Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 121

Thread: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

  1. #1
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    20,181
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    This amendment would remove the following from the Constitution.

    Section III - Ostraka and Magistrates
    Article I. Ostraka
    If a citizen receives an infraction the Consul suspends their citizenship until the infraction has expired or is revoked.

    If a citizen believes an offense by another citizen is egregious enough to bring before the entire Curia that citizen may initiate an Ostrakon.1


    Moderation should have no part in controlling the Curia's membership just as it has no part in management of the Curia. This amendment would see to it that only the Curia and Hexagon council have the ability to remove a user's Citizenship for any reason, no matter how temporary.

    Check out the TWC D&D game!
    Message me on Discord (.akar.) for an invite to the Thema Devia Discord
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan







  2. #2
    Gaius Baltar's Avatar Old gods die hard
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    campus Martis
    Posts
    7,587
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    The key wording here is "Consul". His action is a curial action in reaction to the misbehavior of the citizen.

    ​​
    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



  3. #3
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    20,181
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    It's not a Curial action unless it's voted on by the Curia...

    When Athelstan moves a thread from one forum to another that's not a "Curial action".

    Unilateral decisions are never "Curial actions" since a "Curial action" by definition would have to be a matter voted on by the Curia. You can't just do something and say "I did this for the Curia" and have it be a "Curial action"

    The Consul has no discretion here, he does not have a choice whether or not to suspend citizenship when an infraction has been issued. Therefor this is simply a moderator action that for some reason has been delegated to the Consul to carry out.

    The Curia should be responsible for these decisions. If we want people who get a single infraction to lose their Citizenship, we should have the balls to vote to do so every time it happens.
    Last edited by Akar; February 06, 2021 at 06:00 PM.

    Check out the TWC D&D game!
    Message me on Discord (.akar.) for an invite to the Thema Devia Discord
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan







  4. #4

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Support.



  5. #5
    Iskar's Avatar Insanity with Dignity
    Moderator Emeritus

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

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Opposition.

    Moderation has no power over Curial membership because infractions only cause temporary suspensions.

    Furthermore an automatic suspension that was instituted by a Curial vote is still a suspension legitimised by the Curia. We don't have to deal with every incident by itself, we can set general rules like "While you have active infractions you cannot serve as a model member of the site and hence have to let your citizenship rest until the infraction expires."
    "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.

  6. #6
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    20,181
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Moderation has no power over Curial membership because infractions only cause temporary suspensions.
    Do you realize the illogical nature of this sentence?

    Moderation has no power over Curial membership even though infractions issued by them temporarily suspend Curial membership.

    Do you see how your statement makes no sense?

    "While you have active infractions you cannot serve as a model member of the site and hence have to let your citizenship rest until the infraction expires."
    We got rid of the higher standards part of the constitution exactly because of nonsense like this.

    As of right now, this is what the Const. has to say about Citizenship

    "Citizenship is the fundamental award given by the Curia for contributions to the site and community of TWC."

    It is an award for contribution to the site and community. There is nothing in the language any more about "higher standards" or "model behaviour" or whatever garbage was inserted by previous puritanical administrations.

    The idea that you cannot be recognized for your contributions to the site, no matter how large or numerous, because of a single infraction point is ridiculous and the kind of thing that drives people away from the Curia.

    Check out the TWC D&D game!
    Message me on Discord (.akar.) for an invite to the Thema Devia Discord
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan







  7. #7
    Leonardo's Avatar Reborn Old Timer
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Southern Sweden
    Posts
    5,245

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Quote Originally Posted by Iskar View Post
    Moderation has no power over Curial membership because infractions only cause temporary suspensions.
    IIRC, only a Moderation Overseer has the authority to either remove or temporary suspend citizenship at their discretion as they are hex.
    Under patronage of General Brewster of the Imperial House of Hader.





    How to make Morrowind less buggy for new players - Of course every player may find it useful.

  8. #8
    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: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    I think that you actully don't understand that Moderation and Curia aren't necessarly tied together. As already said, if a Citizen has an infraction by the Moderation, then his citizenship is suspended. On the other hand, a Citizen doesn't need to be infracted to be judged by his peers if they think that his behaviour is not worthy as a Citizen, with or without any moderaton record.
    With this proposal, you're re-opening the door for frivolous curial procedures mostly based on personal vendetta as it was with referrals.
    Enough of that witch hunt hidden behind false excuses.

    Opposed.

    PS: I definitively need to ban myself from these aeras of the site
    Under the patronage of Flinn, proud patron of Jadli, from the Heresy Vault of the Imperial House of Hader

  9. #9
    mishkin's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,693
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    just dont break the ToS. You want the badge, the privileges and be able to break the rules. this is the most ridiculous moment of the curia as far as i know
    Last edited by mishkin; February 07, 2021 at 03:01 AM.

