[Amendment] Abolish CdeC

[Squid]

It makes it easier for members to get involved in Curial affairs without the ridiculously high standards currently needed. It also makes the Curia more representative of the site at large, since more people would have the chance to propose things and vote. Indeed, even the election of CdeC members would be more representative, meaning that low-citizens can vote into office CdeC members who are more attuned to the common man. Over time, I predict, it would completely change the mindsets of CdeC.

All people on the site can already propose things, its called the Q&S. The only thing this is doing, in practice since the "lower citizen" is a bogus thing like I'll explain in a minute, is opening the Curia to posting by those currently not citizens. That bill has also failed more times than you'd like to admit.

As for why "lower citizen" is bogus, that rank already exists on the site, but is fully inclusive, its the full member user groups. We have members who are your non-citizens, full members who are your lower citizens and citizens who are your higher citizens. The only difference from what have now is the middle layer will no longer be fully inclusive but it will be able to post in the curia to make proposals and will get a custom user title. To get that now, just propose, in your own thread, that all full members be allowed to post in the curia and get custom user titles, let's see how quickly that gets passed.

Again, I know it's not ideal and perfect, but by taking steps that are too bold, we are only alienating conservative citizens and dividing the Curia into two extreme camps, where no change can happen at all.

I am a conservative, look at my posting history on the curia and the only alienating being done is by CdeC to citizens and to the site at large. I've said it before, if you don't try because you're afraid to fail then you'll never succeed.

Why is it you're doing this proposal again? Wasn't it in order to increase activity in the Curia and lower standards? Diamat's proposal achieves both, while still letting us "elitists" feel better than everyone else, and we can have our own little council for deciding who can join our club. Isn't that great, we can all be happy and nobody has to feel like they've lost. Or do you just want to get rid of the CdeC because why not?

Actually that isn't the primary purpose, but again yet another example of a councilor who can't be bother to be fully informed. This amendment isn't about increasing activity, though I hope that will be one of the consequences, its about getting more citizens into the curia (i.e. more members to become citizens). If only the same people who are on CdeC take part if its opened to the entire Curia then we've lost nothing. If CdeC members choose not to participate afterwards then clearly they were doing the job properly in the first place.

Moving activity from the Q&S to the Curia is not the same thing as increasing activity in the curia, but continue to think so. Diamat's proposal achieves nothing, all things of import magistrates/cdec/curator are still barred based on the flawed CdeC system, all other things "given" by Diamat do not change anything on the site, except for the user title which I'd be happy to hand out by hex fiat, besides the location in which non-citizens do the specific action.

I have not seen a single piece of evidence from the anti- CDEC lobby of the low activity in the Curia.

Here's the problem. In a stable population you can expect that the makeup of the population will remain relatively stable baring major events, such as war, famine, etc. Similarly on TWC you'd expect the population to be fairly stable including the number of active citizens, by percentage of population. Over the last 5 years the population of TWC has skyrocketed, I don't think anyone would deny this especially as part of the tech problems earlier were related to not having sufficient resources, yet the number of active citizens on the site has fallen and the number of active citizens in the curia has plummeted. We used to get ~60 votes on any proposal if you go back a few years, now if we get over 20 its a miracle.

Have you gone to the non-participating citizens and asked them to tell you why, show me. For your perceived problem have you done a Root Cause analysis, to establish if their are multiple problems. Have you asked non-participating citizens how they feel about voting? The current stance seems to be like the Global warming argument, that every event is linked to one thing, when you do not do proper analysis, you get the wrong answers or you start trying to link with little evidence.

Actually if you read comments posted by various citizens that normally are not active they tell you why, mainly what the hell is there to do here is the common theme. Not only if you read what Q and others have said about members not wanting to be patronized (the bigger reason for the amendment) says that CdeC isn't working.

As for site activity, all the TWC sub forums I frequent are all quieter than what they were a year ago.

Given site activity is well higher than before the upgrade I'd be hard pressed to believe that but then again I don't know what forums/subforums you frequent.

I believe that CA's poorly turned out products, linked with our own technical problems, plus MMO's like World of Tanks and War Thunder are taking people away. Basically the Curia lack of activity cannot be linked to one thing, it needs to be established all the contributing factors

Who says its one thing? One thing has been identified as part of the problem, by multiple people over a very long period of time. What is appears that your saying that just because it isn't the entire problem we shouldn't be trying to fix it. That's the kind of attitude that got us here in the first place.

