[Amendment] Patronisation Incentive Bill

[Thoragoros]

Honestly Thor - your habit of making up claims I've made is started to piss me right off. The whole point of me saying I could get numbers, is inducing that I clearly don't have up-to-date or accurate numbers on this. On thinking about it though I haven't got the time - if you can't see the logic of this, by all means vote no.

I'm making things up...okay...except that you said…

The difference here is that raw figures support my point of view while your point of view is outright assumption.

To which Genius said, much the same as I am right now,

Can you give me these raw figures you speak of? You haven't actually provided them. I'm curious to see how you draw conclusions about what the Curia's main function is by both relegating what is written about it in the Constitution and what actions it actively takes to inferior.

After which you continued to insist you had numbers...we just can't see them.

These figures do not exist in a format most would recognise - as I said it's going to take some significant time I could be doing other things to get them, but I will consider it and get back to you before I do anything on this proposal. I won't lie to you though - it's going to be a significant ball ache. I already asked Simetrical when he was on Hexagon Council if such analytic data existed on Citizen's and it was more of a "Nope and no time to get them".

There it is, so I'm not sure why you're losing your temper and saying I'm making things up. Am I simply inconveniencing by recalling what you say, and asking you to either carry through on it or to back it up?

Now, as to the matter of Artifex...

Once again - don't ing take what I say, turn it into something else, and then try and feebly destroy it in a weak strawman - I hate Curial politics, it's BS and I there's nothing more I hate that someone piping up and deliberately misrepresenting my viewpoint. It is obvious really - you start a thread in the mod forums as an Artifex, it is more likely to get noticed than as a normal member. Citizen's don't have coloured names and badges for no reason.

Wow...'Curial politics,' 'bs,' and 'strawmen,' all wrapped up into one nice post claiming I'm taking what you say out of context.

Okay....except this is what you said regarding Artifex,

It's not the only factor and I've never said that more than once. Take this example: I'm a modder. I mod in warscape - I produce great product. It is in the bones of any modder that you want you're work out there. It is easier to do so when you're an Artifex - you've been through the process, you know a few people that could help you in such regards, and you're easier to spot than say.....posting up your modding work on the Org.

You said it is easier since you've 'been through the process,' etc.., I'm saying no it isn't!

Take me for instance.

You mention meeting people, well, I met ToonTotalWar in the Modding Worshop...as well as Husserl. I also met pre-citizen Mitch in the workshop...and the rest of my former team. So yes, I am speaking from experience. Artifex is, for those who know what they're doing when it comes to modding, just a shiny bit.

I'm not sure why that offends you so much, but it was my experience, and I'm sorry if my experiences, which run contrary to what you are saying, happens to offend you.

[Omnipotent-Q]

I'm making things up...okay...except that you said…

To which Genius said, much the same as I am right now, so he must be making things up too...

I said and inferred in context I had figures that aren't in a presentable format. I've not changed my viewpoint on that. I also said it would take me some work to get it into a presentable format but do you know what? I'm not going to bother. You two just sit in your corner and wait for the Curia to do something and we'll see what happens. No way I'm spending hours collating it for the benefit of you two seeing the patent logic of this manoeuvre. It's like asking me to get figures to prove cars drive on roads - it is that obvious for most who've read this thread.

There it is, so I'm not sure why you're losing your temper and saying I'm making things up. Am I simply inconveniencing by recalling what you say, and asking you to either carry through on it or to back it up?

You don't want to see me when I'm angry sir. I'm merely passionate on this issue, and it's mainly because I've identified what I think is a problem (lack of patronisations) and a possible solution out of 0 alternatives that have been posed. I've spent a good long amount of time getting opinions on this - so obviously when someone drops by to use an argument based on me apparently calling a list of people not sterling contributors when in fact I said the exact opposite, what reaction are you expecting to get?

Wow...'Curial politics,' 'bs,' and 'strawmen,' all wrapped up into one nice post claiming I'm taking what you say out of context.

I've got better things to do than sit around with "he said, you said" arguments. That is Curial bollocks and we all know it. You claimed that I said the people on the list weren't good contributors, when in fact I said the opposite - I said they're sterling contributors. You should apologise for mis-representing my viewpoint deliberately to pick off my entire proposal like a strawman.

You mention meeting people, well, I met ToonTotalWar in the Modding Worshop...as well as Husserl. I also met pre-citizen Mitch in the workshop...and the rest of my former team. So yes, I am speaking from experience. Artifex is, for those who know what they're doing when it comes to modding, just a shiny bit.

