Ammendment to the Consilium Belli.

[Halie Satanus]

Consilium Belli

Six Civitates shall be appointed by the Triumvirate to discuss and advise on ideas concerning the Total War section of the forums. These civitates should have a strong background in the Total War modding community and be in good standing.

A designated forum will be created in the Question and Suggestions fora, where all suggestions regarding the Total War section of the Forums will be discussed.The Council shall make necessary recommendations to the staff on issues of the TW Sections.

The Council will have the power to invite advisories to be given access to the Council during its tenure. The protocol for this is as follows.

On receiving a request of access a Council member shall open a thread in the Councils forum, the request requires the consent of at least two other serving Councillors to be accepted, should acceptance be obtained the council shall request access permissions be given by the administration.

Appointment to the Consilium Belli:
Each member of the Consilium Belli has a term which lasts for a period of two months from when they are appointed. When a Council member’s term is due to end or a Councillor resigns, the Curator will choose when to open a candidates thread and post an announcement in the Symposium. Applicants must then post their reasons for wishing to participate and relevant qualifications within this qualifications thread, which shall remain open for 72 hours.

After the candidates thread is closed the Triumvirate will appoint as many new Councillors as are required at that time. Councillors may serve consecutive terms though in the interests of fairness the Triumvirate will attempt to introduce new qualified councillors when possible.

Reasoning;

The Cow is an ideal means for the modding community to discuss the Tw sections of the site, as such the Cow should not be bound by limiting it's membership though the Syntagma.

[Perikles]

I definitely support...

[imb39]

Will those 'advisories' also be limited to a two month term, or for that particular issue? The thrust of the legislation is, obviously, the way to go.

[Halie Satanus]

Will those 'advisories' also be limited to a two month term, or for that particular issue? The thrust of the legislation is, obviously, the way to go.

"During it's tenure" is that to ambiguous?. i was going for least restrictive.

Will the advisories have to be citizens?

Again i was going for least restrictive and trying to cut down on verbosity. so no they don't have to be citizens.

[rez]

Will the advisories have to be citizens?

[the Black Prince]

make sure you state that such advisors do not need to be citizens, or words to that affect.

shouldn't advisories be "advisors" or maybe "consultants"?

[Professor420]

Generally, advisors are considered 'higher ranking' people (advisors to the CoW sounds higher than the CoW members themselves). Consultants would be a much more accurate term.

As far as the 'tenure,' I think the 'current Council term' or something to that effect (meaning, the current 2-month term), would be more accurate than 'tenure.'

I support the ideas behind this issue, however.

[Tom Paine]

Since when was an advisor higher than those they advised? It'd be like saying an advisor of a monarch was more important than the monarch. No, advisor is fine.

Support, by the by; it's a good idea.

[Halie Satanus]

Advisories is in my opinion the correct word to use in this case, consultants pertains to someone gives expert or professional advise and would therefore be misleading as not all advisers would be experts or professionals.

Advisers would be fine but as they mean the same thing i see no reason to change.

As far as the 'tenure,' I think the 'current Council term' or something to that effect (meaning, the current 2-month term), would be more accurate than 'tenure.'

I see no reason to change tenure to 'current Council term' it's using one word correctly rather than three.

make sure you state that such advisors do not need to be citizens, or words to that affect.

Citizenry is not a requirement so i see no reason to mention it. and in future you will be kind enough to ask rather than bark any request you have of me.

[Kagemusha]

Would it be too radical to open the Councills to ordinary members altogether? So they could be full blown Councillors without beeing Citizens?

[Publius]

I support this Ammendment.

[the Black Prince]

HS, currently council members have to be citizens. without refutation, standard interpretation would suggest this applies throughout the section, therefore to advisors, or whatever term is selected, as well as full councillors.

nor was i making a request of you, i was making a statement. i didn't think the obvious addendum to the statement was necessary. clearly i was wrong.

[Halie Satanus]

HS, currently council members have to be citizens. without refutation, standard interpretation would suggest this applies throughout the section, therefore to advisors, or whatever term is selected, as well as full councillors.

Advisories would be just that, Advisories, not full members, they would only be allowed access via the stipulations set out in this amendment, their not appointed by staff so don't have to be citizens.

nor was i making a request of you, i was making a statement. i didn't think the obvious addendum to the statement was necessary. clearly i was wrong.

That's twice today you have misread and misconstrued something i've said, if you read the line which includes the words 'in future' you will realise i was not talking about your already posted lack of respect towards me, but making what will probably be a vain attempt to stop you making such an error in judging my patience again. Had you not already misquoted me and then ommited an apology today this would not have been an issue.

