New Bill Proposal: Tribunus Populus

**Obi Wan Asterix** · February 16, 2006, 10:20 AM

After consulting with several members on this idea:

I propose the following position to be created to help re-invigorate the Curia:

Tribunus Plebis

1)The Tribunus Popularis would be elected by the Curia
2) The Tribunus Popularis would have administration rights in the Curia and Consillium Publicum
3) The individual would not be staff or have access to staff forums (possibly the Alhambra?)
4) The individual would work in close co-ordination with the staff appointed Pro-Curator
5) The individual would have a special privilege to poll civitates in the Curia Vote
6) The Tribunus would work for the Curia and represent non-civitates members of TWC in the Curial government.
7) The Tribunus cannot also be a staff member but can choose to resign by making another nominations thread to replace him
8) The Tribunus can issue a writ of protest protesting any actions on TWC which can be approved or dissaproved by the Curia in the Curia Vote
9) The Tribunus can issue a writ of honour to praise any action on TWC which can be approved or dissaporved by the Curia in the Curia Vote

I feel this is a much needed gap, and we need an official who is the popular choice in the Curia to focus the debate and stimulate the Republican spirit. Off course some are presently doing this very well, but they should have a non-staff rank which would allow the Curia more focuse participation.

On the surface this may look like powerless, but I think this rank could prove very important for TWC and an influence on the staff.

Look on the Tribunus as a compromiser capable of focusing and unifying the opinion and will of the Curia into legislation.

UPDATED

**Mímirswell** · February 16, 2006, 10:57 AM

Wouldn't the powers granted in article 2 essentially displace the Pro-Curator? I'm not saying this is a bad or good thing but unless you mean just the Curia proper and not the subforums, it seems the Tribunus could move bills to vote etc. I like the overall idea though, I just need more time to think about it's many ramifications.

**Obi Wan Asterix** · February 16, 2006, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Mimirswell

Wouldn't the powers granted in article 2 essentially displace the Pro-Curator? I'm not saying this is a bad or good thing but unless you mean just the Curia proper and not the subforums, it seems the Tribunus could move bills to vote etc. I like the overall idea though, I just need more time to think about it's many ramifications.

This is essentially an attempt at compromise between various previously proposed bills. Considering that we have enterred an era where the Curia has more liberty, and the current Imperator intends to give the Curia the significant role it should have in the community. When I proposed it to members of the staff including Archer they did not oppose the idea per say. (Although off course their word will be given here and ultimatelly in the veto)

**Lusted** · February 16, 2006, 11:47 AM

Veto? Surely you mean vote don't you? In regards to this proposal, i am not sure yet, i will post again when i am sure of where i stand on this issue.

**Belisarius** · February 16, 2006, 11:53 AM

Most of this is done by an elected Republican Consul and The Curia's powers are just enough. The problem isnt with the current constitution which Archer approved and we voted in, its with it not being applied. Elect a consul, let him appoint a pro Curator and then the staff wont have to worry about the constitution.

I mean from this point on with archer back it can be applied to the letter and at that point there wont be problems and a need for yet another rank.

Christ, take a month break and what was a promising future for the curia turned to crap.

**Boudicca** · February 16, 2006, 12:02 PM

If he is elected by the curia and is their "representative" than I think it is clear that the curia can at any time elect a new representative or will at least check his work every now an then by vote?

**Tacticalwithdrawal** · February 16, 2006, 12:05 PM

I'd agree with VL for a change. If we had an elected and strong Republican Consul who was in favour of the curia and understood how important it is as the unique selling point of this site, then they'd appoint an equally dedicated pro-curator and a lot (if not all) of the problems this role is meant to sort would be solved.

We just need a good Republica consul as the first step, one that is seriously pro-curia but who is also willing to work with Archer and Sel.

**Lusted** · February 16, 2006, 12:08 PM

This is what we need - a pro curator who is very pro-curia, and likewise with the republican consul.

