CdeC: Its Premises and Problems (A Budgie's Observations)

[Diamat]

Citizenship is a reward above everything else, it was a thank you from the site to allow those people to have a say in how its run. The fault is with us for turning it into a tool to reward ourselves. There is nothing wrong with the system what needs change is us. You wanna help then go do it, don't try to change things with the hope that it could lead to change. Now you can call me an elitists, however i like to think that I respect the wishes of those that came before us, if something needs changing change it. However the entire system is not in need of change. Also, talk is cheap put your money where your mouth is and propose something.

I'm currently busy scheming, allying, etc. I won't make any premature proposals. Once we have come up with something, we'll let you know. The purpose of this thread was mainly to point out the holes in the system.

And as I said, I don't agree with the whole "there is nothing wrong with the system what needs change is us." I used to be a big advocate of this. Been there, done that. Doesn't help.

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

Strip everyone of there titles and medals and then ones again we are equals among equals.

Ya mean they would jack my Bling? ......

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Oh Hell.....No! Strike the colors.....Sound Dixie!

To Arms in Dixie ( Confederate Song )

[Derpy Hooves]

LOL, as long you don't try and pull the get dead people to vote for your proposal card!!

Longterm plan, create dozens of alt accounts, try to get them up to citizenship and then you have your own voting bloc

[Hesus de bodemloze]

Longterm plan, create dozens of alt accounts, try to get them up to citizenship and then you have your own voting bloc

Sounds like Ana but then different.

[grouchy13]

I have to say I honestly don't believe this is about reform, I think Diamat's dissolution has more to do with the abject failure of the TD Forum Play Proposal in which he placed an immense amount of personal stock, finding that his most ardent opponents were fellow CdeC members he has now chosen to attack this body and attempt to slander it with charges of elitism, calls for reform etc etc without offering the slightest recommendation on how these reforms should be carried out.

I wholeheartedly believe that Citizenship as it stands is what stands TWC above it peers, it rewards those who contribute and innovate on TWC period, what I ask is so wrong with this system?

As for the calls for the CdeCto be some kind of nanny state that invigorates activity I think we can can safely say that is not the CdeC's purpose, one only has to look at the abject failure of the CCT and CAT to see this. TWC has enough innovators, enough contributors and enough mature members who choose when and how to assist in making TWC what it is without some monolithic body cajoling them into having Lulz or making what is and always has been the premier home of TW some kind of whacked out utopia pseudo political system.

I understand that recent Curia politics dictates I'll bounced from Pillar to Post by Diamat and his cronies of the TD for holding these beliefs, but I think at a Time when the Biggest TW Title in the series is about to drop along with the cultivation of TWC burgeoning own Gaming Community, the crop of Video Campaign guide Makers and Legendary Difficulty and Blitz Campaign scenes there is more the Curia could be doing then letting ourselves be sidetracked by this kind of prattle.

[Derpy Hooves]

I have to say I honestly don't believe this is about reform, I think Diamat's dissolution has more to do with the abject failure of the TD Forum Play Proposal in which he placed an immense amount of personal stock, finding that his most ardent opponents were fellow CdeC members he has now chosen to attack this body and attempt to slander it with charges of elitism, calls for reform etc etc without offering the slightest recommendation on how these reforms should be carried out.

I wholeheartedly believe that Citizenship as it stands is what stands TWC above it peers, it rewards those who contribute and innovate on TWC period, what I ask is so wrong with this system?

As for the calls for the CdeCto be some kind of nanny state that invigorates activity I think we can can safely say that is not the CdeC's purpose, one only has to look at the abject failure of the CCT and CAT to see this. TWC has enough innovators, enough contributors and enough mature members who choose when and how to assist in making TWC what it is without some monolithic body cajoling them into having Lulz or making what is and always has been the premier home of TW some kind of whacked out utopia pseudo political system.

I understand that recent Curia politics dictates I'll bounced from Pillar to Post by Diamat and his cronies of the TD for holding these beliefs, but I think at a Time when the Biggest TW Title in the series is about to drop along with the cultivation of TWC burgeoning own Gaming Community, the crop of Video Campaign guide Makers and Legendary Difficulty and Blitz Campaign scenes there is more the Curia could be doing then letting ourselves be sidetracked by this kind of prattle.

