The end of the Linear system?

**Silver Guard** · February 05, 2007, 02:13 PM

Combination of mine and Prof's ideas. The compromise proposal.

The Plebs are as they are now

Plebs are patronised as per the current system, they are then voted on by the CotC to become Civitates/Artifexi.
As Civitates/Artifexi they can vote on and discuss legislation.

Patricians are those of the curia who have shown dediction and contributed to the site, they are voted on by the CotC after recomendation by any Patricians or those above the Curia.

The Curia elects the CotC members, who are made up of 16 Patricians. Those ranks above the Curia automaticly have the rank of Patrician. Appointed moderators and First Councillors are barred from applying.

The Curia also elected a collection of senior appointees. These apply for the rank as per the usual methods. The Elected moderators are elected from a shortlist presented to the Curia via the First House. They are given power over a sub-forum or several sub-fora.

The Curator is the representative of the Curia on the First House. He is voted as he who best shows the opinions of the Curia, wether a majority iew or as a moderate. He must hold the rank of Patrician to gain this rank. A successful vote of no confidence by the curia will result in the Curator being stripped of rank. He may not be a global moderator or hold another position in the first house.

The TW representative Is chosen from the ranks of Patricians, Artifexi and Opifexi, though those of the last rank are likely the most fit for the rank. He is chosen as the one who best shows the views of the TW section of the site. He must apply via an application thread in the curia main. Those applicants will be trimmed down to whom the First house deem acceptable and then voted into office by the curia. He may not be a global moderator or hold another position in the first house.
The CC representative is chosen from the ranks of Patricians and Civitates. He is chosen as the one who best represents the interests of the CC section of the site.He must apply via an application thread in the curia main. Those applicants will be trimmed down to whom the First house deem acceptable and then voted into office by the curia.
All of these three sit on the First House. They are joined by the site owner, two senior moderators and the forum's technical representative, who is chosen as the most active of those technical personal on the forum by the first house. He may not be a global moderator or hold another position in the first house.

The Technical representative decides who has admin access, and to what extent. His decisions may be vetoed by the First House if they deem his choices inappropriate, and all admin role changes must be reported to the First House. Major changes should await the First House's approval, though emergencies should be dealt with immediatly. It is the role of the Technical team to best implement site softwear to benefit the site.

The elected moderators are promoted to global moderators by the Global moderators. These are those moderators most trusted in their role by the global moderators and are given moderation rights over the entire forum. They must hold the rank of Patrician to be elevated to this rank.
From the elected and appointed mods one of their ranks are elected as the one who best represent the moderation team. This person can be drawn from either rank and are voted into their position by the other moderators. He join all other representees in the First House and must hold the rank of Patrician.

The Content staff are chosen by the editors of the content, who remain as they are at present. Whenever an editor steps down he chooses a replacement. Between them the editors of the content decide who is best suited to represent them, by vote or by mutual agreement. This member joins the other representees in the First House.

The Tribunal is formed of ex-moderators who have been awarded the rank of Senatorii, they are either voted into place by the curia or appointed by the First House, as per the needs of the First House in this area.

Any members who are in the First House and are not already Patricians (the owner, tech, TW and CC representatives) gain the rank automaticly, no CotC vote is required.

EDITED: Prof's compromise version

**Kscott** · February 05, 2007, 02:28 PM

Profs proposal except two head mods instead of one?

**Silver Guard** · February 05, 2007, 02:37 PM

More clearly set out, with the added role of Patricians (the rank separating the rest of the curia from the leading mod ranks and the CotC), elected primary moderators and the addition of guilds are also included. Content is also completly separated from the Curia, the two have no influence on one another.

**Spartan** · February 05, 2007, 04:17 PM

Looks good. I would suggest that if you are going to keep the Pat rank then I would make the Head and Globe positions of that rank as well.

**Silver Guard** · February 05, 2007, 04:32 PM

Edited so that Global and Head mods and the Curator must hold the rank of Patrician.

**Lusted** · February 05, 2007, 05:21 PM

Don't really like it because of the elected head mods, and election of all 1st House positions. Curia cannot see what goes on in staff so does not know who would be the best head mods. and haivng all 1st house positions elected leads to too many possibilites of playing to the crowd and people getting elected then using their position for their own agenda.

