Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Constitution Updates

  1. #1
    StealthFox's Avatar Consensus Achieved
    Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    8,170

    Default Constitution Updates

    I've started working on updating the Constitution to implement the changes in the big overhaul amendment and replacing all instances of "Curator" with "Consul."

    Much of the wording, especially regarding the footnotes were TBD, so here is my best try at it. Please review to make sure I am capturing the spirit of the amendment and not overstepping my remit.

    I've completed Section I. Feel free to have a look at the Constitution for the full text changes, but for reference for discussion here are the footnotes. I'll update this post with new content blocks for future sections.

    Section I
    Quote Originally Posted by From the amendment
    Add footnote if needed: Off topic and personal references in the Curia will be allowed, within reason, despite their outlining in the ToS as not being allowed, given the nature of the proceedings of the Curia.
    Footnote 7 previously referred people to Section III to reference the position of censors and the work they did with referrals. So I changed it to this:

    7Due to the nature of the Curia, Praefects recognize that off topic and personal references are allowed, within reason.


    Quote Originally Posted by From the amendment
    Amend Footnote 10: The Primus Praefect has a one year term after election; the 2 other Praefects have 6 month terms from time of election. The Primus Praefect requires verifiable experience in moderation for 3 months, and/or Tribunal experience as a Tribune or 2 Magistrate terms.
    I added that Censors are appointed to serve the same time as the Consul, meaning they aren't permanent appointments. I think that was within the spirit of the amendment. My changes:

    10 Consuls and Magistrates are elected for four months from the day of their election. The Primus Praefect are elected for a term of one year while the other two Praefects have six month terms from time of election. The Primus Praefect requires verifiable experience in moderation for three months, and/or Tribunal experience either as a Tribune or having served at least two terms as Magistrate. Censors are appointed to serve alongside the same term as the Consul but may be reappointed by future Consuls.


    Quote Originally Posted by From the amendment
    Amend Footnote 11 as needed
    This is almost the same wording as it applied to CAs.

    11 Censors are appointed positions and as such the Consul is responsible for overseeing their activities.


    Quote Originally Posted by From the Amendment
    Amend Footnote 12: Praefects are included in these stipulations only when there is such a time period where none of the 3 Praefects are present or have given notice of extended absence, or any absence without notice places undue burden on any remaining praefects. Should a Curator be removed from office prematurely for any reason, either/both of their Censors may begin the next election process, and in the event they cannot, the duty shall fall to the Praefect(s).

    IMO, this did not take into account the fact the Censors are appointed. If a Consul is VONC their appointees should be as well. So I have changed that to the Praefect holding elections for the next Consul. I hope that is not outside my remit. I think it is within the spirit of how the role of censor was changed. I have changed it to:

    12 If the Consul is absent (has not logged into the site) for seven days without giving a notice of absence, is absent for more than fifteen days regardless of notice, resigns, or is subject to a successful Vote of No Confidence (VoNC), they are automatically removed from office along with any appointed censors. Any decisions of the office shall be held over until a replacement is elected. When such a decision is time-limited, time from the moment the office is empty does not count towards the limit until a new Consul is elected. When the office of the Consul is empty, the Primus Praefect will organize the election of a new Consul, and assume day-to-day administration of the Curia.

    Praefects are included in these stipulations only when there is such a time period where none of the 3 Praefects are present or have given notice of extended absence, or any absence without notice places undue burden on any remaining praefects.


    Section 2
    The only thing I see that needs updating in Section 2 is footnote 3:

    3 Applicants for the offices of Censor and Consul cannot have received an infraction, or a Curial Warning, in at least six months, and must have been Citizens for at least three months. Applicants for the office of Magistrate cannot have received a Moderation Warning, or a Curial Warning, in at least six months.

    I think it makes sense to move the Praefect requirements here from Section I Footnote 10, but I'm not sure what to do about the Censor position. Do we want the censor position to keep these requirements? Do praefects have any stipulations about not having Curial or Moderations warning for 6 months? I think changing any of this would require an amendment.

    Can someone explain the difference between the consul position and the magistrate position though, it's saying the same thing to me, except magistrates are not required to be citizens for three months? Moderation warning means the same thing as an infraction, right?



    Section 3

    Quote Originally Posted by From the amendment
    Amend Footnote 7: All citizen initiated referrals processed as Ostrakons are obviously public; citizen initiated private referrals may be kept private or public at request of the member. Staff referrals are kept private by default, as they deal with infractions, except at the member's request.
    This is the only footnote I questioned as I was changing things in Section III. There is no process in place for Ostrakons. Should there be? Or was that language left in by mistake? This is what I have in the Constitution now:

    6 All citizen initiated referrals processed as Ostrakons are public. All other referrals are private unless the member referred requests for them to be made public.
    Last edited by StealthFox; February 21, 2019 at 08:12 PM.

