Representation of the Citizens Bill

**Spiff** · December 29, 2006, 08:17 PM

Representation of the Citizens Bill

Proposer: Spiff
Supporters: Simetrical, Perikles, Tacticalwithdrawal

Summary:
This bill aims to reform the posting and voting rights within the Curia and its sub-forums. Specifically, members holding either the rank of Civitate or Artifex shall be given the right to post and vote within the Prothalamos and Curia Votes forums.

The Members Ranks and Rights section of the Syntagma shall be amended as highlighted below.

Member Ranks and Rights

...

Citizen
Contributing members of TWC have the opportunity to become a Citizen of the forum as per the Patronization section of the Syntagma. There are two ranks of Citizen, one is elevated for their contributions to the Total War Community (Artifex), the other is elevated for their contribution to the Common Community (Civitate).
- All Citizens of TWC have ~~limited rights~~ the right to post within the Curia forum, as stated in the Curia section of the Syntagma.
- All Citizens are granted access to the "Symposium" forum.
- The rank of Citizen can be removed by the CdeC as per the "Citizens' Behavior" section of the Syntagma.
- All Citizens may nominate other members for Citizenship as per the "Patronization" section of the Syntagma.

Patrician
Patricians are members who, having already gained either Citizen rank and proved they are good posters (as conferred by the rank of Civitate or Artifex), are interested in TWC and have made a good contribution to it, and who therefore deserve the right to have a greater say in the running of TWC. have subsequently continued to excel in their position within the forums by contributing to a greater extent than Citizenship alone requires.
- Any Citizen may be nominated for the rank of Patrician by any other Patrician in accordance with the "Patronization" section of the Syntagma. There is no patronage link created in this process (as per Patrician/Citizen relationship).
- Patricianship is awarded by the Consilium de Civitate for significant contribution to TWC (Appendix A). None of these contributions provide automatic Patricianship however, but they do allow for nomination. In addition to those contributions, the member must have at least one month’s experience as a Citizen and have no active warnings at the time of the election. Patricians are expected to contribute to the developing the site. Involvement in the Curia is part of that.
- ~~Patricians have the same rights as Citizens but may also participate in the Curia to a greater extent, as stated in the Curia section of the Syntagma.~~
- The rank of Patrician can be removed by the CdeC as per the "Citizens' Behavior" section of the Syntagma.

...

The Curia Section of the Syntagma shall be amended as highlighted below:

The Curia
A special section shall be made in the forum to discuss pertinent topics in governance, a place for the Citizens to propose legislation, and to post relevant developments. The Curia is a place for the exchange of ideas, and if the rules against any infractions are tough in the normal forums, in the Curia they are doubly so. The Curia is broken into distinct sections:

Curia
For general discussion of governance related matters. Polls are not permitted within the Curia main. All Citizens may post in this area and propose informal legislation for discussion, though it will require Patrician support to become officially recognised in the Prothalamos, as per the Legislation section of the Syntagma.

Prothalamos
An area specifically for formally proposing and discussing legislation and ideas relating to TWC as stated in the "Legislation" section of the Syntagma, but not for voting. ~~Only Patricians may post in this area.~~

Curia Vote
An area strictly used for voting on proposed legislation and in Curial Elections, as outlined in the "Legislation" and "Curial Elections" section of the Syntagma. Surveys are not permitted within this sub-forum. ~~Only Patricians may post and vote in this area.~~

Consilium de Civitate
An area visible only to elected Patricians and Senior Staff as per the "Consilium de Civitate" section of the Syntagma. Within this forum votes shall be taken regarding the granting and removal of certain Curial ranks.

Additional areas may be added at the discretion of Curia members and following an appropriate vote.

The Patronization section of the Syntagma shall be amended as highlighted below:

Patronization
Any Citizen holding their rank for three months without warnings can Patronise a Peregrinus for Citizenship at a rate of one per month (subject to requirements, section 1). The granting of Citizenship is determined by the Consilium de Civitate. The process for patronage works as follows:

The patron reviews the member before recommending him, ensuring the member has at least fifty posts, has been a registered member for at least one month and has no warnings in the last six months.
The nominee sends a private message to explain his duties, privileges, and contributions towards TWC to his patron. The patron then sends this paragraph (along with his own paragraph outlining why he chose this person for a client) to a member of the CdeC.
The CdeC member then opens a thread and vote in the Consilium de Civitate section and the proposed nominee is then discussed and voted on.
If the nominee achieves at least a 75% majority, the nominee shall become a Citizen. ~~This must be concluded within 1 week.~~

If a nominee fails his Citizenship vote he must wait a minimum of one month before being put up for vote again. The nominating Patrician of a failed candidate may not patronise again for two months. Members of the CdeC must abstain from voting on those they wish to patronize.

