Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47

Thread: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

  1. #1

    Default Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    As you may or may not know I have been doing some work with citizenship and patronages etc... In my research, I have come across of active former citizens who had their citizenship removed.
    Currently, if a revoked citizen wishes to become citizens, they must go through the application process again.

    I would like to propose a different approach. Citizens usually lose their citizenship through misbehavior, thus the reason for this proposal.

    The Proposal

    Requirements
    A revoked citizen may apply for reinstatement if the following conditions are met;
    1. Have had their citizenship revoked no less than 3 years.
    2. Must be active* for the previous 3 years.
    3. No Moderation warnings for1 year.


    * I supposed "active" would have to be defined. Obviously, the member would have to be posting on the site.

    Approval Process
    • The Revoked citizen PM's the Curator with a formal request with a letter explaining; the reason for their revocation with permission to make revocation referral public, why they want to be reinstated and details on how they have changed as a member of the site. The Curator would post the referral and the letter of reinstatement it int he Politia for review by the Censors.
    • The Censors determines that all requirements have been met.
    • Then the letter of reinstatement along with the revocation referral is posted by the Curator in the Prothalamos, Citizens debate and after two days a poll lasting 5 days added.
    • If the 2/3rd majority of non-abstaining votes, the member will have their citizenship reinstated.


    This amendment does not exclude the choice to be patronized a second time.

    Stealthfox's Proposal
    A member whose citizenship has been revoked may request it restored after a period of one year from the date of removal as long as the requester has not had any moderation warnings within a one year period. Applicant PMs the current curator, who verifies the requirements and posts a thread in the Prothalomos. After a two day discussion period the Curator adds a poll lasting five days. A 2/3rds majority of non-abstaining votes in favor of reinstating citizenship is required for it to be granted. A citizen may choose to be patronized a second time.
    I do not believe this would be a footnote. The specifics of the procedure would be in the footnote.

    In Section 1, Article 1 of the Constitution.
    A member whose citizenship has been revoked have two options; They may request it restored after a period of three years from the date of removal as long as the requester has not had any moderation warnings within a one (two) year(s) period or choose to be patronized a second time.
    The Footnote
    The Applicant PM's the Curator requesting reinstatement giving permission to make public the referral that led to the revocation and explaining how they have changed. The Curator posts the information the Politia in which the Censors verifies that the requirements have been met. Once verified, the Curator posts a thread with the reinstatement letter and referral that had led to the revocation in the Prothalomos. After a two day discussion period, the Curator adds a poll lasting five days. A 2/3rds majority of non-abstaining votes in favor of reinstating citizenship is required for it to be granted.


    ----
    What do you think of the length? Too long? suggest a length.



    CHANGE LOG______________________________________________
    1. Changed 75% to 66%. (18/04/2018)
    2. Corrected the role of the Censor (18/04/2018)
    3. Changed 66% to
    2/3rds majority of non-abstaining votes. (19/04/2018)
    4. Added details of letter and permission to make referral public. (19/04/2018)
    5. Added option of 1 or 2 years for debate. (19/04/2018)
    5. Added Constitution changes based on Stealthfox's suggestion. (19/04/2018)
    6. Removed the active requirement since the time span has been shortened (19/04/2018)
    7. Added three years for the time period to keep consistent with the original intent. (20/04/2018)
    Last edited by PikeStance; April 20, 2018 at 05:31 AM.

  2. #2
    Halie Satanus's Avatar Emperor of ice cream
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    19,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Seem a very complex way of offering a route back to those who might otherwise struggle to find a patron.

  3. #3
    Commissar Caligula_'s Avatar The Ecstasy of Potatoes
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The alcoves in the Koningin Astridpark
    Posts
    5,876

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Opposed, I don't see they point. Just make em have to apply for Citizenship again via a Patron and do everything a non-Citizen would do to get Citizenship.



