Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 82

Thread: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

  1. #1
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    .
    .

    PreambleFirst: apologies in advance for robbing participants of their usual 'What's it all about?' treasure hunt.
    Second: the base for this amendment was originally floated here in January and has since been part of at least two previous amendments, here and here. Both failed due to the other part of their respective amendments. Which means my only claim to fame is putting it on it's own and coming up with acceptable wording.
    BackgroundAt present moderation immediately notifies the consul when a citizen has been penalized with an infraction (one or multiple points penalty) and the consul then suspends the member's citizenship until the penalty expires or it gets revoked, the latter through a tribunal or praetorium appeal. As this suspension is immediate it would remain in place until an appeal was concluded, which could take several weeks to run it's cause. In the case of a reversal that would mean citizenship would be suspended unduly for an extended period. Underneath in the spoiler some numbers to put this into perspective (originally posted here):

    Spoiler for tribunal appeal numbers
    A quick rundown of cases since August last year makes it clear that it is the decision\deliberation (not the 'interrogation') process that delays the verdict, eg in 4 out of 11 cases the deliberation took longer then a week:
    1035 - 6 days
    1034 - 7 days
    1033 - 20 days (11 days from last comment to verdict, 9 days 'interrogation')
    1032 - 7 days
    1031 - 14 days (12 days from last comment to verdict)
    1030 - 1 day (resolved)
    1029 - 14 days (13 days from last comment to verdict)
    1028 - 8 days
    1027 - 14 days (no defense from appellant, 'time out')
    1026 - 23 days (12 days from last comment to verdict, 11 days 'interrogation')
    1025 - 5 days
    ProposalThe above issue can be solved rather simply by introducing a '72hrs grace period' during which the citizen can lodge an tribunal appeal. In other words the implementation of the suspension will be put on hold for 72hrs and in case of a timely appeal until after the verdict (if it is denied).
    At present the expiry length for an infraction is three months, so to allow for a delay in implementing the citizenship suspension said suspension will run for a 90 days period from the date of implementation.
    WordingOriginal, Link
    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. The suspended member losses the ability to display all rank, including both Citizen and Patrician badges and color.
    Amended
    Section III - Ostraka, Citizen Suspension and Magistrates]
    Article I. Ostraka and Citizenship suspension
    If a citizen receives an infraction Moderation will inform the Consul suspends their citizenship until the infraction has expired or is revoked. who will inform the member that a citizenship suspension procedure has been initiated.3

    The suspended member losses the ability to display all rank, including both Citizen and Patrician badges and color.

    Regulations and procedures for Section III
    3 The consul will inform the citizen of the dual appeals process and time limits. The suspension will be delayed for 72 hours. allowing the member to appeal the infraction. The Consul will verify if an appeal has been lodged. Pending the result of the verification the following procedure applies:


    • No appeal

    the consul will execute the suspension


    • Appeal initiated

    the consul extends the hold of suspension for the duration of the appeal
    - at the conclusion of an unsuccessful primary appeal the consul will renew the 72 hours hold period to allow for a secondary appeal and repeats the verification process thereafter.
    - the consul will verify that all appeal options are concluded, and if an infraction remains in place then the consul will execute the suspension.


    • Appeals refers to both Tribunal and Praetorium appeals


    Last edited by Gigantus; October 31, 2021 at 12:31 AM. Reason: final update of 'amended' - removed 'discussion'




  2. #2
    Flinn's Avatar His Dudeness of TWC
    Patrician Citizen Moderator Emeritus Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus Gaming Emeritus

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    17,486
    Blog Entries
    35

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    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

  3. #3

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Support in principle, but too long-winded, includes unnecessary text and ignores Praetorium appeals. The wording needs some more thought.



  4. #4
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Thanks, will add praetorium '...allow for a tribunal and\or praetorium appeal to...'

    Tried to put all the essential points like delay period, appeal impact in as short as possible paragraph\wording, your suggestions to simplify (remove unnecessary text) while retaining the meaning\purpose are welcome.

    The 'consecutive infractions' as well as the 'and forfeits' section should be logical conclusions but then this is the curia where 'if it ain't written down it's disputable (or, unintentionally, will not get enforced)'.
    Last edited by Gigantus; October 20, 2021 at 12:49 PM.




  5. #5
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen Censor

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    18,435
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    and forfeits all offices that specifically require citizenship.
    This sentence is entirely unnecessary, imo. If someone does not meet the requirements for office, they cannot hold office. You don't need to include this sentence since the citizenship requirement to hold office is listed elsewhere.

    Consecutive infractions will add to the suspension period according to their validity period.
    This is a confusing sentence that I don't feel like adds anything. I have no idea what was wrong with the language that included "until the infraction expires or is revoked" but it was way clearer and in line with how things are currently done.