All CdeC votes associated with patronage shall be concluded within one week (7 days) of the thread being opened in the CdeC.

Points 3 and 4 above are used for the promotion of Patricians nominated by an existing Patrician as per the requirements listed in Appendix A. In addition to these requirements, the nominee must have at least one month’s experience as a Citizen, and have no active warnings at the time of their election.

The Legislation section of the Syntagma shall be amended as highlighted below.

Legislation
Any ~~Patrician~~ Citizen is able to post a bill in the Prothalamos for discussion, which does not require named support. If a version of the bill becomes supported by a minimum of three other Patricians, the proposer can request that the Syntagma Curator move the supported version of a bill to a vote three days after it was first posted.

Should it be judged that after the minimum of three days more time is needed for debate on the subject, or that the debate is active, and moving the bill would be premature, the progression to voting of the bill may be delayed at the discretion of the Syntagma Curator. If the Syntagma Curator decides to delay the vote on a bill beyond one month, then this decision is subject to staff ratification in the same way as a staff veto.

Once moved to vote, all bills shall be voted on over a one-week period. All Bills will be required to run for the full duration so that all ~~Patricians~~ Citizens may be able to vote if they so wish. In addition, responses (including indirect methods such as signatures) in the Curia Vote sub-forum will be limited to notification of having voted. A bill shall pass on the basis of a two-thirds majority in favor. Abstentions are not considered when determining whether a bill has achieved the required proportion of voters. If any bill fails a vote, no revote on a substantially similar bill will be permitted for twenty-eight days.

To the extent made possible by the forum software, no member will be able to view the results of a poll in the Curia until he has voted in the poll or it has closed.

If the forum software cannot reasonably be modified to prohibit viewing of poll results by any given member, that member, is hereby obliged on their honour as a ~~Patricians~~ Citizen not to view the results of any poll in the Curia he has not voted in unless necessary for the execution of any duties he may have to the site.

Version History:

1.1 - Current Draft. Removed phrase "holding their rank for three months without warnings" from Patronization section.
Supported by:Simetrical, Perikles, Tacticalwithdrawal

1.0 - Initial draft:
Supported by: General_Sun, Perikles, Simetrical

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

Feedback welcomed (especially regarding typos or any other sections which require alteration)

**Halie Satanus** · December 29, 2006, 09:52 PM

[insert name of new forum dedicated for advanced discussion of Total War.]

...
May as well strike that, there isn't one.

Patronisation, Why??....
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=75068

One or the other you can't have both, either you want more citizens or you don't. The Patronisation for citizens was a popular vote if i recall you were one of only a very small minority that was against, I'm not opposed to some kind of compromise to advance more Patricians. (i think i just heard Gigalo screaming)

Other than that i support your erm reform of the reforms.

**General Sun** · December 29, 2006, 10:03 PM

I support this bill completely.

**John Wayne** · December 29, 2006, 10:36 PM

The question that needs answered is thus; which would be better for TWC as a whole, more citizens or more Curial activity?

**Sétanta** · December 29, 2006, 11:28 PM

Nah. Why must we stir up a hornets nest every couple months by radically overhauling the system. As soon as a Bill that returns Citizens the rights to do everything mentioned in this particular bill, whispers of "degrading Curial standards" and "staff doesn't trust the Curia anymore" will return, and hey a few more months go by and another upheaval.

I don't think allowing every Citizen to vote will do the Curia any good, so leave Patricians as the only ones who can vote, but it makes no sense to exclude Citizens from the Prothalamos. Also, seeing that returning Patronisation rights to every citizen was so popular, it is foolish to return that to only Patricians now.

However, I would support this Bill if those to things were changed. Patricians should be the only ones who can vote, and all Citizens should be able to patronise.

**Fabolous** · December 30, 2006, 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by Mudd

Nah. Why must we stir up a hornets nest every couple months by radically overhauling the system. As soon as a Bill that returns Citizens the rights to do everything mentioned in this particular bill, whispers of "degrading Curial standards" and "staff doesn't trust the Curia anymore" will return, and hey a few more months go by and another upheaval.

