Citizenship Proposal

[Kagemusha]

Citizenship Proposal

Proposer: [user]Kagemusha[/user]
Supporters:

it is proposed that the granting of Citizenship, and therefore the right to vote in the Curia, be an automatic process which occurs following 6 months activity on the forum. The CdeC shall still exist in order to remove this right from demonstrably undeserving members.

The following articles shall be amended as highlighted below:

Section 3 - Member Ranks and Curial Officers

All member of the Forums can be divided into the following Ranks. Each Rank confers on the holders a specific set of rights and privileges unavailable to other Ranks unless explicitly stated.

There are two broad categories of Ranks, Normal Ranks and Honorary Ranks. A member, in addition to his normal Rank, may also hold any number of honorary Ranks, as well as an Officer's position. In this case he may choose which Rank he is displayed under. Regardless of the Rank listed next to his name, he retains all the rights and privileges associated with all his ranks.

Article 1 - Normal Ranks

Peregrinus

The Rank of Peregrinus is conferred automatically with registration to the TWC Forums. It confers posting rights in the General Fora. Any Peregrinus has the right to ask questions and suggest changes in the "Questions and Suggestions" Forum.

Citizen

All members of TWC shall graduate from the rank of "Peregrinus" to the rank of Citizen following six months activity on the forum, subject to the conditions stated below.

members of TWC have the opportunity to become a Citizen of the Forum as per Article 3 below. Once a member becomes a Citizen, they can then choose between 3 different badges. Artifex, designed for those who are modders, Civitates, designed for those who have contributed to the debating side of the Site, whether in TW or CC, and Citizen, for those who associate with both.

To qualify for Citizenship, a member must have at least hundred posts, been a registered member for six months, and have no unexpired warnings. within the last six months.

All Citizens have the rights associated with Peregrinus, but in addition may post within the Curia, subject to the procedures in Section 2; may post with the Symposium. and may patronise other members as per Article 3

Patrician

Patricians are those Citizens who have continued to excell in their position within the forum by contributing to a greater extent than their citizenship requires.

A Citizen may be nominated to this rank by another Patrician in accordance with Article 4 3 below. Patricianship is awarded by the Consilium de Civitate for significant contribution to TWC (Appendix A). None of these contributions provide automatic promotion, but instead allow for nomination. The nominee must also have been a Citizen for at least one month and have no warnings at the time of their election.

A Patrician has all the rights of a Citizen, and in addition becomes eligible to be considered for higher office. Patricians are also required sponsors of Bills.

The following Article shall be deleted:

Article 3 - Patronisation

Any Citizen holding their rank for three months can patronise a Peregrinus for citizenship subject to the requirements in Article 1 above. The process of patronisation is as follows.

1. The patron confirms the candidate meets the requirements, OR a candidate meeting the requirements contacts a Citizen asking for patronage.
2. The nominee sends the patron a PM explaining his duties and privileges as a Citizen, and his contributions to the community. The patron forwards this paragraph, along with his own, outlining why he nominated this member, to a CdeC member.
3. The CdeC member opens a thread in the CdeC Forum and the proposed nominee is discussed and voted upon.
4. If the nominee achieves sixty per cent of the non-abstaining votes, he becomes a Citizen.
5. The Speaker of the House promotes the member to Citizen, with a Citizen badge, and contacts him as to whether he would like to remain a Citizen, or further self define as an Artifex or Civitate.

If a nominee fails his vote, he is not eligible to be considered again for one month. Members of the CdeC must abstain from voting on members they patronise. All CdeC votes must be concluded within seven days of the thread being opened in the CdeC.

The following Article shall be amended as highlighted below:

Article 4 3 - Promotion of Patricians

A Citizen is nominated by an existing Patrician, who PMs a CdeC member. to commence the nomination procedure. Points 3 and 4 of Article 3 are then followed. The CdeC member then opens a thread in the CdeC Forum and the proposed nominee is discussed and voted upon. If the nominee achieves sixty per cent of the non-abstaining votes, he becomes a Patrician.

Big thanks for Spiff on writing this proposal in a form that is understandable! Basicly what this proposal is trying to achieve, would be universal citizenship for all well behaving TWC members who have been part of the Forums for 6 months and posted the minimum of 100 posts.
I think we could be able to create an alternative patronization process based on voluntarity and not necessarily abandon the system alltogether. So what you think my fellow Citizens?

[Cymera]

Do not support, sorry, but isn't Citizen supposed to be an honorary rank? Didn't we just fight something like this a little while ago?

How about the creation of a rank that allows it to vote in the Curia, but does not associate it with contributions to the community.

That I would support.

[deRougemont]

Do not support.

Seeing as this bill got clobbered, I believe this even more radical variant of that proposal has even less chance of success. I would refer to this thread for reasons as to why this not a wise idea. The arguments pro and con will be similar.

