[Amendment] Abolish CdeC

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

They will be allowed to post?

[Diamat]

I have been holding off replying to this thread, gauging the various opinions and viewpoints. To be honest, there is no perfect viewpoint - each stance has its pros and cons. I am a pragmatist and an idealist, meaning that I try to realize my ideals through pragmatic/realistic ways. The current proposal, as it stands, although in tune with my ideals, is simply unrealistic. It is too revolutionary. This is why it will never pass.

---------------------------------------------
What Many Hate about CdeC:
-Elitist: an institution which mainly exists to perpetuate elite status, creating an exclusive, privileged clique of citizens and maintaining that clique by restricting membership
-Standards for Citizenship too High
-Errors in judgment
-Occasional lazy councilors
-CdeC not in the interest of the community-at-large, and instead rather self-serving; detached from the broad membership base and their interests

What Many Love about CdeC:
-Filter: CdeC is a devoted body to select citizens, an ideally invests more time into researching candidates than would your average citizen; as such, it is less susceptible to popularity-contest votes than a straight-up popular vote; thus, CdeC acts as a sort of filter
-Elitist: It ensures the hard-earned privileges currently enjoyed by many a citizen; these privileges and their hard-earned nature incentives non-citizens to work hard for the benefit of the site in order to one day attain citizenship
-Tradition: Due to its longevity, CdeC has become inviolable in many a citizen's eyes; as an institution, it possesses legitimacy in itself, and many think that removing CdeC would mean removing the whole system as we know it
--------------------------------------------

Thus I would propose a much more realistic amendment, one that would satisfy both sides. Specifically, you have to appease the conservatives by giving them a sense that their elite status won't be affected in any way. This is the major stumbling block to any sort of reform. And if progressives can't accept that and vote against a more moderate reform program, then they won't see any change at all. So here is what I propose (much of this emerged from past discussions I had with Omni-Q):

A Two-Tiered Citizenship System (one that is different from what TWC once had though)
-2 types of citizens: low-citizen and high-citizen (I'm just calling them this for now for lack of better name)
-All current citizens will automatically be considered high-citizens (thus appeasing the conservatives; they will not lose any status)
-CdeC will remain; CdeC will decide on high-citizenship, which follows the standards we currently have for citizenship (thus retaining this part of the current system, once again appeasing conservatives)
-Low-citizens shall be decided based on a 2/3 vote of the entire Curia; the Curia shall be redefined as the united body of low- and high-citizens
-The standard for becoming a low-citizen is incredibly low; the main thing we would want is good behavior, motivation, and active engagement in the community
-Low-citizens do not have badges, but they have full voting rights in the Curia; they also should have custom user titles
-Low-citizens can eventually apply to become high-citizens, adjudicated by CdeC, which is decided upon based on the current CdeC standards
-High-citizens have badges and only high-citizens can become CdeC members, Curators, and Magistrates

This proposal carries minimal risks. It does not eliminate any institutions. Instead, it tries to open up those institutions to a wider audience, hoping to lead to a more active engagement by the community at large, which will also mean a more accurate representation of the wider community's interests.

[m_1512]

A Two-Tiered Citizenship System (one that is different from what TWC once had though)
-2 types of citizens: low-citizen and high-citizen (I'm just calling them this for now for lack of better name)
-All current citizens will automatically be considered high-citizens (thus appeasing the conservatives; they will not lose any status)
-CdeC will remain; CdeC will decide on high-citizenship, which follows the standards we currently have for citizenship (thus retaining this part of the current system, once again appeasing conservatives)
-Low-citizens shall be decided based on a 2/3 vote of the entire Curia; the Curia shall be redefined as the united body of low- and high-citizens
-The standard for becoming a low-citizen is incredibly low; the main thing we would want is good behavior, motivation, and active engagement in the community
-Low-citizens do not have badges, but they have full voting rights in the Curia; they also should have custom user titles
-Low-citizens can eventually apply to become high-citizens, adjudicated by CdeC, which is decided upon based on the current CdeC standards
-High-citizens have badges and only high-citizens can become CdeC members, Curators, and Magistrates

This proposal carries minimal risks. It does not eliminate any institutions. Instead, it tries to open up those institutions to a wider audience, hoping to lead to a more active engagement by the community at large, which will also mean a more accurate representation of the wider community's interests.

Why not simply keep citizenry the same way, and abolish the CdeC? If the second tier of veteran citizens is a good idea, how about bringing back to patricians? Citizens can be accorded the status by the curator (with consulting admins) and if patricians are failing to do their duties (citizenship applications), then they can be kicked from the group. How about it?

[Diamat]

Why not simply keep citizenry the same way, and abolish the CdeC? If the second tier of veteran citizens is a good idea, how about bringing back to patricians? Citizens can be accorded the status by the curator (with consulting admins) and if patricians are failing to do their duties (citizenship applications), then they can be kicked from the group. How about it?

I'm trying to avoid drastic change, because I fear that anything like abolishing CdeC will not get the 2/3 required vote. This is not about what is the most ideal, but what is both in accordance with our ideals while being realistic at the same time.

[Squid]

<snip>

What does that proposal actually accomplish? Nothing it doesn't solve the problem but merely adds a layer of insulation to it.

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

One thing, I think "low-Citizens" will still want the badge.

[Derpy Hooves]

While I haven't fully accepted Diamat's proposal (it is quite the compromise though), in that kind of system there could be two badges: a "Low Citizen" badge and a "High citizen" badge. If this concept is chosen as the best method for solving this crisis, I would also suggest using terms other than low citizen and high citizen.

[Mhaedros]

Diamat's proposal is probably the best I've seen so far in this thread and I'll support it if someone changes the amendment or makes a new one.