I'm not sure why that offends you so much, but it was my experience, and I'm sorry if my experiences, which run contrary to what you are saying, happens to offend you.

Heh opinion don't offend me - people can disagree me for whatever reason they want. But misrepresenting side points I've made for seemingly no real reason just isn't cool in my opinion. For example yes, I did mention meeting people in the context of a mod example but it's just that - an example. Are you saying you've met no one on the site for the first time in the Curia or because they're a Citizen? (yes or no) If you haven't, could you see this being the case in some circumstances? (again yes or no)

[Lysimachus]

I'm making things up...okay...except that you said…



To which Genius said, much the same as I am right now,



After which you continued to insist you had numbers...we just can't see them.



There it is, so I'm not sure why you're losing your temper and saying I'm making things up. Am I simply inconveniencing by recalling what you say, and asking you to either carry through on it or to back it up?

Now, as to the matter of Artifex...



Wow...'Curial politics,' 'bs,' and 'strawmen,' all wrapped up into one nice post claiming I'm taking what you say out of context.

Okay....except this is what you said regarding Artifex,



You said it is easier since you've 'been through the process,' etc.., I'm saying no it isn't!

Take me for instance.

You mention meeting people, well, I met ToonTotalWar in the Modding Worshop...as well as Husserl. I also met pre-citizen Mitch in the workshop...and the rest of my former team. So yes, I am speaking from experience. Artifex is, for those who know what they're doing when it comes to modding, just a shiny bit.

I'm not sure why that offends you so much, but it was my experience, and I'm sorry if my experiences, which run contrary to what you are saying, happens to offend you.

OH FOR THE MAKER'S SAKE JUST DROP IT

URGH

There's a reason I don't post in the Curia anymore, urgh. This "no u" "gtfo" "sorry your post made one spelling mistake therefore your entire point is invalid" and whatever bollocks is exactly the kind of crap which makes the Curia such an awful place to post in.

/mumbles to self and walks off

Let's just get this damn thing to vote.

[Omnipotent-Q]

Good call. Moved to vote.

[Okmin]

Can we just vote on this?

[irishron]

I think it has posibilities. Don't discount it, yet.

[Genius of the Restoration]

Sorry for disappearing guys. Don't have time to reply now, but I'll try for later if it's still worth going on now that this is up for the vote.

I had a lovely walk by the way, did a good hundred km and now have thighs worthy of Lomu

[Thoragoros]

In all that you said, Omni, you are forgetting one critical aspect of the equation, and that is the quality of the member. Not every long-standing and frequent member is a Lord Rahl or a Leonidas, some are just frequent members who happen to like posting here, but that doesn't make them concrete contributors to the site beyond their posting.

To me, Citizenship is about a lot more than just posting a lot. It is about 1) Excellent Posting for a Civitate, 2) Good Mods for an Artifex 3) General contributions for a Citizen.

So if we start watering down Citizenship in the belief that Citizen = Posting, we will start losing the quality aspect of our Citizenry.

[Omnipotent-Q]

In all that you said, Omni, you are forgetting one critical aspect of the equation, and that is the quality of the member. Not every long-standing and frequent member is a Lord Rahl or a Leonidas, some are just frequent members who happen to like posting here, but that doesn't make them concrete contributors to the site beyond their posting.

To me, Citizenship is about a lot more than just posting a lot. It is about 1) Excellent Posting for a Civitate, 2) Good Mods for an Artifex 3) General contributions for a Citizen.

So if we start watering down Citizenship in the belief that Citizen = Posting, we will start losing the quality aspect of our Citizenry.

I don't get your point. You say it's for excellent posting, and then you say giving out citizenship on the basis of posting is "watering down Citizenship". You can't have it both ways. This doesn't effect the quality of Citizen's because it encourages patronising good members and aims to reward that - so any claim that it is proposing any mechanism for "watering down" the Curia when it doesn't change the means of getting Citizenship is down right wrong fallacious logic.

Watering down citizenship from what anyway? You make it sound like citizenship is some perfect group we've got going that's the internet equivalent of the College of Cardinals or something. I think people just need to lighten up a bit when it comes to Citizenship - must things be so pedantic, strict, and down right elitist in here?

[Thoragoros]

If exeptional contributions are what we look for in a citizen, then what point do the Opifex and Phalera awards serve?

I never said 'exceptional,' what I said was solid contributions beyond simply being a frequent poster.