    Should an appeal be lodged in this timely manner then moderation will hold the consul's notification until a verdict is rendered that returns a penalty.
    I think this language could use some heavy reworking as well. Way too long winded and unnecessary.

    All in all a good idea but one that needs a good bit of reworking before I can support it.

    Join the Thema Devia Discord here
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan

    Proud Patron of Sara Temer, Cope, Gyrosmeister, and Geg






  6. #6
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Forfeits all office - I did mention that it is logical and also why I included it. If is is listed elsewhere then it can certainly go. Done.

    Consecutive infraction - a second or even third\fourth infraction after the initial one while the preceding one is still 'current'. Should also be a logical conclusion that the suspension will be extended until the last infraction has expired, see my reasoning with regards to 'logical'

    Shortened the 'appeal be lodged' section to : In case of such an appeal moderation will....
    The rest will need to remain - someone is bond to question what will happen if the appeal is granted. But I am open to suggestions otherwise.


    Guess the temptation of using legalese got the better of me...
    Last edited by Gigantus; October 20, 2021 at 02:15 PM.




  7. #7
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen Censor

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    18,435
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Forfeits all office - I did mention that it is logical and also why I included it. If is is listed elsewhere then it can certainly go. Done.
    It is listed in the requirements for office. If you do not meet the requirements, you are no longer eligible for the office.

    Consecutive infraction - a second or even third\fourth infraction after the initial one while the preceding one is still 'current'. Should also be a logical conclusion that the suspension will be extended in that case, see my reasoning with regards to 'logical'
    This is already policy and a logical result of an infraction equaling suspension. I'm not sure this language needs to be included here.

    I'm also still confused about the change to "for 90 days" instead of "until the infraction expires"

    I'd change this,

    In case of such an appeal moderation will hold the consul's notification until a verdict is rendered that returns a penalty.
    to something like this this,

    If an appeal is filed within 72 hours moderation will not notify the Consul unless the appellant is unsuccessful

    Join the Thema Devia Discord here
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan

    Proud Patron of Sara Temer, Cope, Gyrosmeister, and Geg






  8. #8
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    90 days - the infraction period will run from the day it has been issued. In case of an unsuccessful appeal that means that the total period of suspension could be reduced by as much as two weeks or even three weeks (see my spoilered list in the OP). That's a bit much of a freebie, hence 90 days from implementation.

    Appeal section - same effect, different approach. The 72 hours in connection with the appeal is already mentioned. But I think my 'hold until' is a bit too upscale, how about this:

    "In case of such an appeal moderation will not notify the Consul unless the appellant is unsuccessful."

    Consecutive infractions - just to make it clear for me before I remove, please confirm: the current policy is to amend the suspension time by the expiry date of the consecutive infraction? Example: a remaining suspension of 10 days would be extended by roughly 20 days (30 days default period minus remaining 10 days) when the consecutive infraction is received.
    Last edited by Gigantus; October 20, 2021 at 02:54 PM.




  9. #9
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen Censor

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    18,435
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    90 days - the infraction period will run from the day it has been issued. In case of an unsuccessful appeal that means that the total period of suspension could be reduced by as much as two weeks or even three weeks (see my spoilered list in the OP). That's a bit much of a freebie, hence 90 days from implementation
    Okay, I think I understand your point and intention here (even if I disagree that it's too much of a freebie).

    Consecutive infractions - just to make it clear for me before I remove, please confirm: the current policy is to amend the suspension time by the expiry date of the consecutive infraction? Example: a remaining suspension of 10 days would be extended by roughly 20 days (30 days default period minus remaining 10 days) when the consecutive infraction is received.
    So the way it currently works is as follows: If you have an infraction issued on 1/1/2021 and it expires on 4/1/2021 then you are eligible for citizenship again on 4/1/2021. But if you receive an additional infraction on say 3/1/2021 that expires on 6/1/2021 then your citizenship's suspension is extended until the expiration of that infraction (6/1/2021). As soon as all active infractions expire a user is once again eligible for citizenship.

    "In case of such an appeal moderation will not notify the Consul unless the appellant is unsuccessful."
    That language seems good to me, yeah.

    Join the Thema Devia Discord here
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan

    Proud Patron of Sara Temer, Cope, Gyrosmeister, and Geg






  10. #10
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Consecutive infractions - section removed.

    Pretty tight and neat by now.




  11. #11
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen Censor

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    18,435
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Support.

    Join the Thema Devia Discord here
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan

    Proud Patron of Sara Temer, Cope, Gyrosmeister, and Geg






  12. #12
    Flinn's Avatar His Dudeness of TWC
    Patrician Citizen Moderator Emeritus Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus Gaming Emeritus

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    17,486
    Blog Entries
    35

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Re-supporting
    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

  13. #13
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    It's been several days without further input - please move to vote.




