Curial Officers Bill: V.2

**gigagaia** · January 29, 2007, 06:59 PM

Drafted by: gigagaia
supported by: halie satanus, Perikles, Garbarsardar

Aims: The aims of this bill, is to establish a system whereby the curia can elect specific officers to run certain projects at TWC. For example, someone like Halie's modder registrar would fit perfectly into this bill. Perhaps even a head librarian. It will infuse the positions that are elected with constant leadership, fresh ideas and energy.

Rationale: Because projects often get hamstrung by a lack of leadership, usually the result of a prolonged absence and drawn-out resignation on the part of nostalgia or whathaveyou, the motiviation is to let the curia, through elections, keep leadership fresh and active and accountable to the bodies which make the most use of these creations.

Consequences and Future Problems to Address: Each officer covered by this legislation should be given a mandate which is implemented accordingly through some legislation. For the case of a head librarian, in a situation with an already-established staff, I would strongly be against implementing something against the wishes of the other librarians, rather I would advocate allowing them to define the mandate of the head librarian and simply allow the curia to elect that individual based on their merits vis-a-vis the mandate given. Also, Appendix A of the syntagma should be ammended to include curial officers, as not all officers mandates may include a patrician requirement.

Additionally, hopefully Lord Rahl will make some spiffy badges for the various officers to have handy...

Curial Officer

Role: A curial officer is a member who has been given a mandate, by the curia, to administer a project or institution at TWC. It shall only apply to chairpersons or project leaders/managers, and not general and day-to-day staff, who are hired as employees.

Powers and Priviliges: Curial officers shall be given the appropriate moderator priviliges judged by the Hexagon council to be necessary for carrying out their duties.

Selection: When an Curial office is vacant, the Curator shall post a stickied thread in the Curia Main forum for a period of no longer than four days, stating the mandate for the office and asking for applicants. In the event that more than five candidates apply, the CdeC shall review the applicants and choose the best five candidates. The Curator shall then hold a vote, which shall last no longer than six days. The candidate with the most amount of votes shall be declared the winner.

Terms: A curial officer shall hold office for a period no longer than three months from the day they are formally invested in the office to the final day of the following election.
Thus, the official campaign for a curial officer should begin ten days before the end of the officer's term.
In the event that an office is vacated due to dismissal or resgination, the curator will temporarily assume that office until a new election has taken place and a new officer invested.

Dismissal: If, in the judgement of the Hexagon council, a curial officer has neglected his or her duties, including but not limited to prolonged unstated or unexcused absence or a gross violation of trust, the curator may dismiss the officer and hold new elections.

So, would those who are still behind this, please restate (again) their support?

**Halie Satanus** · January 29, 2007, 08:06 PM

I like it, this would empower the Curia through elections and give those who really want to work for the site positions to aim for. I make no bones about the registrars job, i see it as being one of the most responsible positions on this site and not one that should be given or taken lightly.

I support.

**Perikles** · January 30, 2007, 01:08 AM

Not enough time for long post so I just support.

**Garbarsardar** · January 30, 2007, 01:40 AM

I support this bill.

**Spartan** · January 30, 2007, 03:31 AM

I support it as well.

**Tacticalwithdrawal** · January 30, 2007, 03:34 AM

yes, I like it, nice, simple and flexible. Way to go Gig

**Tom Paine** · January 30, 2007, 01:44 PM

What is a project? That's what I want to know... Especially as I'd like to lodge the Content firmly in the realm of Curial oversight, would the Content staff be Curial officers, or just the editors, or what? (As an example). However other than this minor thing I like it; just let's get that nebulous "project or institution" line cleared up.

**gigagaia** · January 30, 2007, 01:59 PM

right now, the posts are nebulous, beacause we have no clear direction from hex as to what could be the curias jurisdiction. But it could include anything from Chancellor of a university to a registrar for a registry to even perhaps the content manager. Editors are iffy, as they are both managers and staff, so that would be something to be ironed out...

**Tom Paine** · January 30, 2007, 02:01 PM

I am not staff, however; I'm just a project manager. So therefore I would fall under this, yes? Or would I be a subcontractor from the Content manager (lobbying for that to be a Curially elected position, yes, yes I am)

**Tacticalwithdrawal** · January 30, 2007, 02:04 PM

well, simple answer is we make the assumption everything is a project - if Hex/owner feel worried about it they can quickly step in.

Frankly I think they would be glad of enthusiastic volunteers