Your proposal does not address the fact that people are voting too harshly for how you envision Citizenship, if you remove Cdec, people will still not meet your desires. Diamat's proposal does.

How so you still need to go through CdeC to get any senior position, including "full citizen". Just because you can't see through the doesn't mean that others are equally as willfully blind.

You want more activity? This brings in more as you have two systems, profit.

As I said above moving activity from the Q&S to the Curia is not the same as creating more of it. Stealing from Peter to pay Paul doesn't make you more money it just changes who has it.

Does anyone remember that old guild idea that was batted around some 3 or 4 years ago? I really liked that.

So did I, Major Darling and I did a fair bit of work on it, including starting a major gutting of the constitution to make it happen. The thread should still be in the curia somewhere.

If you see some connection here, do share. Because I don't.

Why I am supporting Diamat's proposal is because it has better chances of success than what the current proposal in the OP has.

As I pointed out earlier is this post Diamat's proposal changes nothing except for the forum where some things happen, adding an extra layer of bureaucracy, and giving more members usertitle. So saying a proposal that in practice changes nothing has a better chance of succeeding is not saying particularly much.

In my opinion Diamant's proposal makes a change and answers to some of the problems well. Having 2 tier rank system on the site brings a lot more traffic on Curia if that is important. For me the point is not to prolong any Elitism here or keep the CdeC in power just for some selfish reasons. I sincerely think that having a reasonable standards and a goal for people to reach for are doing something good for the site, because it migh and will produce something which everyone in the community can enjoy from. Easily said with a straight face. Obviously it is not wanted that the standards are too high -as they seem to be now - because if they are unreasonable high it will just kills the whole merit of this system we have now. I don't see the point of having stardards with only purpose to keep the people out, but to encourage them to work for the community. Like any other reward, also citizenship loses it meaning if every other passerby have one.

You don't want to prolong elitism yet your supporting a proposal that will not only prolong it but increase it as well.

To why I am in support of the CdeC being statitioned in the Diamat's proposal is because it is a lot easier to keep track on voters who base their judgement on ill-minded reasoning, which is happening a lot less in a CdeC if the Counsillors think that there are people following their decisions and because there is a chance that they will loose their face or destroy their chances to get selected the next time. Even if there were no one doing this in reality, watching their backs, it's quite normal to feel being in spotlight when you belong to a small group like the CdeC. At least now there is some kind of explanation given most of the time (even though it is not required) from a counsillor if their stand differentiate from the rest a lot.

You only need to keep track of who votes for what if it matters (i.e. in determining who to vote for next time).

Also, it is easy to judge if the standards for getting up in a rank are getting too high from a small group of regular people than from an unregular mass of voters.

Not to mention those members that have been approached but turned it down due to not wanting to go in front of CdeC.

Why do people want CdeC to be abolished? Because they believe allowing more (theoretically every) Citizens to vote in applications etc. will help boost activity; am I right in saying that because if I'm not ignore the rest of this post.

That isn't the primary purpose, but a hoped for side affect. The primary purpose is to reduce the barriers to entry into Citizenship. Standards will hopefully lower since those voting won't need to show that "they're doing their job" by turning people away. It would hopefully encourage citizens to participate in the process, though it isn't expected and bring in much needed new blood. Both the new blood and any increased participation due to being allowed to participate would have the effect of increasing activity in the curia.

Looks up....Nice research "Sprout"....


So....after ten pages of debate, were does the proposal stand?



If we look at the big picture{greater effort to acknoweledge members contribution to the site & currying greater member involement} then it's definitley time to take a chance and do something different.

If the proposal includes these points then you have my support.

I think it addresses all three, all applications will be open, at least once they've concluded as private application are not available as there is no more CdeC to handle them.

there is no concept, there is no utility, there is nothing to do.

so what citizens do

Providing them the opportunity to take part in citizenship application, if they choose, gives them something to do.

moderation, its indeed required to be a citizen

Based on various comments and goings on in the curia right now I'm questioning whether this is worth keeping or not.

[Finlander]

As I pointed out earlier is this post Diamat's proposal changes nothing except for the forum where some things happen, adding an extra layer of bureaucracy, and giving more members usertitle. So saying a proposal that in practice changes nothing has a better chance of succeeding is not saying particularly much.