  4. #4
    Frunk's Avatar Form Follows Function
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    6,495

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    While I could live with this change, I don't think it's necessary, and also think there is some logic behind making them re-apply, either with a new patron, or their former one. The latter may or may not be willing to do that for them.

    The entire Curia should be consulted in the (re-)application process (via a new application), not just the Censors, IMO.
    Last edited by Frunk; April 18, 2018 at 07:02 AM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Commissar Caligula_ View Post
    Opposed, I don't see they point. Just make em have to apply for Citizenship again via a Patron and do everything a non-Citizen would do to get Citizenship.
    Do share why?
    Many revoked citizens have contributed a great deal more than current citizens. They had their citizenship revoked because of their behavior. If their behavior is exceptional, why not reinstate?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frunk View Post
    While I could live with this change, I don't think it's necessary, and also think there is some logic behind making them re-apply, either with a new patron, or their former one. The latter may or may not be willing to do that for them.

    The entire Curia should be consulted in the (re-)application process (via a new application), not just the Censors, IMO.
    Quote Originally Posted by ♔PikeStance♔ View Post
    Approval Process
    • PM the Curator with a formal request with a letter explaining why they want to be reinstated and details on how they have changed as a member of the site.
    • The Censor deliberate. If they agree, then the request is posted in the Prothalamos.
    • Citizens will debate and after two days a poll lasting 5 days.
    • If the 3/4 of the citizens agree, the member will have their citizenship reinstated.

    The involvement of the Censors is to ensure all of the requirements are met, avoiding the discussion in the application thread.

    Keep in mind the patron route will still be available much sooner. One thing I noticed is that members who were revoked were young and did immature things. They are obviously mature now and if they have been active for 5 years they are still contributing something to the community. Moreover, unless you know the person personally, I would imagine it isn't easy to indicate your renewed interest in citizenship and potential patrons may shy away because of the stigma of having your citizenship revoked.

  6. #6
    Adamat's Avatar Invertebrate
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Duchy of Dutchland
    Posts
    11,637

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    If after 5 years you still cannot find a patron, you're not very likely to reach 75% of for votes...
    #JusticeForCookie #JusticeForCal #JusticeForAkar #JusticeForAthelchan

  7. #7

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Are 5 years too long?

    I fear that revoked citizens may carry a stigma that prevents potential patrons from approaching them and revoked citizens from approaching a citizen. This gives another option.

  8. #8
    Commissar Caligula_'s Avatar The Ecstasy of Potatoes
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    The alcoves in the Koningin Astridpark
    Posts
    5,876

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    The requirement is harsher than if they were to just apply in the same fashion as normal prospective Citizens though.
    75% approval from Citizens and the Censors get to have a say before it even gets to the Curia.



  9. #9

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    the current threshold is 60%.
    I could reduce it to 60%. I felt like a great consensus was needed.
    Also, The Censor role is to verify all requirements are meant. I should make that more clear.

  10. #10
    Frunk's Avatar Form Follows Function
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    6,495

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    @Pike: Sorry. Serves me right for skimming.

    Like I said, I don't oppose this, but not sure the status quo needs changing. I like the idea of a Citizen having to go through the process again. Should having previously be a Citizen be either a help, or a hindrance? I would say no to both, so therefore the process should be exactly the same for them as new Citizens, no?

  11. #11

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    The process is not any less involved. In addition to the candidate's behavior and attitude under increased scrutiny, their contribution will be discussed as well. The difference is that they can still retain their former patron. They also do not need to ask someone to patronize which is a bit of a taboo by some (and most likely taboo by an older member). I think it is unlikely that someone would seek out a revoked citizen as well. Given these circumstances, this option would be a viable alternative.

    I would still keep the former process of a formal patronage open. However, I suspect that we are far more likely to have revoked citizens take this route.

    As far as the requirement are concerned, I would be open to reducing the time span from 5 years (2, 3, or 4). I still like the 1 year no moderation warning given the person had been revoked for behavioral issues. This also showed a clear commitment to adhere to the higher standards we demand.