**Professor420** · February 05, 2007, 05:59 PM

I would suggest we quietly back away from this proposal... what prompted its posting I have no idea. Sometimes, SG, you have to work with what is given to you, instead of what your (quite unqualified and non-reputable) persona dictates you should stubbornly cling to in order to be deemed important. Take the ideas, and suggest them as alternatives in the proper thread.

**Tacticalwithdrawal** · February 06, 2007, 04:52 AM

SG - not quite sure why this isn't in the original thread, its not a huge change rather lots of tweaks but.......

elected head mods isn't a good idea, its a job not a talent contest.

The only individuals given full admin access are the technical experts, the site owner and the two representatives of the moderation team. Partial admin access may be given to other individuals as per the needs of the First House, as long as the Curia is informed. Any First House decision on this issue may be vetoed as per a successful Curia vote.

no, no, no - admin access is given out as required, this is not something the Curia (or anyone else) should have a say in. The technical people know who needs what and hands it out.

Apart from anything else, 'Admin access' doesn't actually mean anything as there are at least 3 different things that fall within it.

So no, leave the technical running of the site to the people who understand it.

Originally Posted by Professor420

I would suggest we quietly back away from this proposal... what prompted its posting I have no idea. Sometimes, SG, you have to work with what is given to you, instead of what your (quite unqualified and non-reputable) persona dictates you should stubbornly cling to in order to be deemed important. Take the ideas, and suggest them as alternatives in the proper thread.

Prof - what? This is the Curia, everyone is entitled to post their ideas/stand on the soapbox - not good mate

**Professor420** · February 06, 2007, 07:49 AM

Prof - what? This is the Curia, everyone is entitled to post their ideas/stand on the soapbox - not good mate

Should I critically analyze that statement? Or should we just agree it is quite hypocritical coming from you, at the best.

**Silver Guard** · February 06, 2007, 11:07 AM

SG - not quite sure why this isn't in the original thread, its not a huge change rather lots of tweaks but.......

Just makes things less cluttered in my opinion, leaving things open to debating Imb's proposal there

elected head mods isn't a good idea, its a job not a talent contest.

As I said, its elected by the other moderators, or by mutual decision. Surely the moderators can be trusted to know who the most prestigous of their group are?

no, no, no - admin access is given out as required, this is not something the Curia (or anyone else) should have a say in. The technical people know who needs what and hands it out.

Apart from anything else, 'Admin access' doesn't actually mean anything as there are at least 3 different things that fall within it.

So no, leave the technical running of the site to the people who understand it.

Righty, thanks for that, I'll edit my proposal to suit, I'm afraid I don't know much of the technical element of the site.

The Technical representative decides who has admin access, and to what extent. His decisions may be vetoed by the First House if they deem his choices inappropriate, and all admin role changes must be reported to the First House. However, it is the role of the Technical representative to mould and change the administrative system to what he feels most benifits the site. Major changes should await the First House's approval.

This essencialy gives the Technical representative free reign, I'd like some feedback on wether this is practicl or wise and wether he should be more at the will of the First House.

**imb39** · February 06, 2007, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by Silver Guard

Just makes things less cluttered in my opinion, leaving things open to debating Imb's proposal there

As it stands. My proposal is now dead. Take that how you will.

As I said, its elected by the other moderators, or by mutual decision. Surely the moderators can be trusted to know who the most prestigous of their group are?

In the year I worked in Staff I have never thought, or seen, the iddea that the moderators select who gets promoted to Senior Staff. The internal workings of Staff are not at issue, here. We have a strong moderating team that works perfectly well as is. I am not keen for this aspect to change in the slightest.

Righty, thanks for that, I'll edit my proposal to suit, I'm afraid I don't know much of the technical element of the site.

Just accept that as far as I am concerned the Technical Department (or whatever it is called) must never ever come under the influence of the Curia. It should work with (as in provide technical assistance) the other bodies but that's it. I feel very strongly about this.

