Curia officer - Prefect act.

[Halie Satanus]

I feel a more practical approach to the issue of moderating the curia can be found in adding an appointed officer to the roster of curator's assistance. Just as CA's assist with the day to day tasks of the curators office, the 'prefect' acts as a local moderator to the curia in addition to the curator.

The why......

'Behavior unbecoming of a citizen.' - The legend we are supposed to adhere too. However, there is no definition of the legend. It's subjective, you'll know it when you see it... Far from practical and difficult to enforce. A relic of a time where patron's advised clients, disowned them should they misbehave and initiated ostrakon's should they cause too much embarrassment, not just on the reputation of the patron, but on their house. Those days are long gone. Perhaps it's time we introduced a practical alternative.


The how.......

Article II. The Curator and Curial Officers

Citizens elect and can run for9 Curial Officer positions: Magistrates, Censors and the Curator.10

The role of 'Prefect' is a position appointed by the incumbent curator. 13.

Regulations and Procedures to Section I Article II

13. Prefect: Appointed by the curator to assist in moderation of citizens behaviour.' The role of prefect will advise citizen's to adhere to behavior standards set out in 15. In addition he will be tasked to report directly to Hex any instances where a citizen is in breech of 15 article 1. Hex reports shall be recorded in the polita chat thread.

14. A list of citizens willing to serve as prefect will be requested by the curator at the beginning of his term by public thread in the curia. Applicant's must qualify under the following criteria. Have served in a staff position, inc: moderation, triumverate, tribunal. Must have no curial warning for the past three years. A Prefect must not serve consecutive terms.

15. The prefect will advise a citizen to desist in behaviors which are considered in breech of the following.

A citizen

1. is in violation of the ToS.
2. is bringing the Citizenry or site into disrepute.
3. publicly makes false statements about another member or their intentions.
4. ignores warnings from staff, including the Curator or representatives of the Curator's office.
5. demonstrably lies.
6. plagiarises or uses material without credit or reference.
7. damages discussions by repetitive posting without adding anything new.

16. The will of the Prefect: The Prefect has three tools to advise adherence to 15.

1. a thread warning posted in 'purple lettering.
2. a PM.
3. a referral to the censors.

Supporters. Flinn. Pontifex. ♔atthias♔. Aexodus. StealthFox. Iskar. King Athelstan.


Edit 1. Added supporters.
Edit 2. Changed requirement from five to three years. 14.
Edit 3. Added 'A Prefect must not serve consecutive terms.' to 14.
Edit 4. Added 'Hex reports shall be recorded in the polita chat thread.' 13.
Edit 5. Added '♔atthias♔ Aexodus' support.
Edit 6. Altered - Appointed by the curator to assist in moderation of citizens behaviour.' 13
Edit 7. Added 'StealthFox' support.
Edit 8. Added Iskar support.
Edit 9. Added King Athelstan support.

[Lifthrasir]

Why not remove the CA position and replace it by this one? I mean, why separate both duties? A prefect could do both, administrative task and moderation. The other advantage is that he could perfectly replace the Curator if that position becomes vacant for any reason and if that position (prefect) is given by a vote

[Katsumoto]

I like it. Nice and practical. Only question is would the behaviours (call yourself a Londoner Halie, spelling like a Yank!) listed in 15 be reported by this Prefect if they occur outside of the Curia?

[Halie Satanus]

@Lift: I wanted to avoid possible accusations of nepotism for the position. To keep the selection as transparent as possible. The current idea 'selection via public request' might not be transparent enough, but it's a base line which can be refined. Also, I don't want to muddy the waters of prefect/CA/curator. Open to discussion though.

@Kats - Lazy spell checking guvna.... I think 'outside the curia reports. 1' certainly could be incorporated.