I want to say I am surprised by your name calling especially since you are A. a Content Director and B. a member of CDEC, but I'm really not.

Now while I do agree with you on not giving CDEC more power, I disagree with everything else you have said. CCT's general lack of doing anything is because of two things: 1. "cockblocks" from Content and 2. they have not even posted there for more than half a month.
Diamat's grievances from that thread have more to do with everyone's attitudes towards the people who supported rather than it completely failing. People like you generally mocked and ridiculed those who came in support for the proposal. That is Diamat's grievance, the general disrespect people had for those who were trying to support something. All you guys had to do if you wanted to oppose it was to state your opposition and give an answer that doesn't mock or ridicule those who are coming in support of it.

And about Rome II, though I am going to buy it, I can't wait to read all of the delicious disappointment. Especially from those who kept proclaiming that it will be the best. So delicious the disappointment will be.

EDIT: I do hate being called a crony though

[M D]

I hate Constitutions and codified things in general, I can imagine a new one will be even more rigid, and most likely more German. That frightens me.

[Hesus de bodemloze]

Don't worry MD we will rule them all.

[M D]

Three Rings for the Hex-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Content-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal CdeC doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord Curator on his dark throne
In the Land of the CVRIA where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the CVRIA where the Shadows lie.

[Diamat]

I hate Constitutions and codified things in general, I can imagine a new one will be even more rigid, and most likely more German. That frightens me.

Where is Aikanar when I need him. We were on a roll.

I'm starting to suspect that the deletion of both of our accounts was an Anglo-Saxon plot. After all, Poach is a Scotsman.

Totaler Krieg Center!

[M D]

I'm really not joking.

[Diamat]

Neither am I.

[Bethencourt]

I am the one!

[General Brewster]

Spartacus?

[Ishan]

1. Lack of Transparency
2. Petty Personal Struggles and Abuse of Procedures
3. Elitism
4. CdeC Elections as a Popularity Contest

1) Transparency will be more headache. It ran on a trial basis and members in question used to come in and go ape **** when they read something they didn't like. They would PM their friends to help them intervene etc and all this affects the applicant itself as then the CdeC members spend more time defending their opinions debating them then doing further research on it. Best is to wait it out and then comment when they are through with it. It's not like they can hide the application from us or a certain part of it.

2) Show their pettiness or any flaw you see when they are standing for reelection, otherwise no need to bother and stir up **** needlessly. Affect their popularity on the right time and knock them out. Citizens do note such things & eventually they get left behind by better candidates.

3) It exists because only a handful of people among citizens post here and participate. Attract all the citizen body and this trend will instantly fade out.

4) Same as above.

As for Ponti his referral may seem harsh but certainly wasn't unconstitutional or whatever accusations you made on him. Glad you apologized for the bit he didn't even do. Brewster's only mistake there was that he made CdeC look unprofessional. The "mister fantastic" comment was hilarious though, still an applicant who seriously wrote his application and sent it for review would see all of this as unprofessional "LOL so these people were reviewing me?!"

No worries first CdeC term, **** happens. Lessons learned the hard way are never forgotten so perhaps brew should thank ponti. Still this could have been avoided without all of this.

Anyways we should realize that anything meaningful that was done by curia many years ago is long gone and normally site related creative tasks are now handled by content staff which members can directly join so Curia has outlived its usefulness in this field. Content has an advantage over curia. Here a member has to prove his worth before getting posting privileges while over there a member has to show commitment to the relevant content director, his access then depends on the work he does over there whereas here it doesn't matters whether you contribute\participate in curia or not after attaining citizenship.

Any other new project like vault thing like Rush proposed was also sent under staff because in staff there is clear cut work and less arguments and bollocks which we normally see here. Another reason is the ratio of actual work to bollocks. Even citizens prefer to propose something in the Q&S rather than prothalamos. There was a thing i read about CAT or something which was ok but then i read something about elections over that. No logic whatsoever, not sure who came with it. Election over volunteers. Pretty sure that was scrapped off otherwise i would've lost all faith in curia.