This essencialy gives the Technical representative free reign, I'd like some feedback on wether this is practicl or wise and wether he should be more at the will of the First House.

Hopefully I have already done so.

**John I Tzimisces** · February 06, 2007, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by Professor420

I would suggest we quietly back away from this proposal... what prompted its posting I have no idea. Sometimes, SG, you have to work with what is given to you, instead of what your (quite unqualified and non-reputable) persona dictates you should stubbornly cling to in order to be deemed important. Take the ideas, and suggest them as alternatives in the proper thread.

Get the delusion out of your head that you are more qualified than anyone else here, immediately.

**John I Tzimisces** · February 05, 2007, 06:10 PM

Ok, oh man, please, before we butcher more latin grammar irreversibly (civitates? city states? why?), it is artifices, with a hard c, ::desperate look::

**Silver Guard** · February 06, 2007, 01:32 AM

Lusted: The head mods are elected by the other moderators, not the Curia
Prof: Get out of my thread unless you plan on saying something productive, this was posted here to avoid cluttering the main thread with multiple proposals, which becomes confusing. Please, I have no need of your superior air to "put me in my place"
John: Sorry about that, I had no idea and took a blind guess.

**Halie Satanus** · February 06, 2007, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by Tac

elected head mods isn't a good idea, its a job not a talent contest.

But but ....I've been rehearsing, ' Tell me what you want what you really really want.....'

@SG umm yeh, you should have put this in the other thread, though your artistic skills are better than the others. I'm working on one myself but i've run out of green crayons..

**Tacticalwithdrawal** · February 06, 2007, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by halie satanus

But but ....I've been rehearsing, ' Tell me what you want what you really really want.....'

you've got (well, would have got) my vote - but only if you had made a video available.....

Originally Posted by Professor420

Should I critically analyze that statement? Or should we just agree it is quite hypocritical coming from you, at the best.

No, hypocritical would only be if I had ever said people didn't have the right to post their views, and I have never denied anyone's right to post in the Curia, I reserve the right to oppose their point of view, but not their right to post (which is what you did).

**Silver Guard** · February 06, 2007, 01:45 PM

Imb: Just to make sure you have not misunderstood, the First House is not controlled by the Curia, as such the Technical aspect is not touched by any Curial influence. However, I believe even the Tech section must be answerable to someone.

Well treat this as a new direction then. I am uncomfortable with representatives from the tech and curial sections having control over who represents the moderators, and feel that the moderators know themselves best, and so should be given a little autonomy to continue their tasks efficiently without intervention.

**imb39** · February 06, 2007, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by Silver Guard

Imb: Just to make sure you have not misunderstood, the First House is not controlled by the Curia, as such the Technical aspect is not touched by any Curial influence. However, I believe even the Tech section must be answerable to someone.

It is - the owner.

Well treat this as a new direction then. I am uncomfortable with representatives from the tech and curial sections having control over who represents the moderators, and feel that the moderators know themselves best, and so should be given a little autonomy to continue their tasks efficiently without intervention.

The current Staff system works very well. I would say that, I suppose, but the results are pretty obvious. I also repeat - no one from within Staff has ever suggested it, not even in passing.

**Silver Guard** · February 06, 2007, 03:13 PM

It is - the owner.

Who although has the last say, I don't believe should overule the First House on any issue, see it as a moral thing.

The current Staff system works very well. I would say that, I suppose, but the results are pretty obvious. I also repeat - no one from within Staff has ever suggested it, not even in passing.

So? Thats because all the efficient moderators are already part of Hex and rule the site, they don't want to change from that. In this new system where only two of them make the First House position, maybe they would like the ability to choose for themselves who represents them?

EDIT: As per Imb's suggestion, Senior moderators are appointed by the senior moderators already standing, thus making the moderation ranks more independant and making sure experience dictates promotion. The CC and TW reps are now vetted by the first house, and the restriction against global mods not having admin access has been removed.

**Fabolous** · February 07, 2007, 04:36 PM

Question, and perhaps this has already been covered, and I'm just missing it. Can someone who is a moderator be the CC rep, or TW rep, or Curator, or any of the posistions, assuming they fit the other qualifications?