[AMENDMENT]Reduction of the Waiting Period for Patronization

['Gunny]

I honestly think that newbie won't get elected to the CdeC, but yea, I think you should split the bills.

[ForteS]

After think a while the advantages seem more than the disadvantages there for I change my idea to this,

I support 1 month for patronization and 3 months for cdec election.

The Curia is made of old guard and this is something I don't agree with, this place needs new blood by reducing the waiting period we grow the chances of get more new citizens interested in collaborate with the Curia, therefore I now support this.
Let's advance/change and hope we end getting something better!

[Leonidas The Lion]

The Curia is made of old guard and this is something I don't agree with, this place needs new blood by reducing the waiting period we grow the chances of get more new citizens interested of join is collaborating in the Curia, therefore I now support this.
Let's advance/change and hope we end getting something better!

Omni see that, he says I'm part of the Old Guard

[Omnipotent-Q]

Omni see that, he says I'm part of the Old Guard

I'm pretty sure that means we're like some old school heavy metal gods and are the most rocking here!

Like in Tropico, Old Guard couldn't be more 1337

My understanding of this amendment is that too run for CdeC - you've had to be a citizen for three months and this is unchanged. The only thing changed is how long people have to wait after becoming a citizen to patronize.

[Leonidas The Lion]

I'm pretty sure that means we're like some old school heavy metal gods and are the most rocking here!

Like in Tropico, Old Guard couldn't be more 1337

My understanding of this amendment is that too run for CdeC - you've had to be a citizen for three months and this is unchanged. The only thing changed is how long people have to wait after becoming a citizen to patronize.

Man I remember the Old Guard back in 06 or 07 when I became a citizen

[Okmin]

Support.

[Admiral Piett]

Support.

[Hobbes]

Support.

[General Brittanicus]

Support.

[m_1512]

Hi,
Due to some health reasons, I would not be able to be quite active here. But this proposal/amendment is alive, and I would request the Curator or my fellow Citizens to support it in my absence.

Cheers

[The Hedge Knight]

Sorry to hear that , keep safe M!

Anyway just to reaffirm my support of the bill in its new (patronisation only) form!

[King Sama]

I support the amended bill (CDEC still requiring 3 months).

[SonOfOdin]

Ooohh now it's changed to a reduction in the waiting period. Support then.

[Genius of the Restoration]

Oppose.

I don't see what the fuss is about. Just get someone else to patronise for you. Patronising someone shouldn't be about the patron but about rewarding a worthy member. I wrote a post in the discussion thread about this that didn't receive a response from any supporters.

I have a different view of the role of the patron to many here, so keep that in mind for what I'm about to say. Some may view it as revolutionary (in a bad way).

It doesn't matter who the patron is.

Yes, that would mean the Houses are pointless . In my mind, putting off the member's application because you, as a new citizen, can't yet patronise them yourself is purely selfish. Despite thinking someone should be a citizen, this hypothetical new citizen doesn't recommend them to an older one to sponsor because they want to look good themselves. Who the patron is doesn't really matter any more, so why is patronisation so coveted? Why have any restrictions on who can patronise at all? I'll tell you. It's to do with group harmony. Only after you have operated within the club without being removed for a time, three months as it currently stands, is the privilege of extending your hand to other members given to you. This helps maintain the status quo by slowing down the rate at which demographic change can occur by limiting the ability of new citizens to propose others of, possibly, similar mind. More than this though, it is a reserve; a trial period that prevents a new citizen from bringing other members forward as candidates before they have come to know the system and come to terms with their own acquisition of citizenship and what it means to them.

Is three months too long and one month too little? I don't really care that much, it's all arbitrary. I'm going to oppose this though, because I don't like how patronisation is viewed by some people. If new citizens think someone deserves to be nominated they can ask an older citizen for their opinion and to act as patron. Putting it off just so they can do it themselves is pointless and only benefits the ego of the patron while being simultaneously detrimental to the site. Reducing the three month waiting period to one month would strengthen this culture, and I oppose for that reason.

It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned and I'm a little bemused that it receives the attention that it does. I don't think it would be an issue if the site's, the Curia's and the client's interests were held in a higher regard than the desire to nab clients. Maybe I'm a bit too grumpy and some good will come of this though. Specifically, in the form of month-old citizens patronising other members who might not have been noticed by others. I still can't imagine why they couldn't ask, or haven't asked, another citizen to have a look at the prospective citizen, but oh well.

['Gunny]

Oppose.

I don't see what the fuss is about. Just get someone else to patronise for you. Patronising someone shouldn't be about the patron but about rewarding a worthy member. I wrote a post in the discussion thread about this that didn't receive a response from any supporters.

It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned and I'm a little bemused that it receives the attention that it does. I don't think it would be an issue if the site's, the Curia's and the client's interests were held in a higher regard than the desire to nab clients. Maybe I'm a bit too grumpy and some good will come of this though. Specifically, in the form of month-old citizens patronising other members who might not have been noticed by others. I still can't imagine why they couldn't ask, or haven't asked, another citizen to have a look at the prospective citizen, but oh well.

There is something to be said for friendship though, for example, There were several people that I could have gone to for patronization, however I chose Mitch because he had been a long time friend and my mod leader. Now of course this isn't Pokemon or something, where you gotta catch 'em all () But the Curia is seen as sort of an elite club, and as such people generally want the person who patronizes them to be a good friend.

[Genius of the Restoration]

But the Curia is seen as sort of an elite club, and as such people generally want the person who patronizes them to be a good friend.

Some do, it's true. I don't know about generally, but it happens. I didn't care, but I may be in the minority.

If the identity of the patron is irrelevant, then why do we have a patronization limitation?

I addressed this question to myself in the post I quoted. When I said “Patronising someone shouldn't be about the patron”, I was referring to the reasons for the patronisation. A new Citizen shouldn't put off recommending someone for patronisation just because they want to do it themselves. Patronisation should be about the prospective citizens and rewarding them for their efforts. It shouldn't be about the patron wanting to look better by trying to catch 'em all, oblivious to the fact that putting it off is detrimental to everyone else.

[Acco]

Patronising someone shouldn't be about the patron but about rewarding a worthy member.

If the identity of the patron is irrelevant, then why do we have a patronization limitation?

I still can't imagine why they couldn't ask, or haven't asked, another citizen to have a look at the prospective citizen, but oh well.

Your argument makes sense, but in my opinion it would be less cumbersome to let every citizen patronize. I mean, why do we need a middleman when a new citizen is perfectly capable of patronization himself?

[m_1512]

Wouldn't that look like lobbying or planned patronization???


And Yes folks,
I am back...

[Polycarpe]

Support.

[Genius of the Restoration]

Wouldn't that look like lobbying or planned patronization???

What do you mean? I don't follow.