Curia: Simplified and Flexible

[PikeStance]

I already shared the bulk of what I will share below. This isn't necessary a new idea of mine, but it is an improvement of many other ideas.

Objective:
To create a simple, but workable format that will allow for growth if and when the site grows in the future.
To create a system that would allow for ideas and resolution to go to vote rather than languish in endless debate.
To create a system of a fair and balance referral system
To create a system to reduce debate over constitutional interpretation issues.
To create an administration responsive to the electorate for all actions taken.


The Curia Officers will consist of;
The Consul
Curator (s)
Magistrate (x2).
*Prefects (x2)

Roles and responsibilities are the same unless otherwise stated below


The Consul
Elected for a 6 month term

Responsibilities
- Chief Moderator and administrator of the Curia
- Keep record of all Curia and Moderation warnings.
- May determine the number of Curators needed.
- May create a new Curia office deemed necessary for administration and maintenance of the Curia.
- Create election thread and debate thread for Curator or created Curia Officer.
- Resolutions proposed by the Consul do not need support to go to vote.


The Curator(s)
Elected to a 4 month term

Responsibilities
- Acts as Moderator of the forum
- Open and closes polls
- Determine the eligibility of applicants for Magistrates and Consul
-Maintain records of citizens and awards


The motion for these changes is to give the Consul a mandate when elected. This should allow the Consul to pursue what he promise to do when elected. Having both the Consul and "elected Curators" moderate renders the Prefects as unnecessary for that duty.
It is important to note, since all Curial officers are elected, a new consul cannot eliminate a post or its responsibility until the term as expired.


Resolutions
- All resolutions require a 5 day period of debate
- All resolution, except the Consul, require one citizen to go to vote
- Consul imitated resolutions do not require support

This proposal have to purposes; [1] it reduces the endless debates over the same issue which often results in a hostile atmosphere [2] It should allow for the citizenry to actually decide on a proposal without it dying because of a lack of support. In almost every organization, you only need one second to send a motion to vote. Three is a high mark and it has led to numerous unnecessary debates trying to get that one support. Extending the discussion to five days will ensure more people see it.


Magistrate/ Prefects
Additional Responsibility

- Interpretation of the Constitution. If their is a split opinion, then the Consul will break the tie or will make the final determination.

Alternatively:
- Elect Two Prefects to serve as interpreters of the Constitution. Two protect the prefects from political intrigue, once elected they remain in their post until they choose [1] leave , [2] receiving a Curial or Moderation warning, or [3] neglect through inactivity.
- In the event of two, if there is not consensus then the Consul will break the tie or will make the final determination.

if there is a better Roman name to use, y all means suggest it.

Discipline
- The discipline is very lenient for citizens.
- Both the Consul and Curator may issue "Censure" for failure to adhere to directives.
- A Curial Warning results in suspension of rank for one month
- A Moderation warning of more than 2 points will result in a suspension of rank for one month.
- The Consul may initiate an Ostrakon for persistently receiving warnings with at least one other Curia Officer in agreement.
- The Consul will have 5 days to initiate upon issuance of warning.

[Akar]

I do not understand what this is supposed to fix or how it's going to be any different? This proposal offers no improvements over the current system. The only thing this will do is cause unwanted decisions and amendments to go to vote and be immediately shot down. If you can't get three people to support your idea maybe you need to re-evaluate your idea. I really don't get what this is supposed to be addressing.

[Leonardo]

This proposal sounds too complicated to accomplish and having Curators instead of the Primus Praefectus is needless IMO. Opposed!

[Cope]

This proposal needlessly muddles the competencies of curial officers and turns the consul into an elected dictator. The only part of this suggestion which I support is extending the consul's term to six months.

[PikeStance]

I do not understand what this is supposed to fix or how it's going to be any different? This proposal offers no improvements over the current system. The only thing this will do is cause unwanted decisions and amendments to go to vote and be immediately shot down. If you can't get three people to support your idea maybe you need to re-evaluate your idea. I really don't get what this is supposed to be addressing.

In every organization I have belong to, a motion only requires a second to go to vote. There isn't an argument i can conceive in that would require such a high number of "seconds" for a motion/ resolution to go to vote. After 5 days it goes to vote. Thus reducing any chance for discussion to become personal or heated. If it fails, then natural coling down period will be good for everyone.

This proposal sounds too complicated to accomplish and having Curators instead of the Primus Praefectus is needless IMO. Opposed!