  10. #10
    Turkafinwë's Avatar The Sick Baby Jester
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    3,802

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Support

    The automatic supsension when you get an infraction is only a lazy response to curb bad behaviour and it really doesn't achieve that anyway. Nobody will look at Akar and see the difference when he isn't displaying his badge and when he is. They know he is a member of the Curia with or without it. They also know he will be back whenever the supsension is over. This is merely the Curia pulling his hands away from taking active responsibility of their members. "Oh Akar insulted someone and they reported him. We'll just supend his citizenship for a moment until the waters have cooled and then just return to the same as before as if nothing happened." The Curia must take responsibility for its members and decide what to do with them when bad behaviour occurs on a regular basis. Not all ToS breaches are created equally. Besides it's not like if you get to retain your badge after an infraction that that is an implication that you can break the rules. Just like a non-Citizen you get an infraction and points to your profile and if you get too many your account might be suspended. You get the same treatment as a non-Citizen from a Moderation standpoint. In this I agree with Akar that the Curia should make it a priority to deal with this themselves instead of relying on Moderation.

    Seeing the division in how an Ostrakon should be conducted (moderation history versus the judgement of peers) it is clear that there is no consensus on how to deal with bad elements in the Curia. Some cry that there needs to be concrete evidence that the subject is bad instead of, as Lifth suggests in his post here, that it is merely up to the Citizens and a peer judgement to decide if someone should have their Citizenship revoked. We need to decide which one it is going to be. Is it Moderation that will decide if someone is unworthy of Citizenship or we the Citizens?

  11. #11
    mishkin's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,693
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    The next step will be an amendment whereby it is not necessary for an applicant for citizenship or magistrate position to have a clean recent moderation record.

  12. #12
    Turkafinwë's Avatar The Sick Baby Jester
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    3,802

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Quote Originally Posted by makawa View Post
    The next step will be an amendment whereby it is not necessary for an applicant for citizenship or magistrate position to have a clean recent moderation record.
    If the Curia decides that that is where they want to go with it then so be it, though I would never vote for it however especially in regards to the position of Magistrate.

  13. #13
    Hitai de Bodemloze's Avatar 避世絕俗
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,306
    Tournaments Joined
    1
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Well I never much liked the automatic suspension thing (which was a vote I missed apparently), but I'm also an advocate for those oft bemoaned higher standards that we seem to have done away with, so I can't really say I have my finger on the pulse of the Curia these days. I'd tentatively support this, but I don't like the idea of a disciplinary system that just goes from zero to ostrakon.

  14. #14
    Iskar's Avatar Insanity with Dignity
    Moderator Emeritus

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

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Quote Originally Posted by Akar View Post
    Do you realize the illogical nature of this sentence?

    Moderation has no power over Curial membership even though infractions issued by them temporarily suspend Curial membership.

    Do you see how your statement makes no sense?
    A temporary suspension makes no lasting changes in the membership and the suspension is not effectuated by Moderation, but by the Curia's decision to tie it to infractions.



    We got rid of the higher standards part of the constitution exactly because of nonsense like this.

    As of right now, this is what the Const. has to say about Citizenship

    "Citizenship is the fundamental award given by the Curia for contributions to the site and community of TWC."

    It is an award for contribution to the site and community. There is nothing in the language any more about "higher standards" or "model behaviour" or whatever garbage was inserted by previous puritanical administrations.

    The idea that you cannot be recognized for your contributions to the site, no matter how large or numerous, because of a single infraction point is ridiculous and the kind of thing that drives people away from the Curia.
    The automatic suspension is not about higher standards. It is about maintaining the bare minimum of conduct - not incurring infractions. (One might even make a point for extending it to notes, but I doubt this idea would have many supporters). You are free to devise a new system for higher standards, of course, but that would be a very different question.
    The simple and compelling rationale for the automatic suspension is that we do not allow recent infractions when you become a citizen, so why should we allow them when you are one?
    "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.

  15. #15

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Since you must have received no warning for at least six months before applying to become a citizen, automatic suspension seems to me a pretty reasonable and balanced measure. In fact, its 3-months duration (the stanard time for an infraction to expire) looks quite lenient, in comparison to the 6-month requirement. I don't think that expecting from citizens to actually be responsible for the actions, like every other member, could be considered high standard or whatever. By the way, the citizenship is removed by the Curator, not the moderators, according to an amendment that was passed by the Curia and was not imposed by the staff. By that logic, modding and debating also interfere in Curial affairs by giving the opportunity to contributing members to apply for citizenship.

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

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    The Consul has oversight to check any impropriety. As do Hex.