You don't want to prolong elitism yet your supporting a proposal that will not only prolong it but increase it as well.

I kind of fail to see what harm would it exactly do if we are to go with Diamat's proposal. I don't care for elitism, the point is not to keep the council there just for the sake of it being there, instead, I see a practical reason for having the new proposed system.

I have nothing against giving the Citizens the voting power - I am still kind of in a middle ground finding my own opinion on the proposal in the OP - but in my opinion it isn't the ideal change either. If the main task here is to have as many new citizens in the CVRIA, 2-tier rank system would lift the pole low enough to welcome masses into here. As I mentioned in my earlier post I believe that Citizens will still have their own imaginery standards on who they think are qualified. Having a 2-tier rank system kind of guides the qualifications lower, because the requirements to pass an applicant are easier to figure out what they are. Every citizens will weight differently how the attitude matters to them over articles released and vice versa, just as the CdeCs do now. It will not change. It would become much easier for those members who have been active on the site for a long time, being a friendly member on the forums and a regular poster in various discussions. Very likely they wouldn't make it into a Citizenry now or in the new system, because quite many will still find that they lack text-walls or solid contributions (guides, mods etc). Now the people can realize themselves that these attributes are enough to qualify them in without the need of forcing the judges to vote in a certain matter.

For me it matters the most that the requirements are not set too low because of this. The second rank would hopefully ensure that the new citizens still have a clear goal to reach for, which might encourage them to keep contributing to the site more. I am not sure who would exactly lose here. I'm not quite swallowing the concern that it will divide our members in two classes (well, it does ) but it shouldn't cause inequality amongst the members. They are not people to be looked down, but perhaps the fruit of being promoted to the second class is something to look up to. I don't believe it is too much of an elitism if (1) the class ranking is open to all members with reachable requirements; and (2) being in the higher rank doesn't offer unfair advantage or power over the other class.

I agree the idea of a small group of judges (CdeC) is/sounds Elitist, but I wouldn't like that all its members are being labeled as such. Afterall, we merely consist of some volunteers who wanted to help the site and keep the tradition going on. It has its faults, but also advantages.

[Bethencourt]

there is no concept, there is no utility, there is nothing to do.

so what citizens do

moderation, its indeed required to be a citizen

content, a few of them at least

they keep doing whatever they are doing or not doing

It was a rethoric question, but thank you anyway. Now instead of CDC elections for CDC members to decide citizenship, citizens decide about it directly. So we do the same thing with different mechanics. I foresee even less participation than in CDC elections.

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

Both the new blood and any increased participation due to being allowed to participate would have the effect of increasing activity in the curia

What I'm saying is will there be new Citizens just because standards are lower, and will there be an increase in activity in old Citizens just because everyone can vote in applications - I highly doubt that.

However I am all for lowering standards, but I think it needs to come from the CdeC just changing and deciding to accept lower standards. Getting rid of CdeC might even lower activity as people won't bother coming to try applying for CdeC and debating as to why they should. Has someone considered that those 30~ people who have been applying to CdeC in the past year might not bother commenting on applications because they lose they're "special" status as being a CdeC member, so they might think what is the point in commenting on an application because I don't get anything for it. At least with CdeC there is a reason to keep coming back to the Curia i.e. to get elected.

Get rid of the 3 month waiting period for being elected for offices, keep the CdeC, get them to lower their standards = done.

[m_1512]

One merit though I see in this (Squid's proposal) is that there will be more specialized participation in terms of application. In essence, whenever there would be an application about modding, modders will be able to participate and provide their expert opinions on the contributions. I know a good handful of talented modders who simply aren't judging modding applications because they are busy and don't have enough time to run for the CdeC and all that. But this simply enables every modders to have a say in modding applications. The same holds good for citizens having their expertise in certain aspects of the site.

[Mhaedros]

One merit though I see in this (Squid's proposal) is that there will be more specialized participation in terms of application. In essence, whenever there would be an application about modding, modders will be able to participate and provide their expert opinions on the contributions. I know a good handful of talented modders who simply aren't judging modding applications because they are busy and don't have enough time to run for the CdeC and all that. But this simply enables every modders to have a say in modding applications. The same holds good for citizens having their expertise in certain aspects of the site.

