[Amendment] Abolish CdeC

[Finlander]

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.

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. I agree on many parts about the faults of the CdeC and that the standards for becoming a citizen are high. This is because the behaviour of the counsillors and what they think they are expected to do are reflecting their own experience of the CdeC in the past - the time they were made Citizens themself in the first place is playing a big role here as well as what they think the CdeC was or has been in the past, and that what was/has been expected from the counsillors or the applicants. Soon I have been on this site for 5 years, and during all this time the CdeC has meant to be selective, letting only a one segment of the community in, what ever that is. It is only natural that the standards has been getting higher in time, partly because they have been high all this time, and partly with the growth of the site. This together with the fact that there is no a written code for the counsillors to base their judgement on, the standards are what they think they are. This is then again shown in the next generation to some extend, too.

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.

Citizens at large are still going to have standards no matter what. In my opinion the merit in Diamat's proposal is that it kind of sets easily passable standards for the lower class, which is a reward for staying active and showing some good manners in the forums. I could name easily dozens of names without thinking hard who would pass this criteria easily, but with the current CdeC standards wouldn't pass the vote. In this system they would no doubt be recognised. Having a second rank with a higher criteria would in my opinion encourage people to make more traditional contributions, such as writing AARs, attenting in the competitions or writing tutorials and guides, which might not have been written otherwise. If this becomes an insurmountable elitism question, then forget the whole thing.

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.

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.

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

The Goal:

1. To increase involvement & include as many members as possible.

2. To acknowledge as much of the membership's profound investiture in this site as possible.

* Opening citizenship application reviews to citizens allows all site members to be included in the process. Citizens can post directly in reviews and baseline members can also participate via commentary threads.

* As to the liquidation of the CdeC. Those members are still fully able to volunteer their contributions here. The Curator/Magistrate panel handling disciplinary reviews,{provided that defendants are still able to select publically posted verdicts} solves any lingering necessity of having elected, non staff members involved to maintain equal representation in disciplinary reviews.

"Doing the same thing expecting different results", of the past few years using the CdeC model has'nt attained the desired results so it's now time to try something else...

[Noif de Bodemloze]

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.

[Derpy Hooves]

Like I said though, I am willing to support Diamat's proposal as a last choice measure, however abolishing CDEC does seem to be the right decision. I say seem because we can not be completely sure that abolishing CDEC will or will not increase activity within the CDEC. We have little to no data to suggest anything, which is why perhaps doing a trial of the CVRIA without the CDEC is logical. People who oppose abolishing the CDEC, you guys could be 100% wrong. People who support abolishing the CDEC, you guys could also be 100% wrong. Abolishing the CDEC could be best thing that could happen to the CVRIA...or the worst thing, but we'll never know if we don't try and see.

[Derpy Hooves]

"lower" citizens should be able to self patronize themselves. Don't make the houses more confusing.

[Mhaedros]

In that case you should be able to patronize peregrini to higher class citizen rank immediately.

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.

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?

[Squid]

Which is the same thing we have now just with an extra layer and no solution to the existing problem.

[Navajo Joe]

I have not seen a single piece of evidence from the anti- CDEC lobby of the low activity in the Curia. 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. As for site activity, all the TWC sub forums I frequent are all quieter than what they were a year ago. 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

[Navajo Joe]

Squid,

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

[Derpy Hooves]

@Brigadier, Diamat said that all current citizens would be the upper citizens. So you wouldn't be a second class citizen...unless you are really a peregrinus in disguise! Hmm, I might have to conduct an inquisition to find out if you really are who you say you are Brigadier. Are you?

['Gunny]

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

[ElvenKind]

Elite and little lesser elite? Is that it? Why would anyone want to join lower elite at first place?

Either we are all equal, or the new potential Citizens won't even desire to enter this so called "Elite" club.

[Ishan]

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

If one can find a path with no obstacles then it probably leads to nowhere. Diamat's proposition has no obstacles.