**Last Roman** · February 16, 2006, 12:37 PM

I support this proposal

**Belisarius** · February 16, 2006, 12:49 PM

The RC shouldt be Pro Curia or Pro Staff, he should be Pro TWC and understand that the Curia is a part of TWC that should be respected. With a RC I see no need for yet another rep, sorry asterix, I'll pay you back in that Thread in Anagennese! :wink:

**Obi Wan Asterix** · February 17, 2006, 02:59 AM

Originally Posted by Lucius Vorenus

The RC shouldt be Pro Curia or Pro Staff, he should be Pro TWC and understand that the Curia is a part of TWC that should be respected. With a RC I see no need for yet another rep, sorry asterix, I'll pay you back in that Thread in Anagennese! :wink:

Hehehe it was worth the effort then

Link please LV !

Originally Posted by Mimiswell

1)The Tribunus Popularis would be elected by the Curia.

Subject to staff veto? Can a bill state that its immune to staff veto?

No it can't

2) The Tribunus Popularis would have administration rights in the Curia and Consillium Publicum

Similar to the position Kscott was advocating; I thought it was interesting, worthy of consideration at least.

Me as well, this however give some power while still making the individual non-staff and a member of the Curia.

Originally Posted by Mimiswell

3) The individual would not be staff or have access to staff forums (possibly the Alhambra?)

Sounds good though I'd like to hear your reasoning.

Staff forums are hidden. They cause controversy. An individual who is a true rep of the Curia would be better served if he/she were not staff. Furthermore, it forces all relevant debate out of the staff forums into the Curia. This is an important point advocating openess.

Quote:
4) The individual would work in close co-ordination with the staff appointed Pro-Curator

It should probably outright replace the Curator/Pro-Curator.

Why? Would a third position not add to a much needed greater representation? Representation = democracy = "republicanism" in this case is this not what everyone wants? Make the sea of civitates more represented..... I say keep both, it would change the spirit of the Curia intenselly and make things more interesting.

Originally Posted by M.M.S.

Quote:
5) The individual would have a special privilege to poll civitates in the Curia Vote

I'm not sure I agree with this.

Think English Common Law. This makes the Tribune responsible for leveraging "neutral: opinion.

Quote:
6) The Tribunus would work for the Curia and represent non-civitates members of TWC in the Curial government.

If the Tribunus is voted on by the Curia, he would be hard pressed to serve non-civitates.

Hmmm. Interesting point, but this should be the inherent difference between Pro-Curator and Tribunus. Maybe we should extend the vote to the CP? *ducks*

Quote:
7) The Tribunus cannot also be a staff member but can choose to resign by making another nominations thread to replace him

Shouldn't staff make the thread?

Give this position a degree of independence from staff.

:

8) The Tribunus can issue a writ of protest protesting any actions on TWC which can be approved or dissaproved by the Curia in the Curia Vote
9) The Tribunus can issue a writ of honour to praise any action on TWC which can be approved or dissaporved by the Curia in the Curia Vote

Cool idea but couldn't anyone do this? Furthermore, what purpose would it have other than to show pleasure/displeasure towards the staff. As far as I can tell, those who are displeased make themselves heard with ease.

Again like English Common Law. And yes I mean vote not veto up there. It formalizes the opinion of the Curia, and I believe this would throttle legistlation because staff would react to sensible moderate proposals.

tBN and SIM

I agree with tBN and I have taken Sim's name change into account. I think this has been a great debate so far and agree with tBN on not having moderating privileges in the CP/Curia. Maybe a special Tribunus forum could be created in the CP?

**Fabolous** · February 17, 2006, 03:59 PM

I am with the group of people who fail to see a need for this. :wink:

**Savage_Swede** · February 17, 2006, 04:53 PM

Well as i understand it, overall this seems as a good proposal. But i dont really understand the need for it. But then, its a good chance that i dont have a clue whats going on :laughing:
Meh.. politics

I will stand by and watch how this debate evolves first before i give a further opinion.

**the Black Prince** · February 16, 2006, 12:55 PM

agreed with Tac, if we had a good Rep Consul who we elected and supported, and he then appointed a good Pro-Curator, who, though its not necessary, also had a good portion of popular support in the curia, then this role would be largely ceremonial.

thats not to say its a good idea though...

i'm going to wait to see if the senior staff have any objections or comments before i speak further on this, but consider me neutral leaning toward against for now... (i'm open to convincing)

**Last Roman** · February 16, 2006, 12:59 PM

I only support it because a tribune would represent the non-civitate members of this site

**Søren** · February 16, 2006, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Asterix

1)The Tribunus Popularis would be elected by the Curia

See other points.