  2. #2
    Elfdude's Avatar Tribunus
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    7,335

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Magistrates are supposed to have more stringent requirements that Consul's, that may have been an oversight, essentially you wanted to have someone who's own behavior was (mostly) clean serving as someone who would rule on appeals. I believe it must be a point valued infraction and not a note.

    I believe the language for Ostrakons is here: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...roduce-Ostraka

    It may need to be processed into the constitution along with the new changes, I'm unclear as to what constitutional amendments we've made have been included in the last 8 months. I'm updating the tabularium annals now to hopefully make it simpler.

  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: Constitution Updates

    Regarding the Primus Praefect position, unfortunately nobody noticed but I've got a slight proposal to make. At the moment it reads:

    The Primus Praefect requires verifiable experience in staff moderation for three months, and/or Tribunal experience either as a Tribune or having served at least two terms as Magistrate.

    I think that it should be something like "... or having served at least two terms as Magistrate (or Praefect)". Two Magistrate's terms would be 6 to 8 months, whereas two Praefect terms would be 9 months to 1 year, but I don't reckon a single term as Praefect would be enough experience to take on the Primus role. This proposal is because Magistrates and Praefects pretty much operate in the same way, and gain the same experience in applying the TOS.



  4. #4

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    I would stick with the term "Moderation Warning." As far as I know, no one confuses the term. I believe a "note" is still technically an "infraction," except it is not a warning (no points).

    Caligula makes a good point. A Praefect should satisfy the requirement for Primus Prefect. This would have to be an amendment.

  5. #5
    Elfdude's Avatar Tribunus
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    7,335

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    It could be argued the other way around. Technically they're both moderation warnings and technically they're both infractions. One simply carries point values for increasing severity of ruling. If you want to distinguish between the two it should include a statement about point values otherwise even a PM warning you to stick within the rules could be counted as a warning.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Not according to the wiki.

    Curial warnings, however, have been a matter of debate.

  7. #7
    Lifthrasir's Avatar "Capre" Dunkerquois
    Patrician Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    City of Jan Baert
    Posts
    13,950
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Note

    Notes are given when the actions of a member require staff to officially contact them. They are simply a record of that contact and do not contribute toward a member's warning level. They are recorded both to let other moderators know that the user has been informed of the particular rule, and to give the user a record of all contacts with moderators they have had.
    I suggest you to read it more carefully. I've 'highlighted' the relevant part for you. Hope it clarifies the situation.
    Under the patronage of Flinn, proud patron of Jadli, from the Heresy Vault of the Imperial House of Hader

  8. #8

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Seriously,

    Here is your quote
    NoteNotes are given when the actions of a member require staff to officially contact them. They are simply a record of that contact and do not contribute toward a member's warning level. They are recorded both to let other moderators know that the user has been informed of the particular rule, and to give the user a record of all contacts with moderators they have had.
    This is the part you left out.
    Warning
    Warnings are given when a member commits an offense (other than a very mild one) when the member should already know the rule in question, such as if a moderator has previously discussed that type of offense with them. Warnings expire after three months and contribute toward a member's warning level. How many levels an offense is worth can be found in the Member Conduct section in (parentheses). Whether to give the first or second number, if applicable, is up to moderator discretion.
    If they are the "same" they would not have to separate and distinct descriptions. One results in a warning level increase while the other does not. So when I wrote that a Note is still technically an infraction but it does not contribute to the warning (level) I was 100% correct.

    When determining requirement or a referral only warnings are of concern to the Curia. This is what is germane to the discussion. That is, when it is written in the Constitution, "Moderation Warning," it is referring to the "Warning," and not the notes given.

  9. #9
    Lifthrasir's Avatar "Capre" Dunkerquois
    Patrician Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    City of Jan Baert
    Posts
    13,950
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Rigth, does a note, less than 6 months old, prevent a possible candidate to apply for citizenship?
    Under the patronage of Flinn, proud patron of Jadli, from the Heresy Vault of the Imperial House of Hader

  10. #10

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Lifthrasir View Post
    Rigth, does a note, less than 6 months old, prevent a possible candidate to apply for citizenship?
    No,
    To be awarded with Citizenship a member must fulfill the minimum requirements and be proposed by a Citizen, their Patron. Minimum Requirements: At least fifty posts; been registered for at least two months, and; not received a Moderation Warning or Curial Warning within the past six months.
    I would not be in favor of extending to include Moderation Notes. I supposed one could argue for extending it for Curial Offices. However, I believe notes are private. We only know of warning because it results in a referral.

