(Moved to Vote) (Amendment) Modder Consultation Proposal

[Tom Paine]

I propose that, to increase the participation of modders in the site governance, to aid modders in the pursuit of that which gains the site most new viewers, and to aid the Curia in addressing the concerns of modders, the following Bill is passed, to add a new permanent Curial officer to the current set, amending the legislation on Curial Officers by adding in the following to Section 3 Article 5 SS4:

Modder Consultation and Information Amendment Bill

A Curial Officer shall be elected to improve communications between the TW Community of the site and the Curia.
First, the Officer will oversee a thread pinned in the TW and Modding Community Forum linked to in closed, pinned threads in the relevant locations. This thread will be for all questions, suggestions, complaints, &c of members on the TW side which they wish to voice. Any long discussion coming within this thread shall be split into an independent thread in the same area of the site, linked to from the original thread. Monthly, the Officer shall post in the Curia a summary of each matter raised in the thread, with the exception of those deemed by Hex not to be the remit of the Curia, and these shall be discussed seriously by the Curia; any resultant Bills shall proceed through the Prothalamos as normal. This should not be taken to mean that ideas from this area or these threads should not otherwise be introduced into the Curia.
Secondarily, the Curial Officer will post, using the closed pinned threads, Curial developments that are relevant to the TW community, including but not in any manner limited to changes in the patronisation system, to the structure of the site as a whole, and Curial initiatives such as Modder Awards.

The Curial Officer will, in doing these duties, be expected to liase regularly with the Curator and the Speaker of the House.

Rationale: At present, modders have difficulty in registering all their complaints, suggestions, and requests in a simple, concise, single area that the Curia will then have an easy time inspecting; and they have a difficult time in ensuring that such matters are brought to the attention of the Curia. This Bill will ensure that modders have a voice in the Curia for these matters that is listened to without fail. Since modders provide the biggest draw to the site (poll here), this is essential to the continued success and expansion of the site in all areas. Furthermore the TW side needs to be integrated into the governance of the site by being informed of all changes to the site relevant to them, thus the latter part of the Bill.

(Patrician) Supporters: makanyane; Perikles; Kagemusha

Edits
1.1 Added the word "closed"; removed the list of areas in favour of "relevant locations" for such closed pinned threads.
1.2 Radical rewrite from old version below

Modder Consultation Proposal

Monthly, a Curial Officer (as per the Curial Officers Act) will post a pinned thread in the TW and Modding Community Forums, linked to by means of closed pinned threads from relevant locations. The purpose of this thread, to be noted in each link-thread, is to gather requests and suggestions from modders as to improvements to the site; to register grievances about the site of modders; and similar matters. The Curial Officer will summarise these grievances, suggestions, and requests into one thread that shall be posted within the Curia. Any matter in the thread that is outside Curial remit, such as warnings, shall be removed by staff within 24 hours, then the thread shall be pinned for 1 week, during which time the Curia is expected to debate and deal with all points it feels that need addressing. Bills resulting from this thread should be posted in the Prothalamos and proceed the normal way.

[Publius]

I support. This gives the entire modding community on TWC (as opposed to just artifex) a clear voice in policy, and helps collect the broadest range of opinions.

[Perikles]

I too support. Seems like a good idea, finally all modders will get an input in policy.

[Spiff]

I don't really support, it just seems like extra legislation that isn't particularly needed. "Modders" are still just members of the forum, like the rest of us, who come here for various reasons, and are just as capable of noticing we have a Questions & Suggestions forum.

You say "modders have difficulty in registering all their complaints, suggestions, and requests" but i don't see the evidence.

[Tom Paine]

The fact they often don't voice any suggestions they have for improvement; the various replies to this thread and the repsonses its sisters held; and so on. Simple, really.
I might add that anything that aids the site in improving itself should not be rejected on the basis that its possibly unneccessary.

[Spiff]

I dont think the problem is lack of interest from "modders" as a group, its more from the "Casual" members who only visit the TWC in passing. For example to check if the latest patch is out, or if the latest version of their favourite mod has been released - or in the case of people who are part of a mod, they may have their own forum elsewhere and only visit TWC to maintain a presence for their mod here.