  12. #12
    StealthFox's Avatar Consensus Achieved
    Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    8,170

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Am I missing something? Under Section 1 this section "Citizenship can only be revoked by the Curia6" points to footnote 6 which then points to Section IV. I do not see any language in Section 4 concerning revoking citizenship. Should it actually point to Section III where it outlines procedures for the triumvirate?

    As far as this proposal though, I'm fine with the concept, but not the details, especially the five year time frame. How about something like this, inserted as a footnote somewhere.

    A member whose citizenship has been revoked may request it restored after a period of one year from the date of removal as long as the requester has not had any moderation warnings within a one year period. Applicant PMs the current curator, who verifies the requirements and posts a thread in the Prothalomos.
    After a two day discussion period the Curator adds a poll lasting five days. A 2/3rds majority of non-abstaining votes in favor of reinstating citizenship is required for it to be granted.
    Last edited by StealthFox; April 18, 2018 at 10:28 AM.

  13. #13
    Halie Satanus's Avatar Emperor of ice cream
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    19,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    How would this prevent someone who did something truly vile from applying again. ?

  14. #14
    StealthFox's Avatar Consensus Achieved
    Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    8,170

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    They still have to be voted back in, so they have to convince us they've changed. If it's something as you say truly vile, (tony?) I can't imagine it ever passing. In my suggestion above I did have a majority of 60%, but just changed it to 2/3rds. It should be harder to get back in than the first time.

  15. #15
    Gaius Baltar's Avatar Old gods die hard
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    campus Martis
    Posts
    7,587
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    How many citizens have had their membership revoked? I could only imagine that a small fraction of those would even attempt to reapply for membership. So the production of legislation for such an event seems like more trouble than it is worth. As has been mentioned before, whomever can go through the citizenship process as already outlined.

    ​​
    Pillaging and Plundering since 2006

    The House of Baltar

    Neither is this the dawn from the east, nor is a dragon flying above, nor are the gables of this hall aflame. Nay, mortal enemies approach in ready armour. Ravens are calling, wolves are howling, spear clashes and shield answers



  16. #16
    Halie Satanus's Avatar Emperor of ice cream
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    19,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by StealthFox View Post
    They still have to be voted back in, so they have to convince us they've changed. If it's something as you say truly vile, (tony?) I can't imagine it ever passing. In my suggestion above I did have a majority of 60%, but just changed it to 2/3rds. It should be harder to get back in than the first time.
    There is worse than Tony. I hadn’t even thought of him.

    So here’s my problem, members of the Curia now weren’t around when certain events happened. And evidence may be covered by SND, or deleted. How would the Curia know?. It opens the door to discussion where all the info can’t be discussed and would lead to Hex veto. In the meantime those affected are forced to relive those events.

  17. #17
    Sir Adrian's Avatar the Imperishable
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nehekhara
    Posts
    17,363

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    5 years feels a tad on the long side. I would dramatically shorten the term and change it to 2/3 of votes. An can still be an even after 5 years while somebody genuinely repentant may be a changed person after only 6 months. The important part is that the Curia vettes the person

    Say 1 year has passed since citizenship was stripped, the user has been active for that year, no moderation infractions for that year.

    Quote Originally Posted by Halie Satanus View Post
    There is worse than Tony. I hadn’t even thought of him.

    So here’s my problem, members of the Curia now weren’t around when certain events happened. And evidence may be covered by SND, or deleted. How would the Curia know?. It opens the door to discussion where all the info can’t be discussed and would lead to Hex veto. In the meantime those affected are forced to relive those events.
    Hex or moderation can give the Curator their recommendation for stuff covered by SND. Moreover ostrakons are issued by the curia so they are not covered by staff non disclosure, it would be just a matter of simply checking the archives seeing the reason for the ostrakon and comparing it with the candidate's current behavior.
    Last edited by Sir Adrian; April 18, 2018 at 01:30 PM.
    Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!


