I agree with Aik on pretty much every point he raised.
I agree with Aik on pretty much every point he raised.
The AI Workshop Creator
Europa Barbaroum II AI/Game Mechanics Developer
The Northern Crusades Lead Developer
Classical Age Total War Retired Lead Developer
Rome: Total Realism Animation Developer
RTW Workshop Assistance MTW2 AI Tutorial & Assistance
Broken Crescent Submod (M2TW)/IB VGR Submod (BI)/Animation (RTW/BI/ALX)/TATW PCP Submod (M2TW)/TATW DaC Submod (M2TW)/DeI Submod (TWR2)/SS6.4 Northern European UI Mod (M2TW)
So what is generally problematic not just with the proposal, but with that which it tries to amend, is tying citizenship standards to moderation.
A lot of people mention it's not fair having your citizenship suspended for a single off-topic post. However, the ToS nominally has the same sanction on things like disruptive posting, defying moderation and insulting others.
It is for such violations primarily that automatic suspension of citizenship was introduced. Pay close attention now: the fact that it's automatic signified that remaining free from infractions was the absolute bottom line of behavioural standards. So much so, that no judgment by peers was considered necessary.
This proposal changes that. If this passes, it will be left up to you, the Curia, to suspend people for insulting others. I can hear the protestations already "I think it's too harsh to suspend someone for a single insult". And so, indeed, the standards will slip.
There may be a case for saying off topic posting isn't as bad a violation of citizen standards as insulting people, but relaxing the standards for both is obviously no solution for that. What that requires is setting different threshold for different ToS violations.
"Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -
Must oppose for how it is now, while I'm not against making it a bit less rigid than now (when we voted for this amendment we wanted it to be as strict as possible of course, but I at the least always interpreted this choice as a first step, meant to be reviewed later on). However, I believe that a more than 3 points is a too high threshold*
I would prefer to have it set at 2 active infractions no matter the points or the specific kind for each (rather than 1 as today), much fairer to those who do a constant effort to behave well and still gives the citizen in trouble the opportunity to rethink their behavior or simply cool down on that specific argument, etc.
Remember that Citizens are supposed to behave well and be exemplary (only of course if we still believe in this idea over which the Curia was founded long ago), so this amendment should be intended as for giving a fairer chance to Citizens in trouble, not giving them the opportunity to skirt around this a more than 3 points threshold*
** just to make it clear, getting 4 or more points it's quite a high threshold, for instance:
- off topic, censor bypassing, hard to read posts: you could get a note, one infraction with 1 point, and then the subsequent one with 2 points, and you are still below the threshold
- generally: you can have 3 notes and 3 one pointers from 3 different kind of infractions and still be below the threshold
I commend the idea of making it less strict, but IMO the step from the actual system to the new proposed system is too wide
Last edited by Flinn; September 22, 2021 at 06:42 AM. Reason: it's kind not kid, Flinn you moron
Under the patronage of Finlander, patron of Lugotorix & Lifthrasir & joerock22 & Socrates1984 & Kilo11 & Vladyvid & Dick Cheney & phazer & Jake Armitage & webba 84 of the Imperial House of Hader
I agree with most of this, if not all of it.
As an abendum with regards to off-topic posting. Liable to this paragraph of the ToS is also making off-topic personal references which must not necessarily be insulting but nevertheless were the cause for a lot of trouble in the past, especially when I think of the D&D and new game releases.
I could be swayed to support a paragraph by paragraph of the ToS approach which would also make it very clear what is expected citizen conduct in less sweeping way (Muizer's statement with regards to the bottom line of expected citizen behavior).
And no one should lose their citizenship for a single count, or even multiple counts, without the informed consent of the Curia. The Curia giveth and the Curia taketh away. Moderation should play no role in this aside from that which they play as regular citizens.A lot of people mention it's not fair having your citizenship suspended for a single off-topic post. However, the ToS nominally has the same sanction on things like disruptive posting, defying moderation and insulting others.
GOOD.This proposal changes that. If this passes, it will be left up to you, the Curia, to suspend people for insulting others.
Moderation should play zero role in removing or suspending citizenship. That should, ideally, be the sole purview of the Curia. People's contributions to the site do not go away nor are they dampened by the contributor getting a note for off topic posting or for censor bypassing.
The criteria to receive an infraction isn't being changed, I'm not sure what this sentence is talking about.There may be a case for saying off topic posting isn't as bad a violation of citizen standards as insulting people, but relaxing the standards for both is obviously no solution for that. What that requires is setting different threshold for different ToS violations.
It's worth mentioning that this system was only added in the past year or two. For the majority of Curial history we existed just fine without mandatory suspensions.Must oppose for how it is now, while I'm not against making it a bit less rigid than now (when we voted for this amendment we wanted it to be as strict as possible of course, but I at the least always interpreted this choice as a first step, meant to be reviewed later on). However, I believe that a more than 3 points is a too high threshold*
I would have no problem with changing it to that. How do the others feel about that change?I would prefer to have it set at 2 active infractions no matter the points or the specific kind for each (rather than 1 as today), much fairer to those who do a constant effort to behave well and still gives the citizen in trouble the opportunity to rethink their behavior or simply cool down on that specific argument, etc.