I don't get your point. You say it's for excellent posting, and then you say giving out citizenship on the basis of posting is "watering down Citizenship". You can't have it both ways.

Mr. Curator, you are well aware of what we look for in a Civitate's posting habits.

['Gunny]

If exeptional contributions are what we look for in a citizen, then what point do the Opifex and Phalera awards serve?

Besides, citizenship quality is supposed to be assesed by the CdeC, and unless you don't think CdeC can do its job, more applicants won't effect the size of your e-penis er... your eliteness or the site.

[Lysimachus]

must things be so pedantic, strict, and down right elitist in here?

Yes.

Mr. Curator, you are well aware of what we look for in a Civitate's posting habits.

...I don't understand how that was answering his point at all :S

[Omnipotent-Q]

...I don't understand how that was answering his point at all :S

It didn't whatsoever is the best explanation!

[Thoragoros]

I don't get your point. You say it's for excellent posting, and then you say giving out citizenship on the basis of posting is "watering down Citizenship". You can't have it both ways.

We do hand out titles for good/above average posting, not simply 'frequent posting' as you were implying. That isn't what we are told to look for when making our judgements, therefore that shouldn't be part of the equation.

Now, a Civitate is essentially a debating title. Debating is done through posts. If the debater is a above average, he/she will get the Civitate badge. Therefore quality of the posts, and not projected post frequency is the requirement we are supposed to look for.

It's not having it both ways to say we don't hand out titles for what may or may not be the Member's posting habits as a result of the Application outcome. What may or may not happen to that member due to a failed or successful application should in no way effect the decisions we make.

[Omnipotent-Q]

A fail by five votes....well wasn't that a grand waste of my time. I'll consider playing Team Fortress 2 instead next time I've got an idea I want to put forward as something to at least try and give a go in solving a recognised problem.

We do hand out titles for good/above average posting, not simply 'frequent posting' as you were implying.

You're being pedantic - frequent posting is a pre-requisite to citizenship. There's even a post number requirement to become a citizen in the constitution!!

That isn't what we are told to look for when making our judgements, therefore that shouldn't be part of the equation.

The constitution doesn't even so far as to give examples of what and what isn't acceptable citizen material above the requirements so any gauge of what anyone should make a judgement on is to individual councillor's. Generally they don't get re-elected if their judgement is seen as flawed.

Similarly if you're not asking what effect conferring citizenship will have....well, let's just say it's idiotic not to look at the full picture, or the effects of voting actions in CdeC on the site as a whole. "I know, lets Ostrakon x guy and the consequences!" for example wouldn't be a prudent train of thought.

It will have to be plan b. I'm sick of inaction by the Curia and not out of bias, the fact this failed is outright wrong. It never would of "back in my day" old school Curia where almost everyone had a bit of common sense - there wasn't a sizeable minority of closed minded (or closed ears open mind perhaps) voting as is the case now, but there you go. It has at least had some success in encouraging more people to patronise - getting more people to think about it more. The likes of Mitch (A new Siblesz patronising machine extraordinaire nay?), Fortes (who took like five minutes of being eligible to patronise - nice one!) hesus (and his grand emerging faction of de bodemloze's!)....all keen to bring new people in and I salute them for the fine job they're doing at it too. I humbly apologise to you and the numerous others who won't get any recognition for performing a good role in making the Curia and the site better.

If you liked this idea and can - why not have a pop at patronising? Even if you haven't done so in ages, could be worth throwing the patronisation dice once more? In other news, I'm about 60% done on a full family tree of the entire Citizenship (The 40% left to do is the Legion of Rahl! ). I'm making it using some family tree software's so at least they'll be some remnant in the system of being nice, open and friendly in a system that's long lost its way.

I pose a few open questions before I archive this in a few days - Do we really need a "Council" of twelve people to judge one or two patronisation cases a month? Do you think staff transferred this power in the first place because they couldn't handle the workload of a patronisation level not over 10 per month, and discipline cases per month rarely hitting double figures either? Man how I tried to hammer home how staff would be more open to applications and people wanting to be Citizen's to make the site a better place when they decided patronisation cases. They could see the big picture or the positive impact a patronisation of a good member can have- too often lines such as

we don't hand out titles for what may or may not be the Member's posting habits as a result of the Application outcome.