    Removing this would leave the curia with only Ostrakon, a system that only works if the voting citizens do so with integrity. Unfortunately that has proved to be lacking and automatic suspension is really the only behaviour control remaining. It's disappointing that the curia's ability to self moderate has fallen so far. There used to be a level of honour in gaining citizenship, this has been eroded to a level where the need for moderation referrals is not simply necessary, it is imperative.

  17. #17
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    20,181
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    I think that you actully don't understand that Moderation and Curia aren't necessarly tied together. As already said, if a Citizen has an infraction by the Moderation, then his citizenship is suspended.
    Do you want to try to explain how a moderator infracting someone causing them to be removed (however temporary) from the Curia is not a direct link?

    On the other hand, a Citizen doesn't need to be infracted to be judged by his peers if they think that his behaviour is not worthy as a Citizen, with or without any moderaton record.
    Yes, that's what the const says. I don't get your point?

    With this proposal, you're re-opening the door for frivolous curial procedures mostly based on personal vendetta as it was with referrals.
    Enough of that witch hunt hidden behind false excuses.
    Huh? This is opening the door to only removing Citizenship for the most egregious of offenses, not for the most minor of them. I really don't know what you're on about.

    The next step will be an amendment whereby it is not necessary for an applicant for citizenship or magistrate position to have a clean recent moderation record.
    If that's what the Curia wants then so be it.

    A temporary suspension makes no lasting changes in the membership and the suspension is not effectuated by Moderation, but by the Curia's decision to tie it to infractions.
    Well this is just false and entirely dependent upon how you choose to define "lasting". I thinkANY removal of citizenship outside of direct Curial action is wildly inappropriate and has a lasting effect on the Curia.

    You're going to tell me that the multiple amendments and threads directly resulting from the moderator's choice to infract me has/will have no lasting effect?

    Not sure how you think that a moderator infracting someone is somehow the Curia's fault now.

    This is simply laziness on the part of the Curia born out of a desire to not be responsible for making decisions that might cause feelings to be hurt.

    The automatic suspension is not about higher standards. It is about maintaining the bare minimum of conduct - not incurring infractions.
    Are you seriously not seeing how this is the exact same thing as higher standards?

    I don't think that expecting from citizens to actually be responsible for the actions, like every other member, could be considered high standard or whatever.
    No one is asking for Citizens to be treated differently, don't try and create a strawman. Citizenship is an award for significant contributions to the site, nothing more. The Curia decided that it was no longer subject to higher standards or to serve as a sign of being a model member of the site. The ONLY purpose of Citizenship now is to serve as an award for site contributions. There is no other badge or award that can be taken away simply for having an infraction, no matter how small. Imagine if making an off topic post made you lose all of your awards and badges. Pretty absurd, innit? So why are you guys still trying to hold one award to this standard (which, by the way, the Curia already agreed SHOULDN'T BE HELD TO THAT STANDARD ANYMORE)

    You and Iskar are stuck on this high standards when that hasn't been a factor in forever. Your interpretation of the Constitution is shockingly out dated.

    By that logic, modding and debating also interfere in Curial affairs by giving the opportunity to contributing members to apply for citizenship.
    I think we both know you're smarter than to try to claim that.

    By the way, the citizenship is removed by the Curator, not the moderators
    Removed by the Consul due to actions taken by moderation. The consul has no input in this decision. He is simply Moderation's tool to try to convince the Curia that Moderation isn't grossly overstepping its bounds by having a direct influence on the day to day actions of the Curia.

    If you want proof just take a look at everyone trying to shift blame to the Consul for this rather than the people actually responsible - Moderation.

    Well I never much liked the automatic suspension thing (which was a vote I missed apparently), but I'm also an advocate for those oft bemoaned higher standards that we seem to have done away with, so I can't really say I have my finger on the pulse of the Curia these days. I'd tentatively support this, but I don't like the idea of a disciplinary system that just goes from zero to ostrakon.
    Blame the people who decided to remove the entire referral system, then. Those are the people who decided to remove everything and make it zero to Ostrakon.

    The Consul has oversight to check any impropriety. As do Hex.
    Provide a source from the Constitution please.
    Last edited by Akar; February 07, 2021 at 06:42 AM.

    Check out the TWC D&D game!
    Message me on Discord (.akar.) for an invite to the Thema Devia Discord
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan







  18. #18
    Halie Satanus's Avatar Emperor of ice cream
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    19,995
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    Quote Originally Posted by Akar View Post
    Provide a source from the Constitution please.
    Quote Originally Posted by Constitution
    If a citizen receives an infraction the Consul suspends their citizenship until the infraction has expired or is revoked.

  19. #19

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    The Consul being mandated to suspend Citizenship is not "providing oversight".



  20. #20
    mishkin's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,693
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: (Amendment) Section III, Article I

    if you want more oversight, have the curia vote on whether each suspension is deserved or not.

Page 1 of 7 1234567 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
  •