[ElvenKind]

Just to throw this here as referral to my previous post:

Probably I will never be a citizen, but I am sure I will never be a 2nd class citizen. Thanks, but no thanks.

This is what Diamat's proposal brings.

[Bethencourt]

CA removed the walls in small settlements in Rome II, so there are much less siege battles. So now we have a lot of small boring repeated small settlement assault battles and the siege battles abandoned in a design previous to basic level. What a coincidence with this CVRIA! People is not active, so lets take the only thing working to better be removed and replaced by another mechanics to do exactly the same. We are going down the "highway to hell". At least it is a song that rocks. "no problem, no solution."

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

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.

My point is will there be that many extra Citizens who actually bother to vote in applications? Usually CdeC applications have out 4-6 applicants who are usually the same group of people with the odd new 3-month Citizen who wants to apply. Okay they don't all get in but overall everyone who applies will at some point get elected. So I'm saying just because everyone will suddenly be allowed to vote doesn't mean they actually will. We are trying to increase Curia activity, but is there a demand for that increase in activity? I'm inclined to say not really - of course there will be the initial hype of "yay I can vote even though I'm not CdeC" but that will die down and it will go back to the same core group of active Citizens who vote, just without the CdeC badge and activity won't change. Okay get rid of the 3 month waiting time but I still reckon in the long-term getting rid of the CdeC will change squat activity-wise.

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 above)

(none have applied since September 2013)

So that is 30 people in 12 months out of how many seats that have been up for election? (17 application threads since Fed 2013, 17*3 = 51 seats so 30 people for 51 seats, however less then 30 because 9 aren't able to apply due to already sitting so already sitting so 21 people for 51 potential seats) And remember not everyone can apply at each election because they serve for 3 months. In a year 30 people have expressed an interest in voting for Citizens - they haven't always been able to, but by applying one would assume they would like to be able to vote and have a say - and some of those people are no longer active, or only applied once. Hence, by allowing every Citizen to vote do we really expect a massive increase in activity? (which is what I'm assuming the main purpose of this proposal). I reckon on average applications would have 15 voters, but without the onus to be expected to check the application (CdeC are elected and expected to dig through the applicant), is 3 more worth it? I mean of course anyone (Citizen) could just come a long and click yes but then there isn't really contributing or adding activity, that is simply voting because "hey I can" and maybe not even commenting.

If there was really a demand for more activity wouldn't it be reflected by different people applying to be able to get more involved? Just thought I'd point that out and see if anyone gets what I'm saying/thinks it means anything.

Furthermore looking at Citizen applications 43 people (I count) have applied since February 2013 to become a Citizen; 36 if you only count those who have passed. So the Curia has had 36 news Citizens in 12 months, I'd say at least more than half of those aren't Curia-active members - doesn't this suggest that people simply aren't interested in becoming a Citizen? And a significant proportion of those who do think "great now what" and never bother being active in the Curia again. Would allowing them to vote in applications make them more active? I doubt it otherwise they would have applied for a CdeC seat surely, hence back to my point will getting rid of CdeC make more Citizens interested in staying in the Curia, and make more people interested in becoming a Citizen - I don't think it will.

(all figures don't take into account any private applications as I cannot see them)

[Mega Tortas de Bodemloze]

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


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

* Open Citizen application reveiw, discussion, & voting to citizens.
* Applications still posted in the curia. Where does visibility stand? If visible to all members, then baseline members are also able to participate/contribute to the reviews via the commentary threads.
* Curater/Magistrate panel handle disiplinary cases, defendents still able to request that their cases be viewable upon completion.
* CdeC is herby disolved.

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.

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

Thanks Mega, added a bit more at the bottom.

[Bethencourt]

Maybe they are not interested because once voted the CDC elections then there is nothing to do. Because what is to be active in the CVRIA? I still wonder what the concept is.

[karamazovmm]

Maybe they are not interested because once voted the CDC elections then there is nothing to do. Because what is to be active in the CVRIA? I still wonder what the concept is.

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