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
The Curia decided suspension for 10+ years before the current system was introduced. I agree with you that wee need to decouple citizenship standards from moderation, but right now, as it is the curia is strongly tied to moderation staff and that needs to end before it causes even more damage.
The problem here, and with the previous ostrakons and discussions on the topic, is that we have been incapable of deciding once and for all what citizenship is. Is it a reward, or is it a status? If it's a reward then there should be no standards to speak of beyond the ToS and no suspension. You don't lose a phalera because your posts are no longer as good as they were. If it's a status then site staff has absolutely no business in determining when someone's status gets suspended because site staff did not grant it in the first place.
Last edited by Sir Adrian; September 22, 2021 at 09:45 AM.
Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!
I've changed the OP slightly to conform with Flinn's suggestion. If you support that change, please reaffirm your support.
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
Having read and understood the changes made herein I, being of sound mind, willfully and voluntarily make this declaration to restate my SUPPORT ofthis proposal forthwith.
Signed while wearing poofy pants in the year of our Lord MMXXI
EDIT: not /s just fancy.
Last edited by Sir Adrian; September 22, 2021 at 10:21 AM.
Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!
I'd specify "active" before infractions.. also I said 2 or more, not more than 2
This I will support without hesitation, it's a due step IMO, which will keep the logic of the current system (which I like in general), but that will also give to any Citizens in trouble a further chance.If a citizen accrues 2 or more active infractions, the Consul suspends their citizenship until their infractions expire or are removed. The suspended member losses the ability to display all rank, including both Citizen and Patrician badges and color. Infractions under appeal are exempt from further action if the appellant files an appeal within 72 hours.
Under the patronage of Finlander, patron of Lugotorix & Lifthrasir & joerock22 & Socrates1984 & Kilo11 & Vladyvid & Dick Cheney & phazer & Jake Armitage & webba 84 of the Imperial House of Hader
Shh, I just changed it. My illiteracy is showing .
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
In the wake of PM's failed Ostrakon, I find it hard to believe you sincerely expect the Curia to uphold standards on a par with, let alone higher than, the absolute bottom line that adhering to the ToS was introduced for.
I don't like the mechanism of abrogating responsibility to moderation either, but I also look at the reality at the moment, which is that this Curia isn't going to take that responsibility upon itself. It will continue as it does now to turn a blind eye and just let the standards sink to this new bottom line, which will once again be the completely automatic consequence of moderation. The end product is inevitably lowering standards.
What do I care about lower standards? Am I such an elitist? In fact, the opposite is the case. There is nothing more elitist than privilege without merit. Unlike medals, privileges need to be earned every day.
"Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -
The proposed language would fit better under Section I - Article I, rather than in the section on Ostraka, which it has nothing do to with.
Novus Ordo Hebdomadum - Reinstalling: A Total War Aficionado’s StoryPillaging 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
I think the current language would fit better there too. I actually thought about that when I was making this proposal and I considered moving that paragraph to section 1 as part of the proposal, but I figured it would be better to separate the ideas into two separate amendments as this change is a bit more controversial than just re-arranging the structure.The proposed language would fit better under Section I - Article I, rather than in the section on Ostraka, which it has nothing do to with.
I plan on making an amendment to move the paragraph in question to S1-A1 after we get this amendment sorted out.
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
Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII
obvious support is support
Under the patronage of Finlander, patron of Lugotorix & Lifthrasir & joerock22 & Socrates1984 & Kilo11 & Vladyvid & Dick Cheney & phazer & Jake Armitage & webba 84 of the Imperial House of Hader
And another step towards mediocrity and self-indulgence...
"We all make mistakes." is a convenient myth, nothing more. It is not hard to stay on the good side of the ToS and it is sad to see that the citizenry is not even willing to maintain this bare minimum of behaviour.
"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.
I oppose the current OP, because of reasons already stated.
Opposed, because I believe the Curia should be held at the minimum standards the absolute majority of the forum's membership is actually capable of maintaining. Rewards and medals are revoked in both the real and the digital world, on a not very infrequent basis, so I don't understand how our perception of the citizenship is relevant to the debate.
Just a clarification, but Sir Adrian's argument is wrong, because it is contradicted by the moderation guidelines and the Constitution. Infractions are not given on a personal whim, but they are issued after collective deliberation. Mistakes have happened, but the warnings are instantly reversed without an appeal to the Tribunal being necessary. Also, it is impossible for any user to be warned with an infraction for a single mistake. Only if the offender had already violated the same rule in the past, he's issued any infraction points. Otherwise, he's just given either a private message asking him to be more careful or a note, which however carries zero infraction points. Because the citizenship is suspended only as a result of infractions and not of notes, the affected citizens necessarily have a history of rule-breaking, so nobody is in danger of temporarily losing his privileges for a single mistake.
In regards to the off-topic rule, it is enforced in cases of derogatory personal references and repeated and intentional attempts to hijack a thread's discussion.