To turn the whole patronisation process into an e-penis contest where people big up the mods they like, almost "review" them - then decide not on the basis of the impact of a mod on a community positively - but whether they personally dig the mod a person's working on. I've seen arguments where someone can make fantastic posts, but if they're say, part of the communism group, then some feeble excuse will be used to shut the door on them. The induced family atmosphere of patronisation of which is wholly good for the site, is slowly being destroyed by the pervasive elitist attitude of a very small number that think the only use for citizenship is sticking a medal in the form of a badge on the chest of people as some kind of "thanks for amusing me personally".

I think I've got something to add to the Curia with opinions and ideas - but I sure as hell wouldn't be made a citizen today if I came to CdeC....just what does that say about the culture of who and who isn't brought into the once family-esque fold we have today? Just what does that say about a body that's supposed to be representative of the members group? Good gravy!

Question. Why is this still being debated even though the vote failed? (25-15 by the way )

I could re-propose this to vote in 28 days unchanged....but yes, I'll archive in a few days. I've finished ranting and raving for now.

[Okmin]

Question. Why is this still being debated even though the vote failed? (25-15 by the way )

[Thoragoros]

You're being pedantic - frequent posting is a pre-requisite to citizenship. There's even a post number requirement to become a citizen in the constitution!!

The constitution doesn't even so far as to give examples of what and what isn't acceptable citizen material above the requirements so any gauge of what anyone should make a judgement on is to individual councillor's. Generally they don't get re-elected if their judgement is seen as flawed.

Similarly if you're not asking what effect conferring citizenship will have....well, let's just say it's idiotic not to look at the full picture, or the effects of voting actions in CdeC on the site as a whole. "I know, lets Ostrakon x guy and the consequences!" for example wouldn't be a prudent train of thought.

Omni, I'm not going to go in circles with you. You know what I'm talking about, and that's the established understanding of each rank.

Civitate = Debater = good posts = we judge the posts
Artifex = Modder = a guy who puts out files = we judge the mods
Citizen = General Contributions = we judge their generalized contributions as a whole

For instance, I would not expect to have passed the Citizenship process as a Civitate, it simply wouldn't have made sense.

To turn the whole patronisation process into an e-penis contest where people big up the mods they like, almost "review" them - then decide not on the basis of the impact of a mod on a community positively - but whether they personally dig the mod a person's working on. I've seen arguments where someone can make fantastic posts, but if they're say, part of the communism group, then some feeble excuse will be used to shut the door on them. The induced family atmosphere of patronisation of which is wholly good for the site, is slowly being destroyed by the pervasive elitist attitude of a very small number that think the only use for citizenship is sticking a medal in the form of a badge on the chest of people as some kind of "thanks for amusing me personally".

Let me explain how I look at applications, especially modding applications. At the time of my patronization, TGW was in its infancy, but the big difference is that we had something people could play, and therefore something people could actually judge.

If I'm going to judge mods, I need something I can get my hands on, because I'll be damned if I'm going to take someone's word that their product is good when I'm perfectly capable of looking under the hood on my own.

For Civitate, do their posts stand out from the pack? Are they informative or witty? Were they not being Patronized, would I have taken notice of them?

That is hardly a gauntlet method of judgeing.

I've seen arguments where someone can make fantastic posts, but if they're say, part of the communism group, then some feeble excuse will be used to shut the door on them.

Omni, if this is being directed at the oppostion to Bandiera Rossa's citizenship...you're lieing.

Here's the appliction. I invite everyone to look at the arguments that were made against him. We (the opposition) respected his right to his opinion, the fact is, we thought he had some maturing to do.

It was a 6-3 vote, and the three votes against him had to do with his tone and attitude, not his politics. On a side note, Badiera posted a Visitor Message to me thanking me for the advice I gave in the application.

[Omnipotent-Q]

Omni, if this is being directed at the oppostion to Bandiera Rossa's citizenship...you're lieing.

It wasn't.

[Thoragoros]

It wasn't.

Well then I'm curious to know who on our current panel denied a modding application based on the applicant's political beliefs, because so far I haven't seen this.

And if you're not talking about our current panel...how far back are you reaching to make this example?

[Omnipotent-Q]

Well then I'm curious to know who on our current panel denied a modding application based on the applicant's political beliefs, because so far I haven't seen this.

And if you're not talking about our current panel...how far back are you reaching to make this example?

Well....I didn't say current panel and if I had wanted to give an example, I already would have done so....I didn't because it's a rather insignificant point in my rant and I don't have the time to have a debate on the issue when there's nothing really to gain out of it.