Does staff trust the Curia currently? And would this bill change the level of staff trust? And considering the idea behind this bill is proposed by a member of hex, and no member of hex has voiced dissent to the counter-reforms in our thread discussing the issue, I hardly thing staff trust is the issue.

**Publius** · December 30, 2006, 12:13 AM

I fully support the notion of granting citizens access to the Prothalamos. Voting is a right I'd more associate with proving yourself via debates in the Proth and being raised to the rank of patrician, however. It is at its core a Curial rank, after all.

Also, I'm not sure what good removing citizen's rights to patronize does us though. We seem to have a constant tug of war on this issue, and go back on forth on whether or not to allow citizens to patronize. The answer? Have a little faith in the CdeC - I think we can handle a little more than one nomination a month.

**General Sun** · December 30, 2006, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by Publius

Also, I'm not sure what good removing citizen's rights to patronize does us though. We seem to have a constant tug of war on this issue, and go back on forth on whether or not to allow citizens to patronize. The answer? Have a little faith in the CdeC - I think we can handle a little more than one nomination a month.

If we don't then the rank the Civitate would essentially be identical to the rank of Patrician.

**Publius** · December 30, 2006, 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by General_Sun

If we don't then the rank the Civitate would essentially be identical to the rank of Patrician.

Not if Patricians retained the priviledge of suffrage. I'm entirely for citizens to be allowed to debate - the Prothalamos was much more active and to be honest I think the wider range of perspectives did debate good.

However I think the right to actually vote in these processes, should be something you prove to the Curia (to the extent that you are promoted to Patrician). Couple this with the fact that citizens cannot run for something like the CdeC, and I think we've acheived exactly what we set out for - a system that encourages active participation in the Curial process and gives those that excell in this the privilidges (via patricianship) to contribute in an even higher capcacity, as well as be 'rewarded' in a sense.

**Perikles** · December 30, 2006, 04:54 AM

I only have one thing to say:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**gigagaia** · December 30, 2006, 06:16 AM

Well, this is a step backwards in many ways and I doubt it will solve a lot of the problems it seeks to. As long as you have a curia which is the "right" of all members, who have no responsibilities other than being good boys and girls, the curia won't be a particularly constructive place.

Mudd, staff trust is not the issue we once believed it to be. The liklihood of the staff ever trusting/letting the curia to be any more than a glorified member retention tool is quite low.

I suppose whether or not I support this, is entirely irrelevant.

**Spiff** · December 30, 2006, 08:57 AM

The Patricians patronising thing wasnt particularly my idea, so i appologise if ive contradicted myself somewhat. It should be said that most of these changes do come from popular discussion within Hex though.

**gigagaia** · December 30, 2006, 10:34 AM

Hmm I misread it actually... scratch a bit of negativity off my previous post. But I will need some more time to consider this, because there are still points which I'm not entirely thrilled with or feel some areas which could improve...

**Sétanta** · December 30, 2006, 12:48 PM

Yes I know gig, I know. Its just an issue that I felt might come up eventually.

I want to make it very clear, allowing Citizens rights to post in the Prothalamos is a great one. They can propose legislation, debate legislation, take an active roll in the community and it will be far, far easier for Patricians to nominate new Patricians on that basis. But I feel that allowing every Citizen the right to vote will do the Curia no good. Its just too big of an audience that I for one don't hold trust in to vote. I mean, when few of them have even posted in the Curia, why would we give them a vote? Give them a voice and the ability to earn their rank by all means yes, but vote? No.

**gigagaia** · December 30, 2006, 01:03 PM

I agree. Voting rights should remain the domain of patricians who have proven themselves worthy, not citizens who have been bestowed a rank as an award for being a good member.

I can see the merit of allowing diverse debate for those who want to (Mind you I can also see problems with it), but does anyone have any rationale why diminishing the standards to an unaccountable body of people to whom the curia is a reward rather than a responsibility is a good thing?

**the Black Prince** · December 30, 2006, 03:27 PM

i'll support if Senior Staff would like to stand forward and a/ say they all support and b/ say they were wrong to make the changes that this act overrides in the first place.

if senior staff don;t support this, then ultimately its irrelevant

**Spiff** · December 30, 2006, 03:37 PM

I cant speak for all senior staff of course but i view the reforms as accomplising a goal, to create a strong Patrician class for the Curia to now be expanded from. Notice the act does not override every aspect of the reforms, Patricians are still a highly respected group compared to the old minimal requirements

I do not think the reforms as a whole were wrong but i would have done them diffrently perhaps, but then i wasnt in the senior staff at the time.

**Fabolous** · December 30, 2006, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by the Black Prince

i'll support if Senior Staff would like to stand forward and a/ say they all support and b/ say they were wrong to make the changes that this act overrides in the first place.

if senior staff don;t support this, then ultimately its irrelevant

I can speak for senior staff to an extent as Curator. Is this bill supported by senior staff? Yes. Now, this bill wasn't posted word for word in hex and every member of hex said they supported, however, the concerns behind the changes that needed to be made were not disputed by any member of hexagon over the considerable period that it was available to be.

Were we wrong to make the changes that the act overrides? Well pretty much, else we wouldn't be asking the Curia to overturn them. I won't say the reforms didn't achieve their goals, but we will admit that the reforms had unintended and unfortunate consequences. The ideals behind the reforms were in a Curia that was we would reform it to be made of members of the highest quality and that would be the base on which a new Curia would be built, with tough standards for entry, but with the increased membership from M2TW and other attractions, would grow into a body that staff would look at and see as a rather large, very capable body to which staff might then be able to trust with increased responsibility.

That of course, isn't how it worked out. Instead of the curia growing full of smart capable members, it has staggnated, and then decayed.

Therefore, we hope to return to a situation where one of the greatest appeals of TWC in the Curia will return to the state it had before, were it was a body that perhaps had it weaker members, but as a whole represented the will of the TWC membership.

**gigagaia** · December 30, 2006, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by Fabolous

That of course, isn't how it worked out. Instead of the curia growing full of smart capable members, it has staggnated, and then decayed.

Perhaps that has little to do with the number of members in the curia, and more to do with the fact staff never came through with delivering on responsibilities, as well as an extreme loss of faith from citizens to senior staff.
Staff never handed the curia anything. Without powers, of course the curia did nothing. If you consider that ON has contemplated deleting it and it has nearly been totally emasculated, telling the curia it has no place in the administration of the site?
Sure, the curia doesn't ramble on about endlessly rewording legsialation on how we legislate.
Instead of empowering the curia with actual responsibilty, staff just let it decay. I'm sorry, but I'm all too skeptical of any changes coming from above now. You are changing something you have decided didn't work, because you did nothing to make sure it did work. Why do we need more changes, when the problem lies not in the curia, but in how staff engages in the curia? You are changing the recipient of the problem, not what is causing it.
You guys need to decide what you want out of the curia.
If you want a curia that is responsible and does something, then the make up is excellent as it is, but engagement from staff is non-existent.
If you want a curia which simply exists to propogate its own existence as a fancy RPG, then it matters not who is involved in the curia.

Ask yourself this; If the curia is dead, simply because there aren't as many people...
Why are the COW and COP deserted, despite no changes to its structure and numbers?
Why is the symposium practically empty?
Why has curial posting proportiontely fallen as well?

**Fabolous** · December 30, 2006, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by gigagaia

You are changing the recipient of the problem, not what is causing it.

The problem with that reasoning is the idea that there was always a problem. The Curia worked before the reforms. The reforms weren't because the Curia didn't work, they were because senior staff wanted to make them better. It made things worse, so now we want to go back to what has already worked, where is the problem with that?

Originally Posted by gigagaia

Ask yourself this; If the curia is dead, simply because there aren't as many people...
Why are the COW and COP deserted, despite no changes to its structure and numbers?

Well, I'd ask whether they were honestly ever alive, they never really did much except when handed something by Asterix, who has been unable to hand them anything due to his absence.

Further, they have been curial dependant bodies (or atleast citizen dependant) so when the curia slows, they slow with it.

Originally Posted by gigagaia

Why is the symposium practically empty?

The symposium is about or more active than it has been in my year and a half on the site.

Originally Posted by gigagaia

Why has curial posting proportiontely fallen as well?

You said it yourself, proportionally fallen. As there were less members, it fell with that.

But, despite all of that, we do recognize that the Curia is currently devoid of responsibilites, and we are working on ideas to fix that. It is under discussion within hex. However, in our infinite wisdom (meaning sim suggested it