Anyone can post in the Townhall, so if modders aren't posting there now they won't start because of this proposal either.

[m_1512]

Anyone can post in the Townhall, so if modders aren't posting there now they won't start because of this proposal either.

Yes, and a lot of good it does seeing as it takes admin intervention to save applications. Honestly, there is a big difference between posting in the townhall and in the application.

[Derpy Hooves]

Anyone can post in the Townhall, so if modders aren't posting there now they won't start because of this proposal either.

And any councilors can decide not to read the Townhall (not part of their job description); your point?

[Mhaedros]

Way to miss the point, which by the way was that there is nothing making modders or anyone else to write anything either in the Townhall or in the application.

[m_1512]

Way to miss the point, which by the way was that there is nothing making modders or anyone else to write anything either in the Townhall or in the application.

Miss what point precisely?

Read again ->

There is a big difference between posting in the townhall and in the application.

[Derpy Hooves]

Most don't write because CDEC has shown in the past that it does not feel the need to read the Townhall.

[Omnipotent-Q]

Since September 2013:

General B, Inarus, Guy, Leo The Lion, Mhaedros, Noif, Navajo Joe, Adamat, SturmChurro, Derpy, Major Darling, Hesus, Mega, Confederate Jeb, Finlander, GotR, 'Gunny, Lord William, Pasan, MBA

(about 8/9 of them have only applied once excluding the current application process; and most apply to retain seats)

Past September 2013 until February 2013:

Radboud, m_1512, grouchy13, Diamat, Omni-Q, Ponti, Daily, Acco, Bolk, robinzx, (and some of the

I've never applied too CdeC .

Squid,

Do us all a favour, get yourself three supporters, get a vote up, lets see this settled, I mean defeated.

There's no need to rush when it comes to suggesting a big change but I support Squid. He has great experience. I have advocated ideas similar too Diamats in the past as a half way house. If anything this thread has convinced me we must go the whole way. It's ironic really - the Curia in all intents of purposes fought the Ogresnetwork to remain in existence and keep it's power. Only then for it too be given away to an extremely similar system in that of CdeC.

I'm going to make things simple. It is within the sites interest to make a change in the Curia. It is not in the CdeCs interest to cater for the good of the site and community - only their own political interest. Some councillors are wise and aren't like that but it's clear that's the case with some. I mean we're not long out of a spell of CdeC councillors referring each other for citizen discipline as some sort of political tool. Don't pretend this is a good system when evidence says the opposite. Numbers have never been so low in here and anyone with common sense knows it's the ridiculous high bar to get citizenship causing it. I couldn't be anymore disappointed with how things are in the Curia now. Not just as a citizen, but as an admin it does nothing to help foster community spirit. Something we need if the Rome II forum is anything to go by. If any of the opponents shared the reality of how things are generally and saw everything we do, instead of BS political theory and dogma, you'd see that this is the right thing to do.

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

I've never applied too CdeC .

My bad, I miss-read one of your posts as Curator/CA as an application.

Still, helps to reinforce my point with even one less Citizen applying.

[Lord William]

I dont understand how a councillor who doesn't cater to the needs of community can be re-elected, if this is the case it is not the fault of the CdeC but the citizens themselves who allow for such things to continue.

I don't see the correlation its not like the CdeC subtracts from the current citizen pool, citizens themselves are losing interest with the curia and attacking the CdeC will not solve that issue.

[m_1512]

I dont understand how a councillor who doesn't cater to the needs of community can be re-elected, if this is the case it is not the fault of the CdeC but the citizens themselves who allow for such things to continue.

I don't see the correlation its not like the CdeC subtracts from the current citizen pool, citizens themselves are losing interest with the curia and attacking the CdeC will not solve that issue.

You could put it down to two factors - 1) same councillors only keep applying and not much of a choice, 2) CdeC election is a popularity contest as numerous members attributed. Either way, since you have said that citizens have lost interest in the curia, then why keep the cdec? Wouldn't removing the cdec rekindle the interest now that all citizens have a new power without having to go through a tedious process (elections)?

[Robin de Bodemloze]

Wouldn't removing the cdec rekindle the interest now that all citizens have a new power without having to go through a tedious process (elections)?

Seriously?

[m_1512]

Seriously?