  14. #14
    Akar's Avatar I am not a clever man
    Patrician Citizen Censor

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    a 7/11 parking lot with Patron and LaCroix
    Posts
    18,435
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    When you have the required support I will move it to vote .

    Join the Thema Devia Discord here
    Son, Heir, and Wartime Consigliere of King Athelstan

    Proud Patron of Sara Temer, Cope, Gyrosmeister, and Geg






  15. #15

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Setting aside the fact I am yet to receive an explanation for why Moderation sharing infraction history with the Consul doesn't breach non disclosure, there are still questions about language and process. In my view the procedure (if it should even be allowed at all) should be as follows:

    1. Citizen receives infraction.

    2. Moderation informs Consul that Citizen has received infraction.

    3. Consul notifies the Citizen of the following:

    (1) That as a consequence of his infraction his Citizenship will be suspended for 90 days.
    (2) That the suspension will be stayed if an appeal is lodged within 72 hours and until the appeals process is complete.*
    (3) That if the appeal(s) fail, the 90 day suspension will go into effect at the conclusion of the appeals process.
    (4) That the suspension will be invalidated by a successful appeal or revocation of the infraction.
    (5) That if the appellant wishes to file a secondary appeal he must do so within 72 of the conclusion of the first.

    *Moderation informs the Consul of Citizen appeals filed in the Praetorium and whether the appeal is succesful.

    Assuming this is agreeable, it would probably be easiest to include it as a footnote.



  16. #16
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Please specify what you mean with 'yet to receive an explanation...' or what the relevance is for this case as this is the first time you raise the issue.

    1 and 2 is already in place\practice.
    3,1 this is basically the only change to the proposed amendment, eg consul informs about suspension and holds for three days instead of moderation
    3,2 as is specified already
    3,3 ditto
    3,4 obvious and superfluous
    3,5 Please specify what you mean with a secondary appeal, eg tribunal follow praetorium? If so then that's covered already by mentioning both appeal courts as you suggested yourself.

    "*Moderation informs the Consul of Citizen appeals filed in the Praetorium and whether the appeal is succesful."
    This would not be required if moderation holds the suspension as proposed at present nor do I think moderation will actually agree to it as it is a privacy matter, eg it would require consent by the appellant, where as the provision of the notification to the consul once all avenues have been exhausted would not constitute a breach of SND. I would need to get that confirmed, so hang tight.


    Could I get a feed back from the consul if changing the procedure from moderation holding the notification for suspension to him receiving a immediate notification, holding the notification for three days and being obliged to inform the member about the suspension even though he received the infraction already?

    All other points are already in practice (and do not require mentioning again as was established for similar points from the original proposal) or covered by the present wording. Foot notes should therefore not be necessary.

    As aside: you realize that you split the onus of keeping track between moderation and consul instead of leaving it in one hand?
    It appears you didn't want to reduce the wording as such but rather relegate it to foot notes - could have told so and saved us a lengthy debate on how to simplify the text that you deemed too long.
    Last edited by Gigantus; October 24, 2021 at 07:16 AM.




  17. #17

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Support.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  18. #18
    Lifthrasir's Avatar "Capre" Dunkerquois
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Dunkirk - France
    Posts
    13,578
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Support.
    I think that you get the right amount of support now to move it to vote at your will Gig
    Under the patronage of Flinn, proud patron of Jadli, from the Heresy Vault of the Imperial House of Hader


  19. #19
    PikeStance's Avatar Assume Good Intentions
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Tirana, Albania
    Posts
    12,668
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Support

    Let's vote
    MODDERS WANTED | MY PATRONAGES
    Imperial Splendour is looking for Modders and Researchers. SEE AD HERE
    If interested, contact PikeStance(Mod Leader/Manager) or Quintus Hortensius Hortalus (Mod leader /Lead Artist)

    Under the Patronage of Omnipotent- Q | Member of the House of Wild Bill Kelso
    Patron of
    _Tataros_
    | Magister Militum Flavius Aetius | Alwyn | Lord Oda Nobunaga | Massive_attack |
    Proposed the Following - PHALERA: Mangalore & sumskilz | OPIFEX: wangrin, z3n, Swiss Halberdier, and Frodo45127


    Honourable Society of Silly Old Duffers | House of Noble Discourse

  20. #20
    Gigantus's Avatar I don't get worked up over people anymore: they get a post-it with 'ridiculous' on their forehead and that's it.
    Patrician Citizen Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Goa - India
    Posts
    51,217
    Blog Entries
    31

    Default Re: [Amendment] Section III, Article I

    Appreciate the support. While it would allow me to push the proposal as it is right now without further ado I would like to first receive a feed back from moderation with regards to the Praetorium info issue. This would need to be taken into account anyhow in case a procedural change, like proposed by Cope for this amendment, is desired at a later point.

    Plus I hate loose ends.




Page 1 of 5 12345 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
  •