Bring ideas, discuss and then implement them on the forum and then none of us will have time for the nonsense we do here. If i get the time i will definitely try to gather a bunch of modders start a skyrim modding team, teach them how to modify the game and then add cool scripts and 3D models in it. It comes with a creation kit and wide range of tools and tutorials and seeing the state of rome 2 modding people will easily drift towards such games. I even modded gloves and **** for geralt\witcher 2 so that's what people want & that is what will rekindle this section, projects related to games on a gaming website. God knows we do have an army of modders capable of doing lot of things on such platforms. Especially old farts from RTW and M2TW. Prometheus_ts is the only modder i know who's also a TES modder. If someone can bring M&B through hard work and dedication then why not such games?

[Leonidas The Lion]

ISHAN HAS RETURNED!

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

ISHAN HAS RETURNED!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Bringing with him a voice of reason. Sound the horns for his return...

[Legio]

Ishan's giving away some of our most dastardly plans! Great to see you back, tiger

[Bethencourt]

Spartacus?

The premise and the promise of a better future!
For sure I am not, although I like to think I am in a very little portion, but that is what people tries to say with every proposal - post.

[m_1512]

I want to say I am surprised by your name calling especially since you are A. a Content Director and B. a member of CDEC, but I'm really not.

Let's not get there. Stuff gets really messy when content is dragged in.

Now while I do agree with you on not giving CDEC more power, I disagree with everything else you have said. CCT's general lack of doing anything is because of two things: 1. "cockblocks" from Content and 2. they have not even posted there for more than half a month.

I don't know much about cockblocks, but the activity is falling there. Perhaps there isn't sufficient motivation factor to drive the work there.

Diamat's grievances from that thread have more to do with everyone's attitudes towards the people who supported rather than it completely failing. People like you generally mocked and ridiculed those who came in support for the proposal. That is Diamat's grievance, the general disrespect people had for those who were trying to support something. All you guys had to do if you wanted to oppose it was to state your opposition and give an answer that doesn't mock or ridicule those who are coming in support of it.

I agree with you here, but you'll have to get yourself adjusted with this. Proposals will be mocked by some, and you can't really enforce anyone to respect other member's opinions. But the important thing is to not lose focus and drive on.

1) Transparency will be more headache. It ran on a trial basis and members in question used to come in and go ape **** when they read something they didn't like. They would PM their friends to help them intervene etc and all this affects the applicant itself as then the CdeC members spend more time defending their opinions debating them then doing further research on it. Best is to wait it out and then comment when they are through with it. It's not like they can hide the application from us or a certain part of it.

Agreed, but Diamat's concern was in line with accountability of elected officials. His arguments was more like citizens not having much idea of the types of hijinks the councillors get into once elected.
@Diamat: Please correct me if I read it wrongly.

2) Show their pettiness or any flaw you see when they are standing for reelection, otherwise no need to bother and stir up **** needlessly. Affect their popularity on the right time and knock them out. Citizens do note such things & eventually they get left behind by better candidates.

Not sure if this is a fair healthy election practice. Bloody easy to start the pissing contest, but not so to stop it. Then when the whole thing is done wet and sullied, the finger pointing game starts.

As for Ponti his referral may seem harsh but certainly wasn't unconstitutional or whatever accusations you made on him. Glad you apologized for the bit he didn't even do. Brewster's only mistake there was that he made CdeC look unprofessional. The "mister fantastic" comment was hilarious though, still an applicant who seriously wrote his application and sent it for review would see all of this as unprofessional "LOL so these people were reviewing me?!"

It was nevertheless not terribly necessary. And since the term professional was mentioned, it is also the policy of many professional organizations against such things. There, you many not reprimand or tell your colleagues what they do and cannot, leave it to the manager. Similarly, this would have been avoided by simply the Curator sending a private word to the person about so and so.

No worries first CdeC term, **** happens. Lessons learned the hard way are never forgotten so perhaps brew should thank ponti. Still this could have been avoided without all of this.

Either way, the chances of re-elections would be pretty much slaughtered, so no way to apply the lesson in future term.