[Lord William]

I could go along with Diamat's idea, its quite reasonable

bring back the patrician classes

[The Hedge Knight]

Diamats proposal would leave the CDEC twiddling its thumbs for a few months and would simply add increased elitism and confusion. Get rid of the whole rotten structure or leave it there, don't chop half of it off and try and make a throne out of the other.

[Derpy Hooves]

Diamats proposal would leave the CDEC twiddling its thumbs for a few months and would simply add increased elitism and confusion. Get rid of the whole rotten structure or leave it there, don't chop half of it off and try and make a throne out of the other.

It's a compromise. The opposition gets to keep their status of elitism while the supporters get about 1/4 of what they want. However, I still prefer that we get rid of the CDEC, but Diamat's proposal does have a better chance of passing.

[Ishan]

@Fox\Mega: Yeah probably best to remove that line entirely.

Diamats proposal would leave the CDEC twiddling its thumbs for a few months and would simply add increased elitism and confusion. Get rid of the whole rotten structure or leave it there, don't chop half of it off and try and make a throne out of the other.

[Inarus]

[SNIP]

Finally someone who addresses the problem: That removing the CdeC does not change the mindset of the voters.

Plus you did so in a calm and appropriate manner, I feel I can support this

Name? Equestrians, Patricians, Elitist Scum .

[The Hedge Knight]

Whigs

[Derpy Hooves]

The Upper Citizens can be called Tea Party Members

[Finlander]

I'm in support of Diamat's proposal, and by the looks of it everyone would win: More citizens are brought into the CVRIA, existing standarts are remaining to make the old citizens look mighty and a large group of people still have a good reason to push hard to bring new solid contributions to the site in order to get into a higher class citizenry, which is an extra carrot on top of the cake and hopefully a goal to reach for. The standards to become one might be raising as an side effect though, but on the other hand it could serve as an extra motivation to work more and remain active in contributing to the site even after getting selected to the citizenry.

How would the patronisation work though? Are Low-Citizen's added to the families and does it require a patron to get nominated for the higher class, too? I'd suppose that it would work the best if the members of the lower class could apply themselfs to a higher class so that the amount of nominations does not get as low as for the Curial medals, for example. Patrons would be looking for raising stars and friendly members from the community.

[Diamat]

How would the patronisation work though? Are Low-Citizen's added to the families and does it require a patron to get nominated for the higher class, too? I'd suppose that it would work the best if the members of the lower class could apply themselfs to a higher class so that the amount of nominations does not get as low as for the Curial medals, for example. Patrons would be looking for raising stars and friendly members from the community.

I have not thought about all the details yet, but I'm open to suggestions. Self-patronization for lower ranks would be good. However, we should try to compromise here too. High-citizens should still need a patron, otherwise it would destroy the current house/lineage system, which many people are rather fond of. Basically, the idea is to not make too many changes in how CdeC and high-citizenship works, while still achieving the aim of creating more access to the Curia. Also, I don't want to add any more bureaucracy. I want it to be as simple and straightforward as possible.

What does that proposal actually accomplish? Nothing it doesn't solve the problem but merely adds a layer of insulation to it.

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.

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.

[jimkatalanos]

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.

Your proposal is far more drastic and less pragmatic than Squid's. Hardly conservative.
Squid is proposing a change on how citizens are voted while you are proposing the division of citizenship, the reinstatement of the patrician rank, make the curia more elitist, add more red tape and violate one of the most important dogmas of the curia i.e. all citizens are equal.

[Squid]

Finally someone spoke some sense here, thanks for Diamat. I liked Diamat's proposal much better than Squid's proposal. It would give satisfied for both sides.

So I support for Diamat's suggestion. If I can add that we should decrease Cdec seats from 12 to 6-8 IMO.

I'm in support of Diamat's proposal, and by the looks of it everyone would win: More citizens are brought into the CVRIA, existing standarts are remaining to make the old citizens look mighty and a large group of people still have a good reason to push hard to bring new solid contributions to the site in order to get into a higher class citizenry, which is an extra carrot on top of the cake and hopefully a goal to reach for. The standards to become one might be raising as an side effect though, but on the other hand it could serve as an extra motivation to work more and remain active in contributing to the site even after getting selected to the citizenry.

How would the patronisation work though? Are Low-Citizen's added to the families and does it require a patron to get nominated for the higher class, too? I'd suppose that it would work the best if the members of the lower class could apply themselfs to a higher class so that the amount of nominations does not get as low as for the Curial medals, for example. Patrons would be looking for raising stars and friendly members from the community.

Finally someone who addresses the problem: That removing the CdeC does not change the mindset of the voters.

Plus you did so in a calm and appropriate manner, I feel I can support this

Name? Equestrians, Patricians, Elitist Scum .

Why am I not surprised that three councilors would support a proposal that looks like it does something but in fact does not address the problem in any way shape or form. They get to appear as if they're doing something but in fact nothing ends of changing.

[Inarus]

Why am I not surprised that three councilors would support a proposal that looks like it does something but in fact does not address the problem in any way shape or form. They get to appear as if they're doing something but in fact nothing ends of changing.

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. CdeC is only "failing" in that it is becoming increasingly "stringent", because having -No Recent Infractions and -Useful Posting Behaviour on the cards are no longer sufficient for the imaginary ticklist. Okay that's an exaggeration, CdeC is also failing because of a lack of discussion and people aren't making arguments for a peregrini that's in their area of specialisation (contrast with SoulGamesInc's ongoing application), oh and new CdeCers are shouted at when they get it wrong, not helped to see the problem. Discussion can be dealt with, Citizenship expectations can't be as easily.

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