing the limited cases where it happens.

Right. I don't want to use it hence the placement of the period. (I discovered it one day when I was trying to teach myself how to use this here forum. I still get confused hahha.) I find it frivolous and unnecessary. If you cannot wait 7 days to see if something passes or not, I just don't know what to tell ya. For those of you who don't like this, feel free to spam my inbox with hatemail.

Finally. I realize that the CdeC report is due and it shall be done! I do work two jobs so my time is tight, but know that it will be done before this weekend.

**Augustus Lucifer** · May 04, 2010, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by Empress Meg

Right. I don't want to use it hence the placement of the period. (I discovered it one day when I was trying to teach myself how to use this here forum. I still get confused hahha.) I find it frivolous and unnecessary. If you cannot wait 7 days to see if something passes or not, I just don't know what to tell ya. For those of you who don't like this, feel free to spam my inbox with hatemail.

Makes no difference to me either way, just making sure the technical reasoning was understood.

**Gaius Baltar** · May 04, 2010, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by Augustus Lucifer

Regarding the vote threads in the Curia Vote forum. By adding "." to the end of the options it will break the hack which displays the vote count on the forum display to users who have already voted. This should probably be stated clearly somewhere. In order to make the hack work, the options need to be exactly:

Yes
No
Abstain

I think the reason for this was to insure that it only displayed for specific things, those being the Curia and CdeC. Though this is also handled by forum id I believe, so I may fuddle with the hack in the future to see if I can remove some of the specificity without removing the limited cases where it happens.

from Article III of the Constitution.

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.

I'm not sure of the previous discussion on this, its seems to me this was debated and no real conclusion reached, other than it seems valid to view the vote tally after you have voted. This seems clear from this passage in the constitution.

This is the kind of thing, dealing rather specifically with the voting process, that needs to be discussed before altering.

**Augustus Lucifer** · May 05, 2010, 01:06 AM

I think you misread my post. It should be clearly stated somewhere that in order for the hack which displays vote results to work, the three options need to be exactly (Yes No Abstain). I haven't modified anything concerning the hack, the reason they aren't showing is because the poll options have "." on the end of them, which was a choice made by the Curator and is within her remit to make given the current wording.

**M D** · May 05, 2010, 07:49 AM

Curators can vote on Curia Vote threads right?

**Gaius Baltar** · May 05, 2010, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by Augustus Lucifer

I think you misread my post. It should be clearly stated somewhere that in order for the hack which displays vote results to work, the three options need to be exactly (Yes No Abstain). I haven't modified anything concerning the hack, the reason they aren't showing is because the poll options have "." on the end of them, which was a choice made by the Curator and is within her remit to make given the current wording.

Ok, yes. I would still object to the idea that " was a choice made by the Curator and is within her remit to make given the current wording". An overstep here as I don't see any wording that would allow her to unilaterally change the poll procedures.

Thread: Townhall - Curial Commentary and Chat

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Re: Townhall

Posting Permissions