  11. #11
    Lifthrasir's Avatar "Capre" Dunkerquois
    Patrician Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    City of Jan Baert
    Posts
    13,950
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Right, so how can an infraction which is not taken into account for citizen application, which is described as a contact record with no moderation warning point, can be an infraction?

    From my understanding a note is more an admonition rather than an infraction. But that may be due to the fact that English is not my native language

    I also draw your attention that the term 'infraction' is not used in the TOS nor in the Constitution (at least in Section I). Terms like 'violation' and/or 'warning" are used and I guess that it's to avoid such confusion.
    Also, my quote of the TOS was to highlight the official definition of a Note, more specifically its difference compare to a warning. My question about citizen application requierement was to highlight that a note is not taken into account for citizen application, not that it should be included. Hope it clarifies my posts above
    Last edited by Lifthrasir; March 05, 2019 at 02:25 AM.
    Under the patronage of Flinn, proud patron of Jadli, from the Heresy Vault of the Imperial House of Hader

  12. #12

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    From the ToS,
    Terms Violations
    Infractions of the terms of service are tracked using the infraction system, which allows moderators to record incidents in a reliable and centralized fashion. All such records of infractions are viewable in the user's profile to moderating staff and the user in question, but no one else.
    I have been corrected long ago when I mistakenly stated that Notes are not necessarily infractions.

  13. #13
    Lifthrasir's Avatar "Capre" Dunkerquois
    Patrician Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    City of Jan Baert
    Posts
    13,950
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    I'm tired of playing with words. Re-read the definition of a note. Nowhere it says it is an infraction. It clearly says 'a record of a contact'. As such, it is still a admonition imo and not an infraction.
    Under the patronage of Flinn, proud patron of Jadli, from the Heresy Vault of the Imperial House of Hader

  14. #14

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Yes, this is getting rather tedious,...
    This is the entire section. Terms Violations 1.7

    Terms Violations
    Infractions of the terms of service are tracked using the infraction system, which allows moderators to record incidents in a reliable and centralized fashion. All such records of infractions are viewable in the user's profile to moderating staff and the user in question, but no one else.


    Note
    Notes are given when the actions of a member require staff to officially contact them. They are simply a record of that contact and do not contribute toward a member's warning level. They are recorded both to let other moderators know that the user has been informed of the particular rule, and to give the user a record of all contacts with moderators they have had.


    Warning
    Warnings are given when a member commits an offense (other than a very mild one) when the member should already know the rule in question, such as if a moderator has previously discussed that type of offense with them. Warnings expire after three months and contribute toward a member's warning level. How many levels an offense is worth can be found in the Member Conduct section in (parentheses). Whether to give the first or second number, if applicable, is up to moderator discretion.
    For both Notes and Warnings, the term "infraction" is not used. Reading the first section, Notes and Warnings is the "Infraction System." Both are recorded on your profile. All records of infractions are all record of incidences which includes both note and Warnings.

    This was my original statement.
    I would stick with the term "Moderation Warning." As far as I know, no one confuses the term. I believe a "note" is still technically an "infraction," except it is not a warning (no points).
    I supposed you can argue it is actually an infraction and not just "technically" an infraction, but the phrase does not state that it isn't. I was actually referring to the common belief that an infraction is only a warning.

    When I stated, not according to the ToS in Post #6 I was responding to this
    If you want to distinguish between the two it should include a statement about point values otherwise even a PM warning you to stick within the rules could be counted as a warning.
    This is incorrect on two accounts. A PM is not a Note. A Note acknowledgment that you violated the ToS and you are being "warn" (for lack of a better word) and you should be mindful.

    I honestly do not know what you are arguing about. Moderation warning as stated in Constitution refers strictly to "Warnings" only. Ironically, my original response was this;
    I would stick with the term "Moderation Warning." As far as I know, no one confuses the term.
    Can we both accept that it is best to keep the term, Moderation Warning?
    Last edited by PikeStance; March 05, 2019 at 07:07 AM.

  15. #15
    StealthFox's Avatar Consensus Achieved
    Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    8,170

    Default Re: Constitution Updates

    Okay, I've incorporated a few of these things along with some other items in a cleanup bill here.

Posting Permissions

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