Originally Posted by A

2) The Tribunus Popularis would have administration rights in the Curia and Consillium Publicum

The day in which people other than staff members (and preferably Senior Staff members) have moderation ability in the CP would be the day I would seriously consider resigning on. I very strongly oppose having anyone other than a Praetor or Triumvir (and possibly Quaestor, though I'd be opposed to that too).

Originally Posted by A

3) The individual would not be staff or have access to staff forums (possibly the Alhambra?)

Even more reason for him/her not to moderate the CP.

Originally Posted by A

4) The individual would work in close co-ordination with the staff appointed Pro-Curator

Certianly.

Originally Posted by A

5) The individual would have a special privilege to poll civitates in the Curia Vote

What, Ostrakon you mean ? Or poll candidates ? In which case I would be opposed for reasons stated elsewhere.

Originally Posted by A

6) The Tribunus would work for the Curia and represent non-civitates members of TWC in the Curial government.

Good heavens, that is what the staff are for. Don't think we represent ourselves. We represent the site including the Curia and members.

Originally Posted by A

7) The Tribunus cannot also be a staff member but can choose to resign by making another nominations thread to replace him

See other points.

Originally Posted by A

8) The Tribunus can issue a writ of protest protesting any actions on TWC which can be approved or dissaproved by the Curia in the Curia Vote

Surely any civ can do this ?

Originally Posted by A

9) The Tribunus can issue a writ of honour to praise any action on TWC which can be approved or dissaporved by the Curia in the Curia Vote

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by LV

The RC shouldt be Pro Curia or Pro Staff, he should be Pro TWC and understand that the Curia is a part of TWC that should be respected. With a RC I see no need for yet another rep, sorry asterix, I'll pay you back in that Thread in Anagennese!

The RC should be Pro-Curia, Pro-Staf and Pro-TWC, understanding that it is the various parts of TWC working togther, making it what it is.

Originally Posted by Tactical

I'd agree with VL for a change. If we had an elected and strong Republican Consul who was in favour of the curia and understood how important it is as the unique selling point of this site, then they'd appoint an equally dedicated pro-curator and a lot (if not all) of the problems this role is meant to sort would be solved.

We just need a good Republica consul as the first step, one that is seriously pro-curia but who is also willing to work with Archer and Sel.

See my previous point. However, there is an important distinction between Representing the Curia, and Elected by the Curia.

Originally Posted by Boudicca

If he is elected by the curia and is their "representative" than I think it is clear that the curia can at any time elect a new representative or will at least check his work every now an then by vote?

See previous point (made to Tac)

Originally Posted by tBP

agreed with Tac, if we had a good Rep Consul who we elected and supported, and he then appointed a good Pro-Curator, who, though its not necessary, also had a good portion of popular support in the curia, then this role would be largely ceremonial.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Last Roman

I only support it because a tribune would represent the non-civitate members of this site

Who do you think the staff represent ?

Originally Posted by Mirmiswell

Wouldn't the powers granted in article 2 essentially displace the Pro-Curator? I'm not saying this is a bad or good thing but unless you mean just the Curia proper and not the subforums, it seems the Tribunus could move bills to vote etc. I like the overall idea though, I just need more time to think about it's many ramifications.

I suppose the P-C would be relegated to a mainly administrative function.

**Last Roman** · February 16, 2006, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by The Bavarian Noble

Who do you think the staff represent ?

but the staff are appointed directly by the imperator (right?), the tribune would be elected by the members

edit: I read the proposition wrong, I withdraw my support

**Søren** · February 16, 2006, 01:52 PM

but the staff are appointed directly by the imperator (right?), the tribune would be elected by the members

No. Asterix's idea is to have the Tribunus elected by Civs.

Anyway, the Staff do represent the non-members.

Point me to one example where a staff member has acted unjustly in regard to a non-member, due to bias against them. If not, then the non-members need no further representation.

**Last Roman** · February 16, 2006, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by The Bavarian Noble

Point me to one example where a staff member has acted unjustly in regard to a non-member, due to bias against them. If not, then the non-members need no further representation.

I didnt meant that. I'm know that staff represent everyone, but it seems to me that activity within the site might increase if people directly saw that they personally had chosen someone to represent them rather than the civitates

anyway I withdrew my support so this discussion is a moot point