[Perikles]

Do not support.

Seeing as this bill got clobbered, I believe this even more radical variant of that proposal has even less chance of success. I would refer to this thread for reasons as to why this not a wise idea. The arguments pro and con will be similar.

While I do not support this at all, I do not think your arguments again Self Proposal held any ground what so ever. The arguments being used continued changing throughout the thread as Ozy debated each point and thoroughly disregarded it, by the end of the thread the same arguments were being rehashed.

First we had the 'no patron' argument. This was the whole point of the bill, some people who post at TWC do not like the elitism surrounding patronisation. As MasterofNone put it here. I advise everyone reads that, twice. Patronisation is not the be all and end of Citizenship, using this argument again would be quite absurd.

Next we had the 'but a public thread could be humiliating' argument. We put this in as people had previously used the 'watering down of the ranks if done privately' argument. One giant circle, don't you think? The ranks will not be watered down while the CdeC is voting on candidates, from now on I'll call this 'CdeC theory' for short, as we seem to use it all the time. According to CdeC theory as long as Candidates are voted on by the same people there should be no watering down of the ranks. However we recognise the need for 'peer review' as tBP put it and decided it was right to have a public thread so the applicants could be put under public scrutiny.

This is a no win situation, especially for the veteran modders like MasterofNone/Palantir who we are denying the opportunity to discuss TWC policy because we don't like the idea of 'civs without a patron'. My ex-patron, Ummon, was not the sole making of me as a Citizen, it was the people who I talked to in them week just before and after patronisation. I am sure it is like this for others too, why do people insist having a patron is so important?

The system would have entailed a person who is confident they will pass, posting in a public thread asking to be put in front of the CdeC. A person who wasn't confident or expected humiliation would not apply, it is human nature. If someone wanted to patronise them the normal way they could approach them by PM and go down this route. If not, after a few days, the CdeC would vote on the candidate. According to CdeC theory only the worthy will pass as it is the same people voting on these candidates. People who have been on the CdeC know it can be tough for people to pass if they are 'borderline' and many do fail.

So, while I do not support this proposal, even I am not that radical, I think it closely resembles the Self Proposal idea in ideology, but this is not the way to go about letting those who are worthy and do not like patronisation in.

If anyone still has some kind of reason against self-proposal please share it.

(sorry for rambling in this thread, I felt it necessary after that post )

[the Black Prince]

no no no no no no no no no no

citizenship is NEVER to be automatic. it is a peer granted reward to those few members of this site who make a quality contribution in their time here, it is NOT open to any and all. there are members of this site who have been members for over a year, who have a post count in the thousands, who are not citizens, and never will be, because however liked they are, they just post comments, and don't post anything that displays some great quality or contribution or mark of talent or ability or skill.

if this were to pass, the CdeC would be flooded with hundreds upon hundreds of applicants the majority of whom would be rejected out of hand because they are simply average. citizenship is NOT granted for being an average well behaved posting member, it is granted for above average contribution to this community. simply being a member for 6 months and not getting any warnings is not indicative of any form of contribution in anyway. i could achieve these requirements for citizenship just by signing up, posting once in say cheese, and doing nothing else for 6 months, and that is just plain wrong.

i will never, ever, support an amendment that so absolutely devalues and destroys completely the rank of citizen and any level of respect and status it accords, not to mention the recognition that such members gain in being able to contribute to the curia. nor will i subject my fellow volunteer councillors of the CdeC to such a heavy burden in wading through what would prove to be hundreds of applications daily.

this amendment appears to give no thought to the entire meaning behind the existence of the citizen rank, its role in this site, and the sheer practicality of having the CdeC examine the automatic claims of EVERY member who has been here six months on a site whos membership runs into the thousands.

i therefore say, definitively and absolutely, and with the strength and force of my entire being NO!

[Spiff]

no no no no no no no no no no

citizenship is NEVER to be automatic. it is a peer granted reward to those few members of this site who make a quality contribution in their time here, it is NOT open to any and all. there are members of this site who have been members for over a year, who have a post count in the thousands, who are not citizens, and never will be, because however liked they are, they just post comments, and don't post anything that displays some great quality or contribution or mark of talent or ability or skill.

if this were to pass, the CdeC would be flooded with hundreds upon hundreds of applicants the majority of whom would be rejected out of hand because they are simply average. citizenship is NOT granted for being an average well behaved posting member, it is granted for above average contribution to this community. simply being a member for 6 months and not getting any warnings is not indicative of any form of contribution in anyway. i could achieve these requirements for citizenship just by signing up, posting once in say cheese, and doing nothing else for 6 months, and that is just plain wrong.

i will never, ever, support an amendment that so absolutely devalues and destroys completely the rank of citizen and any level of respect and status it accords, not to mention the recognition that such members gain in being able to contribute to the curia. nor will i subject my fellow volunteer councillors of the CdeC to such a heavy burden in wading through what would prove to be hundreds of applications daily.

this amendment appears to give no thought to the entire meaning behind the existence of the citizen rank, its role in this site, and the sheer practicality of having the CdeC examine the automatic claims of EVERY member who has been here six months on a site whos membership runs into the thousands.

i therefore say, definitively and absolutely, and with the strength and force of my entire being NO!

Not to say i particularly agree with the bill (i like the current system too much) but your points don't really add up here.

"CdeC would be flooded with hundreds upon hundreds of applicants"

The CdeC would only deal with unacceptable behaviour cases and Patrician votes, the Citizenship process would be automatic so there would be no 'flood'.


"i could achieve these requirements for citizenship just by signing up, posting once in say cheese, and doing nothing else for 6 months"

Again not true, the bill if passed would require all members to have 6 months activity backed up by at least 100 (not 1 as you say) posts and have no unexpired staff warnings.

So these two arguments don't really hold up, the only other one presented is that this goes against what the rank currently represents.. well yes, that's why its an amendment i guess

[Elrond]

no no no no no no no no no no

citizenship is NEVER to be automatic. it is a peer granted reward to those few members of this site who make a quality contribution in their time here, it is NOT open to any and all. there are members of this site who have been members for over a year, who have a post count in the thousands, who are not citizens, and never will be, because however liked they are, they just post comments, and don't post anything that displays some great quality or contribution or mark of talent or ability or skill.

if this were to pass, the CdeC would be flooded with hundreds upon hundreds of applicants the majority of whom would be rejected out of hand because they are simply average. citizenship is NOT granted for being an average well behaved posting member, it is granted for above average contribution to this community. simply being a member for 6 months and not getting any warnings is not indicative of any form of contribution in anyway. i could achieve these requirements for citizenship just by signing up, posting once in say cheese, and doing nothing else for 6 months, and that is just plain wrong.

i will never, ever, support an amendment that so absolutely devalues and destroys completely the rank of citizen and any level of respect and status it accords, not to mention the recognition that such members gain in being able to contribute to the curia. nor will i subject my fellow volunteer councillors of the CdeC to such a heavy burden in wading through what would prove to be hundreds of applications daily.

this amendment appears to give no thought to the entire meaning behind the existence of the citizen rank, its role in this site, and the sheer practicality of having the CdeC examine the automatic claims of EVERY member who has been here six months on a site whos membership runs into the thousands.

i therefore say, definitively and absolutely, and with the strength and force of my entire being NO!

I agree with TBP. (theres one sentance I never thought I would say)

Even if this vote some how managed to get through the curia and not be vetoed by hex it would cause complete and total chaos. It would be better for the comunity for Imb to sell TWC to HA, H&G and Crandar, than for this bill to succeed.

However well done for trying to suggest improvements to TWC.

[Arakorn]

I agree with TBP. (theres one sentance I never thought I would say)

Ah, but I just saw him doing it to you 3 times in a row... (and then me after him! )

Would it be possible to let the guys, after 6 months, and a specific post count, get some sort of lower rank and let them vote on some, limited bills? They wouldn't get access to everything and the more vital bills (such as this and the patrician-bill for example), but to more trivial bills. At the same time they'd get some practice (if allowed to participate in the discussion), and they'd get higher chances to one day become a citizen.

[the Black Prince]

i would suggest agreeing with tBP is probably a good thing and a sign of enlightenment...

[imb39]

i would suggest agreeing with tBP is probably a good thing and a sign of enlightenment...

Often, agreeing with tBP tends to indicate something quite different...

[Sinuhet]

i would suggest agreeing with tBP is probably a good thing and a sign of enlightenment...

Oh, I have not read the new Syntagma so thoroughly. But as I know you already, you maybe had put during drafting it also some words about such suggestion between the neutral sentences about banning people or such ....

In other words, I will paraphrase your sentence: "i would suggest that agreeing with tBP is probably a good thing, but a sign of enlightenment is to think twice, why he is talking this and not that ...."

I am only joking.

Quite seriously, I am against the "automatic" citzenship. It is the same thing which has done meaningless the patrician rank before reforms, in my opinion. This was only empty honorary rank. I like elitism, I frequent this site due to the criteria for creating the ility here in your small society, and I think that this proposal colud start a lot of unwaited things, which would be the way to the hell ...

[gigagaia]

Gah, no. citizens are far more committed and contributing members. If we want the curia to have any semblance of meritocratic existence at all (and therefore be deserving of authority) we had best not run something like this.

A citizen should be someone who has proven their capability and commitment and has invested more effort into TWC than simply spamming the TD for 6 months.

[Fabolous]

Gah, no. citizens are far more committed and contributing members. If we want the curia to have any semblance of meritocratic existence at all (and therefore be deserving of authority) we had best not run something like this.

A citizen should be someone who has proven their capability and commitment and has invested more effort into TWC than simply spamming the TD for 6 months.

QFT.

[Belisarius]

No I say, for all the reasons above and because of the impleications it will have on the structure of the community.

[Arakorn]

I'd agree on the condition that all current citizens would become patricians. And then maybe we could have a new rank for the existing patricians? Or just create a new rank between peregrinuses and citizens, and allow them only to vote?

I think it is too hard for someone to become a citizen here. The Org has a better system, you just need a couple of weeks/even days and a couple of 10's of posts to become a 'member' there.

[Perikles]

I think it is too hard for someone to become a citizen here. The Org has a better system, you just need a couple of weeks/even days and a couple of 10's of posts to become a 'member' there.

You are one of the few people who think that. The Org system needs to be like that as Junior Members can not: Edit their own posts, start new topics, have a signature etc. Here at TWC we trust the 'basic' members to do these things, but we leave the running of the site to the senior members. A 'member' of the Org can do all the things a normal member can do here. Our 'Watchtower' is the Q&S, we just give more senior members another place to discuss site policy.

[Kagemusha]

Hey Perikles stay on your own thread and dont hijack this one. I must admit i (Spiff actually) didnt write this proposal with my blood,becouse i had no doubt that the reaction would be just like it is. But im happy that its causing conversation among the people.
Its funny when something is proposed to share the citizen rights to more people.(6 months activity without warnings and atleast 100 posts,is pretty tight.): Then we hear the old song: They are not worthy;they are not worthy...Its good to see where we are.

[deRougemont]

@Perikles and Kagemusha

The word "elite" or "elitism" shouldn't, IMO, automatically carry negative connotations. Like many things, it can be good or bad. Here elitism is not a bad thing since it is based on merit; and a level of merit that is hardly unattainable. In fact it is quite accessible for the general population. We could use the words elitism and meritocracy interchangeably without loss of meaning either way as the system now exists at TWC. That is my general reason for opposing these sorts of proposals.

On top of that, even your attempts a democratizing or de-elitizing the community still entail the creation of an elite, because the ranks (which denote who is an "elite" and who is not) will still exist. So unless you are willing to completely do away with ranks at TWC, there will always be an elite. I think it's important to point out that you are only playing with the degree of elitism with these proposals and not with it's abolition. You focus on doing away with elitism is rather moot in that regard.

As to MasterOfNone: I understand his point and admire his principle (and frankly yours as well) though I disagree with him (and you). If we set the system up your way, we would only create another group of "dissenters" who would oppose it (I would be one of them). As with any society you can't possibly hope to please everyone. So those like MasterOfNone will just have to follow their conscience and exclude themselves if they wish, however regrettable that is. Their choice does not mean we must overhaul our entire system to please what is minority of people.

[Garbarsardar]

This proposal would be excellent if TWC was ready for the kind of immediate and absolute democracy it essentially advocates.

But again, if TWC was ready for the automatic granting of Citizenship (as currently in Democracies) we probably would not need this proposal anyway...

[Perikles]

The word "elite" or "elitism" shouldn't, IMO, automatically carry negative connotations. Like many things, it can be good or bad. Here elitism is not a bad thing since it is based on merit; and a level of merit that is hardly unattainable. In fact it is quite accessible for the general population. We could use the words elitism and meritocracy interchangeably without loss of meaning either way as the system now exists at TWC. That is my general reason for opposing these sorts of proposals.

On top of that, even your attempts a democratizing or de-elitizing the community still entail the creation of an elite, because the ranks (which denote who is an "elite" and who is not) will still exist. So unless you are willing to completely do away with ranks at TWC, there will always be an elite. I think it's important to point out that you are only playing with the degree of elitism with these proposals and not with it's abolition. You focus on doing away with elitism is rather moot in that regard.

As to MasterOfNone: I understand his point and admire his principle (and frankly yours as well) though I disagree with him (and you). If we set the system up your way, we would only create another group of "dissenters" who would oppose it (I would be one of them). As with any society you can't possibly hope to please everyone. So those like MasterOfNone will just have to follow their conscience and exclude themselves if they wish, however regrettable that is. Their choice does not mean we must overhaul our entire system to please what is minority of people.

Just focus on the definition of elitism then. *sigh*

You can call TWC a meritocracy, also elitist. But when it comes to ranks people call the patronisation process elitist, not the ranks themselves. The ranks are necessary, the patron part is expendable, especially if it allows people like MoN to become Citizens. It was not an overhaul of the system in anyway, it was an addition, the old way was still there, just a new way too, that was no less tough than the other way.

Not everyone supports every proposal, there will always be a group of 'dissenters', we might as well shut down the Curia if bills aren't allowed because there may be dissenters.

Please tell me why you are against it, apart from wanting to be a dissenter.