[Spiff]

Currently anyone should be able to post in the CoW, as it is clearly stated as a public forum in the syntagma. I think the intention is for the appointed councillors to sift through the ideas and sculpt them into proposals for the senior staff to review.

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

I llike this, but I'd suggest cleaning up the language a bit:

The Council will have the power to invite advisors to be given access to the Council during its tenure. To do this a thread shall be opened in the Council forum and three serving councilors must agree to the proposed advisor. Any time limit should also be proposed if required.

Should acceptance be obtained the council shall request access permissions be given by the administration.

An existing advisor can be removed at any time by three serving council members agreeing to the proposal in the same way as above.

Currently anyone should be able to post in the CoW, as it is clearly stated as a public forum in the syntagma. I think the intention is for the appointed councillors to sift through the ideas and sculpt them into proposals for the senior staff to review.

no, anyone can view but only councilors and hex can post.

[Spiff]

A public forum open to the public for all discussion of the forums in question. The appointed councillors are in charge of drafting proposals.. i thought that was one of the points raised during the reforms, that people were complaining they couldnt get access to suggest things in the Councils

This topic has already been discussed now i think about it, Here:

I for some reason changed this so that it would be a public forum, with the elected members tasked with sorting all the suggestions into actual proposals.. not a bad idea really i think... If thats not what people want then yeah these changes are needed, its just people were complaining about the outrage of not being able to post in the councils.

I'd say that for gathering ideas it is probably best to cast the net as wide as possible, meaning the suggestus. I would suggest retaining the councils in the syntagma, but not as permanent institutions but bodies to be elected/appointed when staff consider it advantageous to have a focus group on a specific project.

So the whole thing is probably my mistake, but in fairness no one sponsored this change last time it was suggested.. so i take only partial responsibility

[Halie Satanus]

Consilium Belli

Six Civitates shall be appointed by the Triumvirate to discuss and advise on ideas concerning the Total War section of the forums. These civitates should have a strong background in the Total War modding community and be in good standing.

A designated forum will be created in the Question and Suggestions fora, where all suggestions regarding the Total War section of the Forums will be discussed.The Council shall make necessary recommendations to the staff on issues of the TW Sections.

The Council will have the power to invite advisors to be given access to the Council during its tenure. To do this a thread shall be opened in the Council forum and three serving councilors must agree to the proposed advisor. Any time limit should also be proposed if required.

Should acceptance be obtained the council shall request access permissions be given by the administration.

An existing advisor can be removed at any time by three serving council members agreeing to the proposal in the same way as above.

Appointment to the Consilium Belli:
Each member of the Consilium Belli has a term which lasts for a period of two months from when they are appointed. When a Council member’s term is due to end or a Councillor resigns, the Curator will choose when to open a candidates thread and post an announcement in the Symposium. Applicants must then post their reasons for wishing to participate and relevant qualifications within this qualifications thread, which shall remain open for 72 hours.

After the candidates thread is closed the Triumvirate will appoint as many new Councillors as are required at that time. Councillors may serve consecutive terms though in the interests of fairness the Triumvirate will attempt to introduce new qualified councillors when possible.

Fair enough.

[gigagaia]

I would also suggest adding in a slight ammendment that requires the member who is an advisor/expert, to be restricted to posting in the threads which he or she has been invited in to advise on. Those threads/issues can of course be broad-ranging or narrow, depending on the member's expertise. Members can be invited to participate in other threads/issues, but that they have a mandate to stick to in their advisory status.
This just keeps members from "becoming" members of the council unofficially, which i think we can all agree is not the intent of this bill.

[Halie Satanus]

I would also suggest adding in a slight ammendment that requires the member who is an advisor/expert, to be restricted to posting in the threads which he or she has been invited in to advise on. Those threads/issues can of course be broad-ranging or narrow, depending on the member's expertise. Members can be invited to participate in other threads/issues, but that they have a mandate to stick to in their advisory status.
This just keeps members from "becoming" members of the council unofficially, which i think we can all agree is not the intent of this bill.

Could that be archived by the Councillor who opens the proposal thread stating that the advisor has access for the duration of the given subject or discussion??.

Any time limit should also be proposed if required.

___________________

Personally i never had a problem with people becoming members on request and if they were given three nods from serving councillors, which should be nothing more than a formality in most cases, people who offer help or advise to the cow get nothing for it, there's no power or free lunch just the knowledge that your ideas and input are welcomed and valued, for that you get to discuss your input with members who will try to keep the discussion moving forward and formulate a workable end product.

[Sétanta]

Is this not what I proposed 24 hours ago? I obviously support, but still.