I am just saying. I put myself in the shoes of say a complete new citizen, and thought like that. In that situation, I would be a pretty enthusiastic new citizen given the prestige that I can provide inputs on citizen applications directly.

[StealthFox]

Since this thread is quite long now, can someone be kind enough to make a list of reasons why this amendment is not a good idea? Here is my attempt at a list of supporting reasons:

• CdeC as an institutions has seen repeated failures
  
  • Standards are too high
  • CdeC has become an elite club that continually raises the bar for citizenship higher and higher
  • Frivolous referrals as political maneuvering
  • Too often councilors are not stating why they voted a certain way
  • Councilors are not doing the investigation they should and usually piggyback off the one or two councilors who are doing research
  
  
• Increase activity and retention of new members by giving them something to do as well as getting old members involved again
• Ensure experts in their fields are able to take part in the process (content, modding, etc....)
• Helps foster community spirit
• Hands over the job of reviewing disciplinary cases to magistrates which is line with what they are already doing in the Tribunal
  
  • Will ensure disciplinary cases are handled with the utmost care instead of as a political tool
  
  
• Will improve use of forum resources by deleting/merging old forums, usergroup, and badge

I'm sure I'm missing some, so if I have if you'll let me know I'll update this post. Squid, feel free to include this in the OP if you like.

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

Since this thread is quite long now, can someone be kind enough to make a list of reasons why this amendment is not a good idea? Here is my attempt at a list of supporting reasons:

• CdeC as an institutions has seen repeated failures
  
  • Standards are too high
  • CdeC has become an elite club that continually raises the bar for citizenship higher and higher
  • Frivolous referrals as political maneuvering
  • Too often councilors are not stating why they voted a certain way
  • Councilors are not doing the investigation they should and usually piggyback off the one or two councilors who are doing research
  
  
• Increase activity and retention of new members by giving them something to do as well as getting old members involved again
• Ensure experts in their fields are able to take part in the process (content, modding, etc....)
• Helps foster community spirit
• Hands over the job of reviewing disciplinary cases to magistrates which is line with what they are already doing in the Tribunal
  
  • Will ensure disciplinary cases are handled with the utmost care instead of as a political tool
  
  
• Will improve use of forum resources by deleting/merging old forums, usergroup, and badge

I'm sure I'm missing some, so if I have if you'll let me know I'll update this post. Squid, feel free to include this in the OP if you like.

Providing reasons against those supporting reasons:

• Just because you disagree with a CdeC decsion doesn't make it a failure - it is an elected body, if you disagree and think you know better then get elected and vote your way
  
  • Are high standards a bad thing? If people think getting a Citizenship is a high standard it could encourage better behaviour and getting people more active across the site as standards are high.
  • See above
  • Nothing against it in the Constitution, you can always VonC someone if you think they have been abusing referrals as a Councillor
  • Then don't vote for those Councillors! Majority of CdeC are re-elected, if they do a crap job then why are they? It is up to people to change who they vote for, not how elected members act
  • See above
  
  
• Ultimately there isn't really the demand for increase in activity
• They can do anyway by posting in Feedback thread or getting elected
• Could create grudges if people vote "no" against a vast majority of Yes or the other way around, could ruin community spirit
• Magistrates check the ToS, not if someone is behaviour as a Citizen. Could lower the standards of Magistrate as they become less specialised and 12 less elections mean more people start applying for them, could lead to lowering standards.
  
  • See above
  
  
• Is there any raw data to back that claim up? Will removing a couple of forums and a usergroup impact that greatly on forum performance especially with the new techno upgrades we've been having - I don't know, but it would be quite interesting to see if technical performance is being pushed as a reason why the CdeC should be abolished

I too am probably missing some things, but Squid feel free to edit this into the OP if you would like to as well just to provide some balance.

[Noif de Bodemloze]

• 
  
  • Then don't vote for those Councillors! Majority of CdeC are re-elected, if they do a crap job then why are they? It is up to people to change who they vote for, not how elected members act.

I wonder same. Even I voted new people who have chance to rise up and councillors who have done their job well. Sometime I see that there are not enough people who do not apply to Cdec. Once there was 3 seats open and 3 people applied and they were automatic selected because there wasn't 4 or more candidates. I don't know what requirements other citizens have when they voting candidates to Cdec.