I remember when i was like this - i only came here to get information on the latest version of RTR, i didn't really care about the forum or how it was run, i just read a few threads on the mod, slowly got into the CC forums and went from there.

I imagine there are many, many members who are like this now - if they are a "dedicated" member they will care about the site, they will look for ways to improve it and will inevitably look for the Suggestions forum. If they are just "casual" members they will likely not care enough so long as they can post and read threads. Having a pinned thread in the TW forums in my opinion is unlikely to provoke many members who otherwise hadn't taken the time to offer suggestions to do so.

But as you say, this is just speculation on my part - the bill is not a bad idea, i just think it would be better served by a member of Hex - Halie for example - on a one month trial basis, rather than having it made permanent in the Syntagma.

[Elrond]

I agree with this bill - most modders don't get involved in TWC's running and this will encourage them to participate.

[The Walrus]

I support for reasons already posted

[Halie Satanus]

I see the rational behind this and i agree that anything that gets people contributing is worth having a crack at, what's making this kind of a 'meh' for me though is the setting up of the new forums, i think there are enough members here who will do this job anyway. The idea being that if a modder should post something in there someone will pick it up and take it to the Curia, hopefully the modder will see that process and want to take part in it themselves. It will take time.

[Tom Paine]

hs, no new forums are needed, where did you get that impression? All that's needed in one Curial Officer and a set of stickied threads; beyond that, nothing is required. While theoretically a strong objection, its not actually valid.

Spiff, I would prefer it to be done by a non-Hexer (its a Curial matter) and Curial Officers seem to fit the role perfectly, in the end. And the codification ensures it happens and lays out a rather simple method thereto, easily amendable if needs be.

[Halie Satanus]

No you misunderstood, sorry probably my fault.. I was referring to the Modding community forums, which can be used as a 'Q&S' by modders, amongst other things.

[Tom Paine]

This, I feel, will encourage and aid in that, as well as making sure anything raised in there gets brought to Curial attention; in directing people to the area, it will raise their awareness of it generally as well as at these one-month intervals.

[Rolanbek]

I am not convinced of the necessity of the post.

isn't this what q&s is for?

R

[Lusted]

I support this proposal, as long as the Curia does actually follow up on the issues raised in the thread.

[Tom Paine]

I am not convinced of the necessity of the post.

isn't this what q&s is for?

R

See my answer to Spiff, post 5 of this thread. Concerns you raise are dealt with there.

I support this proposal, as long as the Curia does actually follow up no the issues raised in the thread.

Is the "no" accidental? Anyway. If the rest doesn't, I at least will do, good enough guarantee?

[Muizer]

I think my position on such matters should be getting clear by now. If one or more individual members are eager to take this task upon themselves, I suggest they submit a plan to Hex, the Curia or both. If it is submitted to the Curia, we can then vote on the plan including the proposed personnel as a Curial decision.

[Lusted]

Is the "no" accidental?

Meant to be on.

[Tom Paine]

The personell, however, are not part of the established decision, Muizer; I'm wanting this to be an elected officer, elected on their merits not on the merits of an idea. I tend to feel that that makes it a somewhat stronger proposal.

Does my assurance suit, then, Lusted?

[Muizer]

The personell, however, are not part of the established decision, Muizer; I'm wanting this to be an elected officer, elected on their merits not on the merits of an idea. I tend to feel that that makes it a somewhat stronger proposal.

I see no reason why the personnel could not be part of the formal decision. Knowing who the driving force behind a project will be is a major factor in weighing its chances of success.

[Tom Paine]

But the driving force behind this is myself, and I don't feel I have the credibility with the TW community to get them to give their concerns. The driving force behind a Bill is not neccessarily the person who will enforce it; otherwise only CdeC members could propose Bills about citizenship qualifications. Furthermore I'm leaving it up to the citizenry to decide who they want to represent them in this enterprise, rather than enforcing one person upon them. I disagree totally with your idea in this regard, basically.