Actually, it is more accurate too say the Consul removes the redundancy of the Primus Prefectus position. The Curator is a re-institution of the previous Curator position. It removes the redundancy of assistants/ censors, and makes them responsible directly to the Curia rather than to the "Consul."

This proposal is needlessly muddles the competencies of curial officers and turns the consul into an elected dictator. The only part of this suggestion which I support is extending the consul's term to six months.

It is not a dictator at all. it is given authority to propose changes and to manage the Curia without needless debate. If authority is abused, VonC ca resolve it quite easily.

Addendum,

By removing the "three support" it is hope that it would encourage any citizen to bring an idea forward and have it discussed and voted on. We want people to proposed ideas. it is how the site can evolve. The current system promotes conservatism, not progressiveness.

[Leonardo]

Actually, it is more accurate too say the Consul removes the redundancy of the Primus Prefectus position. The Curator is a re-institution of the previous Curator position. It removes the redundancy of assistants/ censors, and makes them responsible directly to the Curia rather than to the "Consul."

This does not make sense at all, because the Consul replaced the Curator just before the Order 66 passed if I am not mistaken.

So, your proposal is to re-instate the Curator position along with the Consul at the same time getting rid of the Primus Prafectus position and doing that only makes it totally confusing, because what impact your proposal would have is basically to shuffle around the Curial positions a little just to make your proposal valid. That's not a clean proposal instead it's more like an amendment or a second cleanup bill or if you prefer "necessary adjustments" to the Order 66.

[PikeStance]

I am not looking to clean anything up.

This is an entirely new system design to be more simply executed but in terms of manpower, execution and continuity.

We don't need "three" moderators and I am not even sure the "Curator" even needs to be a "moderator" either.
The censors are removed, so all we would need is two people. There isn't enough activity to warrant any more than that. Even my Interpreters are a "one time thing" and only called upon when needed.
We also do not need a a referral system. This simplifies it. If you break the ToS and get suspended for a month, Keep doing it, well, you are no longer exemplary. So, no need for prefects for that.

This is not a clean up but a complete overhaul. The fat that I am re-purposing terms doesn't mean I am amending anything. The interpreters could just as easily be called, Censors or Judex.

The best way to think about this is to consider;
What do we need?
What do we have?
What is ideal?

I once proposed many iterations of a large body of Curial Officers. However, these are different times which means different solution.

[Akar]

In every organization I have belong to, a motion only requires a second to go to vote. There isn't an argument i can conceive in that would require such a high number of "seconds" for a motion/ resolution to go to vote.

How about the arguments that have already been made then if you can't conceive of any?

The Curator is a re-institution of the previous Curator position. It removes the redundancy of assistants/ censors, and makes them responsible directly to the Curia rather than to the "Consul."

You'll have to explain how the concept of an assistant is somehow "redundant". By that logic there should only be one forum moderator, and one hex, etc.

It is not a dictator at all. it is given authority to propose changes and to manage the Curia without needless debate.

Debate is not needless. There is no point in proposing things without them having been debated on. The only reason to do that would be to rush through a shoddy bill. Either way debate will happen, this way it will just happen in the vote thread instead of the debate thread like it should. You are creating more issues with this.

By removing the "three support" it is hope that it would encourage any citizen to bring an idea forward and have it discussed and voted on

If you can't get three people to support your proposal why do you think you could get enough people to vote on it to pass it? Seriously, out of everything else this is what I wonder the most. If no one is supporting you anyway, what makes you think a poll is going to change peoples minds? Are you relying on the ignorance of the curia or just counting on people not to read things? I don't get it.

I am not looking to clean anything up.

Clearly. This only creates more work for everyone and makes thing even less clear than they are now.

This is not a clean up but a complete overhaul. The fat that I am re-purposing terms doesn't mean I am amending anything. The interpreters could just as easily be called, Censors or Judex.

If this is seriously intended as a complete overhaul it's pretty awful. There is no logic or forethought into the duties of the positions or their requirements. Honestly this whole thing should be shelved.

If you're not amending things, why repurpose terms? This is just creating more confusion and lack of clarity. I just don't understand why this proposal is needed.

I just don't get it...

[Leonardo]

The best way to think about this is to consider;

Below is my answer to each one of your questions.

What do we need?

What we don't need at the moment is a system that makes order into a chaos and this (your) proposal basically remove everything that you think is not necessary to keep.

What do we have?

A system that works. No need to change that.

What is ideal?

Not your proposal, I mean this proposal, that is for sure.



I am still opposed and your latest posts in this thread are far from convincing to change my mind. It actually show how bad (detrimental? I dunno) this proposal really is.