[Lifthrasir]

Well my reasonning is based on 2 points:
1. the lack of HR for curial positions. By gathering CA and Prefect, we spare one.
2. the recent events in the Curia has put on light that when the Curator is not there anymore, his administrative tasks aren't made (no bad meaning against the Censor to be clear ). By setting clearly without any ambiguity a replacement to the Curator, we can hopefully avoid such issue again. Setting a vote for such a position is only to avoid suspicion of favoritism and to give an official legitimacy to that position

[Flinn]

totally love this, in particular

Applicant's must qualify under the following criteria. Have served in a staff position, inc: moderation, triumverate, tribunal. Must have no curial warning for the past five years.

you can also add Content staff IMO, content staffers are requested to behave on the highest standards and are usually scrutinized well before allowing them in the Content (not less than Moderators from my perspective)

one question though: it is ok if an actual global moderator will apply for the position? in which way would this be different from having global moderation directly involved?

[Halie Satanus]

@Lift, I’ll come back to you as the waitress in my local cafe is about to throw meat at me. Not a euphemism. And yours requires consent ration (concentration)...

@Flinn: yes they can. However, they can be VonC’ed as this is a Curia position.

[Flinn]

ok clear, support from me then

please consider to add the Content Staff to that list, it will expand the pool of potential candidates

[PikeStance]

I assume the duties of the Prefect is assumed by the Curator as well.

I suggest making it an elected official. In the event the Curator or Prefect is removed, then in the event, the Curator is removed from office, the perfect assumes the role temporarily. If the perfect is removed, then allow for the Curator to temporary appoint.

My concern is that as a CA, the Perfect is not directly responsible to the Curia, but the Curator. I am not a big fan of initiating a VonC on the Curator to remove a Prefect. It's like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Five years seems excessive. We are reducing the warning level from 1 year to 6 months on everything else, including the Censors. With my proposal, I was planning on keeping it at one year.

[Flinn]

Yes having it as an elected position is a possibility too, I would prefer it that way honestly

For how long? I think a similar position should be held for a long period (6 months), because there won't be much candidates for the position. Also, the Curator should be made responsible of checking their eligibility with regards to the moderation history requirements and their past presence in the staff (moderation, censor, etc)

edit: nay let's keep the standards VERY high at the least here, 5 years without any curial warning is really the best part of this proposal

[Halie Satanus]

I'll try to respond to all queries, forgive me if I miss anything.

I prefer not to make this another elected position.

• I think it better to have the Prefect answerable to the Curator rather than create a role with too much power which could cause conflict.
• I am also loathe to add another vote process.
• I'd also prefer the person in the role not be forced on the curator. They have to work together so they need to get on, and, we don't have elected moderators anywhere else (not anymore).

Could the CA do this job.

• While this role may become superfluous in the future and be rolled up into the CA's responsibilities, I think a clean slate for a new position would be preferable for now. The prefect could be a contentious position, that's why I did not include powers of editing posts. He reports to Hex and or the curator/censors directly.

Essentially this role can be plugged in and tried without entwining it with others. If, six months in, we feel it doesn't work, we can unplug it.

I assume the duties of the Prefect is assumed by the Curator as well.

Just as CA's assist with the day to day tasks of the curators office, the 'prefect' acts as a local moderator to the curia in addition to the curator.

My concern is that as a CA, the Perfect is not directly responsible to the Curia, but the Curator. I am not a big fan of initiating a VonC on the Curator to remove a Prefect. It's like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

All curial officers can be VonC'ed. As per Article III.

''or Votes of No Confidence (VoNC) against Curial Officers or Staff Members. A VoNC may only be initiated for neglect of duty or abuse of authority9 and, if successful against a Curial Officer, results in their immediate removal from office.10''

Five years seems excessive. We are reducing the warning level from 1 year to 6 months on everything else, including the Censors. With my proposal, I was planning on keeping it at one year.

At least 3. But 5 is a nice big safe number. I would rather throw this away than have it as low as 1.

In case anyone missed this. A prefect is appointed by the new Curator etc etc.... So when a Curator's term ends, the incumbent prefect remains until a prefect is appointed by the new Curator.

@Flinn, I don't doubt content staff have impeccable credentials. But they don't specifically have experience of moderation. All the other roles do.

[Flinn]

all noted, I can agree with the most of that; so the actual version stated in the OP is the valid one right? If so, still supporting it

[Halie Satanus]

I haven't edited anything since this morning.

However, I was thinking a prefect should not serve consecutive terms. To avoid bias. ?

[Iskar]

I would actually prefer if the Prefect was a full local mod with the authority to edit, delete and move posts. Otherwise the position will be relatively toothless except for a couple thread warnings.
One could have a hybrid solution for appointment/vote: The Curator appoints an eligible candidate and the Curia ratifies the choice by vote.

Forbidding consecutive terms seems sensible.

[Halie Satanus]

I'm hoping the prefect wouldn't need to ability to edit/delete/move posts. The prefect should get into the habit of dealing with 'unbecoming behaviour' using the tools available in the proposal. Rather than proscribing to a system of sweeping problems away. The position would only be toothless if shown disrespect. I imagine the first couple of citizens who attempt to test the prefects resolve will find themselves answering to referrals.

Ratification is an option. How long should the vote last?. I prefer we keep it as short as possible. A week?.

I'll edit in the non-consecutive clause once we have an accord on ratification and a bit of time for others to comment.

[StealthFox]

I can get behind this with two small tweaks:

13. Prefect: Appointed by the curator to serve as local moderator assists the curator in moderation of the curia. The role of prefect will advise citizen's to adhere to behavior standards set out in 15. In addition, he will be tasked to report directly to Hex any instances where a citizen is in breech of 15 article 1 If a citizen has violated 15 article 1 within the Curia, the prefect sends a report to the Curator who then forwards it to the Hexagon Council.

I wouldn't want to see an emphasis on moderation taken away from the Curator, otherwise it really is strictly a clerical position. Have this position assist the curator with moderation which may include enforcement of topicality other local moderation rights Iskar mentions. Also, the second part, I think it's important for the Curator to have a voice in TOS violations in the Curia. Depending on the case the curator can request lenience (dismissal or issuing of a note) or if its a repeated incident can advocate for something harsher (infraction).

Regarding article 15, I'd also like to see the removal or at least the rewording of #3 and 5. They're just too hard to prove and will cause lots of strife and arguments.

Other points: I don't think it needs to be an elected position. Appointed is fine; I'm indifferent about ratification. I also see no problem with having consecutive terms. I think that would be okay. And five years without a Curial warning may limit the candidate pool too much, but if so we can always amend it later.

[Iskar]

I can see the first point, but why the needless loop in the second one? The Curator has no and should have no authority in assessing ToS violations. That's the job of Moderation (Hex) and the Curator (or anyone) should not play gatekeeper for what is reported to them.

[StealthFox]

It's not meant to be a gatekeeper. It doesn't say the Curator may forward it but that it does get forwarded. It simply give the Curator a voice in the process and can either advocate for lenience or harsher punishment, but that would just be advice, the final decision for action would still rest with Hex.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Support

[Halie Satanus]

@Stealth - Rather - 'Prefect: Appointed by the curator to assist in moderation of citizens behaviour.' Than - Prefect: Appointed by the curator to assists the curator in moderation of the curia.

I'm averse to reiteration within a single sentence. Also, none of the curator's responsibilities are changed by this addition.

I have to agree with Iskar on the second point. However, we can add a directive along the lines that any report to Hex is recorded in the trium chat thread. The curator has no remit to intercede, but he can post his opinions should he wish.

Regarding article 15, I'd also like to see the removal or at least the rewording of #3 and 5. They're just too hard to prove and will cause lots of strife and arguments.

I'd rather keep those in for now, they serve as deterrents.

And five years without a Curial warning may limit the candidate pool too much, but if so we can always amend it later.

This point has been raised before (long ago) regarding, I think, criteria for speaker of the house (an elected position in Hex). Whether you actually have to be a member for five years. I think we got round it by stating, been a member for at least x years and without curial warning for x years. The former being less than the latter.

Maybe just call it 3.

Edit log added to bottom of OP, with edits.