  18. #18
    Adamat's Avatar Invertebrate
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Duchy of Dutchland
    Posts
    11,637

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Ostrakons are only made public on the request of the defendant aren't they?
    #JusticeForCookie #JusticeForCal #JusticeForAkar #JusticeForAthelchan

  19. #19
    Iskar's Avatar Insanity with Dignity
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Frankfurt, München, somtimes my beloved Rhineland
    Posts
    6,395

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    There are no ostraka anymore. Citizenship can be revoked by vote of the Triumvirate in a referral process.

    As for the misdirecting footnote, yes, that was an oversight from the rewriting when the section numbers got shifted down by one (due to removal of old section II). The Curator can just change it via a minor formative change, I guess.

    I am opposed to this addition. Just re-applying like any other non-citizen does the job fairly well, yields no stigma or unfair bonus, ensures Curial control by vote and requires no additional red tape or special regulations. If their contributions warranted citizenship the first time they will have an easy job presenting them again for it (nobody is forced to only name contributions made between losing citizenship and reapplying).
    "Non i titoli illustrano gli uomini, ma gli uomini i titoli." - Niccolo Machiavelli, Discorsi
    "Du musst die Sterne und den Mond enthaupten, und am besten auch den Zar. Die Gestirne werden sich behaupten, aber wahrscheinlich nicht der Zar." - Einstürzende Neubauten, Weil, Weil, Weil

    On an eternal crusade for reason, logics, catholicism and chocolate. Mostly chocolate, though.

    I can heartily recommend the Italian Wars mod by Aneirin.
    In exile, but still under the patronage of the impeccable Aikanár, alongside Aneirin. Humble patron of Cyclops, Frunk and Abdülmecid I.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Citizenship Reinstatement Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by StealthFox View Post
    They still have to be voted back in, so they have to convince us they've changed. If it's something as you say truly vile, (tony?) I can't imagine it ever passing. In my suggestion above I did have a majority of 60%, but just changed it to 2/3rds. It should be harder to get back in than the first time.
    I thought 1 year would be too light. Possibly two years would be sufficient to apply for reinstatement. If everyone likes one year better, I am cool with that.
    Also, I originally had 75%, but that seemed to be too much for some. 2/3rd vote seems just as reasonable as 60%.

    Quote Originally Posted by Halie Satanus View Post
    There is worse than Tony. I hadn’t even thought of him.
    So here’s my problem, members of the Curia now weren’t around when certain events happened. And evidence may be covered by SND, or deleted. How would the Curia know?. It opens the door to discussion where all the info can’t be discussed and would lead to Hex veto. In the meantime those affected are forced to relive those events.
    The best way to avoid any non-disclosure information is to have the person explain why they had their citizenship revoked in their explanation. The goal of the discussion is not to discussed the factors of their revocation but their contrition and whether or not their behavior and attitude have improved. I would not exclude discussion of their past dude. It may be relevant depending on the length of time of revocation and application for reinstatement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iskar View Post
    There are no ostraka anymore. Citizenship can be revoked by vote of the Triumvirate in a referral process.
    The term is being used because most revoked citizens had their citizenship removed it was called that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iskar View Post
    I am opposed to this addition. Just re-applying like any other non-citizen does the job fairly well, yields no stigma or unfair bonus, ensures Curial control by vote and requires no additional red tape or special regulations. If their contributions warranted citizenship the first time they will have an easy job presenting them again for it (nobody is forced to only name contributions made between losing citizenship and reapplying).
    The procedure still requires a Curia vote.
    Actually, under the current system they cannot use any contribution in their first application has a contribution. This precedent was established some time ago. It would be unfair to change the standard now since former citizens were denied based on their argument.

    As stated, this is only one of two options. I would not remove the older format, but I do believe this method would be preferred since it is much more straightforward and easier.


    edit: OP UPDATED
    Last edited by PikeStance; April 18, 2018 at 07:56 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •