[Amendment] Dual Consulship & Aedile Act

[Iskar]

There are several reasons not to have Lictores:
1) They sound like Lector.
2) They sound like lick.
3) The fasces carried by them gave their name to the fascist movement, which is not a good backdrop.

On the actual matter, I think the idea has merit, but for now it is still a tad too much fluffy ornamental regulations for my taste. Will think about it a bit tomorrow and give some positive additions.

[PikeStance]

Other possible names

Princeps officii was the chief of staff, permanent secretary or chef de cabinet (sounds weird saying it)
Cornicularius was a military title, for an administrative deputy of various generals etc. (A mouthful)
Adiutor (literally "helper") seems to have been the chief (general) assistant, or adjutant (Either seems fine)
Ab actis was the keeper of records, the archivist (if we could use just Actis)
Numerarius ("accountant") seems to have been the receiver of taxes. (I can get on board with this one)
Subadiuva ("under-helper") seems to have been a general assistant (a mouthful)
Exceptor seem to have been a secretary (Easy to say but may be misleading)
Singularius has been called a notary, but the word can also refer to a bodyguard (meh)

There is also this;
Aedile - was an office of the Roman Republic. Based in Rome, the aediles were responsible for maintenance of public buildings.

@Iskar: Go for it.

---

Made some minor changes to OP; grooming the rough edges and one addition of the Seniority clause.

[Lifthrasir]

From my opinion, there's a mre simple way to do it.
1. Clarify the moderation right of the curator. It is already in the constitution but some people seems to still not accepting it.
2. Change the CA position from an appointed one to an elected one as well. Basically, same duties as the curator but remains under his authority and responsability. In case of a dismiss of the curator, then the CA can take care of the tasks until a new curator is elected.

End of the story. Not a major change but rather a clarification. And most important, no need of extra manpower.

PS: you can even change the names of these positions if it pleases you

[PikeStance]

No, CA's are a good way to get eager new citizens and old to be involved.

[Lifthrasir]

And what's the difference with your proposal here then? Keep the new citizens on one side and older one on the other? Are you proposing a "double standards system" here?
I might be wrong but from my understanding, you're adding again another layer in the curial hierarchy which is not needed. The curator can do it and if you insist to share his tasks (curator day-to day tasks), then make the CA as an official and elected position. Then no more question about his legitimacy (the CA one). That's simple and efficient.

[PikeStance]

And what's the difference with your proposal here then? Keep the new citizens on one side and older one on the other? Are you proposing a "double standards system" here?
I might be wrong but from my understanding, you're adding again another layer in the curial hierarchy which is not needed. The curator can do it and if you insist to share his tasks (curator day-to day tasks), then make the CA as an official and elected position. Then no more question about his legitimacy (the CA one). That's simple and efficient.

I have no idea what you are going on about. I am proposing a Dual Consulship to deal with moderation and other tasks.
If you want CA's to be elected, then make the proposal.

[Lifthrasir]

Why not
It can't be more "fancy" than this one

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

I have no idea what you are going on about. I am proposing a Dual Consulship to deal with moderation and other tasks.
If you want CA's to be elected, then make the proposal.

Why not
It can't be more "fancy" than this one

I won't have any problem with CA election instead of appointment.

[PikeStance]

The reason why CAs are not elected is that the position allows for inexperience new citizens an opportunity to contribute right way. A private message of interest is far less intimidating than facing an election among people who know little about you and you know little about them. If by appointment, it means you can come and go without issue. It is more flexible if you are uncertain about your commitment. There are a lot of CAs who do it for that reason.

Back to this proposal

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

The reason why CAs are not elected is that the position allows for inexperience new citizens an opportunity to contribute right way. A private message of interest is far less intimidating than facing an election among people who know little about you and you know little about them. If by appointment, it means you can come and go without issue. It is more flexible if you are uncertain about your commitment. There are a lot of CAs who do it for that reason.

Back to this proposal

Yeah, I see your point Pike

[PikeStance]

OP Updated

Changes in dark red.

Added Constitutional changes which are mostly replacing the term, Curator.

Please give your support

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

I'll recheck the OP. Thanks Pike

[Axalon]

"Opposed for the sake of opposing"...

So the general idea here is to create more/larger bureaucracy to fix lesser and still functional bureaucracy? Other
then that, you lost me (and my support) at "It is more of a perception of the heightened prestige of the position."

- A

[♔atthias♔]

"Opposed for the sake of opposing"...

So the general idea here is to create more/larger bureaucracy to fix lesser and still functional bureaucracy? Other
then that, you lost me (and my support) at "It is more of a perception of the heightened prestige of the position."

- A

the general idea is that there are 2 curators to share the heavy workload and to help people who do not dare to take on curatorship as is allowing them to be under a senior curator who can teach and guide them
it also solves the problem of censor having to step in like last time with hitai

[Iskar]

I've thought about it a bit and I like the idea of two Consules instead of one Curator, with staggered elections so the office is never completely empty.

However, I would leave away all the fluff about how many assistants they may appoint, how those are called, what they may do, the regulations about how to moderate the Curia, and the stricter requirements for applying for Consul/Curator.

It is up to each elected Consul/Curator how many assistants they want to have and what tasks they delegate to them, since the Consul/Curator themselves will still remain responsible no matter who performs the actual task.

It is also up to the Curator how they want to spell out the moderation of the Curia.

Finally, the stricter requirements (basically a cursus honorum for TWC where you need to have served in a lower office (Censor, Magistrate) or the military (Moderation) to attain the higher office (Consul)) counteract the idea of getting more and less experienced members in touch with the office.

I'd say cut it down to the bare minimum of having two Consules instead of one Curator with some simple adjustments on who votes when in the Tribunal and who is the senior one. That I would gladly support.

[Axalon]

the general idea is that there are 2 curators to share the heavy workload and to help people who do not dare to take on curatorship as is allowing them to be under a senior curator who can teach and guide them
it also solves the problem of censor having to step in like last time with hitai

1. Regarding the heavy workload... How is that not already achieved with/by having curator-assistants?

2. Regarding helping people who do not dare to take on curatorship... If you do not have the balls to be a curator then the job is simply not suitable for you to begin with, me thinks...

3. How is curator-assistants not the plant-school/training-grounds for future curators? ...A chance to learn the job and what comes with it...?...

4. Regarding allowing them to be under a senior curator who can teach and guide them... How is that not already achieved with the current system and curator-assistants?

5. Regarding it also solves the problem of censor having to step in like last time with hitai... As far as I could tell, Hitai did a great job - so there was about zero problems with him temporarily stepping in. And the circumstance as such is supposed to be exceptional to begin with, is is not? At least very rare, so the problem does not exist as long as we do not venture into the lands of the exceptional, correct? Constructing a new and greater bureaucracy for the sake of safeguarding the exceptional circumstances that really should not have occured in the first place (while seemingly understandable in both recent cases) is kind of excessive - especially since the current system clearly works...

In short, I don't see a true rational necessity here. Essentially, why create a solution for a problem that is not really there to begin with? I kind of fail to see the magnificent gains of that. As in, if it isn't broke, then why fix it? This by creating even more bureaucracy (out of all things)? Usually, it is better to cut bureaucracy not build some more - at least in the world I call home...

- A

[PikeStance]

Under ordinary circumstances, I would be in agreement with your suggestions, but some of them sort of undermines the purpose of adding the second position. I'll explain

However, I would leave away all the fluff about how many assistants they may appoint, how those are called, what they may do, the regulations about how to moderate the Curia, and the stricter requirements for applying for Consul/Curator.

I wanted to draw a clear delineation between the elected official and the appointed position. it becomes hazier if you search for the Curator here. Even though the assistants do not display the badge, it still states "Curator" under the name. Moreover, it isn't a good idea for a non-elected member to "moderate" the forum other than what is stated in the proposal.

An alternative name would be Curator instead of Aedile. I did not suggest it before because I felt it may be confused with the previous use of the word.

It is up to each elected Consul/Curator how many assistants they want to have and what tasks they delegate to them, since the Consul/Curator themselves will still remain responsible no matter who performs the actual task.

The limitation was meant as a common sense provision. With two Consuls and two assistants, that is four administrators already. If it is up to two each, then it is 6 members. The workload is large, but do we need "six?" It is a minor thing I included for reasons already stated, so no problem removing it. I will make the edit.

It is also up to the Curator how they want to spell out the moderation of the Curia.

I only removed the term "local." How one moderate would be up to their own style.

Finally, the stricter requirements (basically a cursus honorum for TWC where you need to have served in a lower office (Censor, Magistrate) or the military (Moderation) to attain the higher office (Consul)) counteract the idea of getting more and less experienced members in touch with the office.

There are a few reasons for this;
1. In other discussions, there were serious concerns about the capability of a "Curator" actually moderate without moderation background. Requiring some background enforcing the term of service and determining proper application seems like a logical direction to go in to assure those concerns. It also allows for a greater amount of time as a citizen in understanding the "higher standard" we value.
2. By requiring citizens to have censor or magistrate background, it helps ensure that citizens opt to hold those positions.

I'd say cut it down to the bare minimum of having two Consules instead of one Curator with some simple adjustments on who votes when in the Tribunal and who is the senior one. That I would gladly support.

I did include who is senior.
Regarding who votes, I wanted to keep it simple and flexible.

Summarize
I do not want assistants moderating the forum, so that needs to be in there.
Restriction on assistants was a common-sense provision, but I see no reason to keep it.
The requirements can be done away with if everyone is satisfied an election would solve problem #1, but I could also reduce the requirement to 1 term instead of 2 terms.

1. Regarding the heavy workload... How is that not already achieved with/by having curator-assistants?
2. Regarding helping people who do not dare to take on curatorship... If you do not have the balls to be a curator then the job is simply not suitable for you to begin with, me thinks...
3. How is curator-assistants not the plant-school/training-grounds for future curators? ...A chance to learn the job and what comes with it...?...
4. Regarding allowing them to be under a senior curator who can teach and guide them... How is that not already achieved with the current system and curator-assistants?
5. Regarding it also solves the problem of censor having to step in like last time with hitai... As far as I could tell, Hitai did a great job - so there was about zero problems with him temporarily stepping in. And the circumstance as such is supposed to be exceptional to begin with, is is not? At least very rare, so the problem does not exist as long as we do not venture into the lands of the exceptional, correct? Constructing a new and greater bureaucracy for the sake of safeguarding the exceptional circumstances that really should not have occured in the first place (while seemingly understandable in both recent cases) is kind of excessive - especially since the current system clearly works...

In short, I don't see a true rational necessity here. Essentially, why create a solution for a problem that is not really there to begin with? I kind of fail to see the magnificent gains of that. As in, if it isn't broke, then why fix it? This by creating even more bureaucracy (out of all things)? Usually, it is better to cut bureaucracy not build some more - at least in the world I call home...
- A

There have been several times when there have been no one interested in being a Curator. it has a lot to do with the lack of prestige and the large workload. Just because the Constitution states you will have assistants doesn't mean you will. If you do not have an assistant, it is a lot of work; been there done that.

[Iskar]

Under these circumstances I will be forced to oppose, as I do not want to see this needless amount of redtape added to the Constitution on the back of an otherwise sensible idea (two consules).

[PikeStance]

Under these circumstances I will be forced to oppose, as I do not want to see this needless amount of redtape added to the Constitution on the back of an otherwise sensible idea (two consules).

Adding a second "consul" inevitably leads to an increased number of provisions. With two consuls, you have to provide a provision for seniority. That is unavoidable. In an effort to reduce the need for snap elections, providing a means for the Consul to step in is inevitable. However, it means we do not have to delay action due to an official having to recuse himself or herself from a case. I'll take the trade off any day. In light of the Ostrakhon, adding (or removing the concept of a local moderator) moderator's powers in enforcing the "higher standards, is also inevitable. By consequence, we have to delineate between actions an elected consul can take and his appointed "helper." All of this is necessary. Ultimately, I do not want to pass a provision that will lead to endless and tiresome tinkering. I rather the Curia to focus on more direct improvements on the site rather than the Constitution. To remove anything would simply invite useless debate on "meaning," "interpretations," etc... These debates drain efforts of citizens best serve by doing something else.

[Iskar]

In light of the Ostrakhon, adding (or removing the concept of a local moderator) moderator's powers in enforcing the "higher standards, is also inevitable. By consequence, we have to delineate between actions an elected consul can take and his appointed "helper." All of this is necessary. Ultimately, I do not want to pass a provision that will lead to endless and tiresome tinkering. I rather the Curia to focus on more direct improvements on the site rather than the Constitution. To remove anything would simply invite useless debate on "meaning," "interpretations," etc... These debates drain efforts of citizens best serve by doing something else.

The mod permissions are already in the constitution, it is only your unsupported opinion that we need to put regulations on what task can be delegated to assistants, and the regulations you added how ToS violations are treated aren't needed either, as the Curator can well work that out with Hex himself according to their preference for heavier or lighter moderation.

This proposal would add lots of further restrictions to the Curator's/Consul's office, which is the opposite direction of where we should go I think. If we trust our Curators so little that we need to regulate every tidbit of their day to day work, why do we elect them in the first place?