Plebs participate?!? Say what?

[Cymera]

Give me a cookie, I have made my first proposal.

Among the recent discussions in the Prothalamos, there have been debates on the meaning and future of the Patrician class, the (Excuse me, but they are horrid) New Latin designations for members of the site, and of course the participation of the plebs in the Curia.

In my understanding, the concern of some Citizens is centered around the fact that the majority of the site has little or no say in how TWC is run. So, various solution have been proposed, from opening the Curia to all, (see "Chaos" definition of) to introducing a bicameral system. As any active Citizen will know, the debates for these proposals have been heated, and were very enjoyable

Now, I have come to propose an idea. Bear in mind, this is not the solution to end all problems, it is merely a proposal, that will surely be changed as the discussions continue. All ideas and suggestions are welcome, considering this is the only way that proposals such as these evolve.

In short, I propose that Citizens not only be patronized, but also be elected. Now hear me out before you started chanting "blasphemy" in unison. I propose that a new section of the forums be created where plebs may discuss the governing and policies of this site. Every month one pleb is voted upon to ascend to the rank of Civitate to "represent" the plebs in the Curia.

===== OR =====

The plebs elect their own "speaker" who will regularly take discussions and issues in their "house" to the Curia.

This is not the same as having a lower and higher house. Not only would bills be passed up, but also members of the site who can actively participate in what goes on in the Curia. This would give the plebians the ability to have an organized, unified voice in the Curia. They can also be informed about the discussions that take place in the Prothalamos, and make their own decisions on it, after which it will return to the Curia, to be reviewed further.

Bear in mind, this proposal is rough at best right now, I would very much appreciate any constructive criticism or ideas from my fellow Citizens. I agree that the plebs should have a say in the governing of the site, however, this would allow them to have that say in an orderly fashion, which will not only save time, but also energy.

At last, I thank you for reading, and anxiously await the discussions that are sure to come.

No plebs were harmed in the making of this proposal.

[Perikles]

A Tribunis Plebis? No, we have 2 moderators of the Curia to keep order and a score of admins and global mods to keep the peace. I can't see the justification for not just letting them in...

[Denny Crane!]

I agree Perikles, I favour either the BiCameral system or just opening the curia up.

I don't like hard to understand systems for this sort of thing. I'd like new users to say Curia, ah that easy I just.......

Peter

[gigagaia]

Bi Cameral, I fear would simply propagate the same system by and large.

As a patrician and citizen, I can understand the hesitancy of some in opening up the curia to all.
As an Admin, however, I see the intrinsic value in revitalising the curia as more than a self-governing and reflective-legislating body. I would not want to see senior staff and moderators drawn from plebs, but in terms of legislation, debate and contribution, the question of "why not" isn't such a bad one to seriously consider.
I think that citizens as a whole should consider long and hard the purpose of the curia, and if opening it up may actually improve the quality of contribution, the number of ideas and the substance of debate.

Personally, I think the question is not really if we should do this, but how. Appropriate safeguards should considered and put in place to minimize abuse.

[the Black Prince]

the most appropriate safeguard being restricting participation to those who have shown themselves worthy and responsible... i.e the citizens

[Denny Crane!]

No I don't think so, not everyone is interested in becoming a citizen. Look at Erik, BigfootFred and one or two others that I see personally. I don't even look at the more active TWC section.

Peter

[Sétanta]

If they care about the way TWC runs, then usually people try and become Citizens. Having the rank of citizen insures that contributors to TWC get the honor of wearing the badge as well as gaining the right to have a say.

They give something to TWC, TWC gives something back. You can't run a forum without the general populace, but just because they are the most active members doesn't mean they are the members we can trust with influencing the site policies.

[imb39]

If they care about the way TWC runs, then usually people try and become Citizens. Having the rank of citizen insures that contributors to TWC get the honor of wearing the badge as well as gaining the right to have a say.

They give something to TWC, TWC gives something back. You can't run a forum without the general populace, but just because they are the most active members doesn't mean they are the members we can trust with influencing the site policies.

One thing I was struck by was that peopel such as Bigfootedfred were very enthusiastic about helping end the problems caused by the mass sackings in January.

Just because people reject the idea of patronisation does not mean that they either do not care or are not putting someithng into this site. Indeed, everyone is putting in the most preciosu thing they have - their time.

On the basis that this was a Community spirit that ran right through the various echelons of the site, I think that maybe those within the Curia should take a step back and re-evaluate what being a Citizen is and, more importantly, what it means to deny it to members who are interested. The Curia is in a much better shape now than it has been for many months. My aspiration was to get some life back in this venerable... erm.. set of pixels and I think that has, been achieved. I have also been somewhat enamoured with the idea of decentralising decision making. I might be going about it the wrong way but the desire is there.

[Cymera]

Well, it's a matter of opinion, isn't it? I don't think it would be wise to open the Curia, I believe I have already stated why. I was merely proposing another solution so that the rest of the site can have a say in how it is run.

They discuss what they want in their section, then one voice brings it before the Curia. Complicated? In my opinion, it is an orderly way to ensure the participation of the TWC.

I only created this proposal to try to satisfy more Citizens. I am not in favor of giving everyone a say, why should they have one? Just because they are members they should be able to have a say? Hell, I play on servers, does that mean I should be able to have a say in how the rules are assigned?

What is wrong with the way things are now?

*Sigh*

[makanyane]

the most appropriate safeguard being restricting participation to those who have shown themselves worthy and responsible... i.e the citizens

..but, but, but, there are plenty of people out there more than worthy and responsible who have no desire to become citizens, not because they are not interested in the future of TWC, but in some cases because they see this as some weird elitist role play. I'm sure they don't want say in everything and hence wouldn't be clogging up discussion on every minor matter just for the fun of debating, but they might actually have something to add on topics they are experienced in.

They give something to TWC, TWC gives something back. You can't run a forum without the general populace, but just because they are the most active members doesn't mean they are the members we can trust with influencing the site policies.

If you are ignoring the opinions of the general populace (most active members) and those who have given to TWC but aren't interested in the current return offering of patronisation, isn't that likely to result in a less successful forum?

@Cymera regarding the original proposal, well done for trying something but it sounds a. very complicated to implement, b. unlikely to actually catch attention of much of the general membership (could we stop saying plebs?) especially modders; I'm not sure why that system would excite them any-more than existing one.

As regards to controlling amount of bills, proposals, discussion etc. likely to come about if curia was opened, I think something beneficial could be done along the lines of Tac's original syntagma change window proposal where number of things going to proth discussion are limited. But hopefully allowing curia to be used as a sounding board for proposals not actually needing legislation... hmm, need to think more on that and actually reply in right thread... sorry

[Cymera]

Rest assured that I did not mean "plebs" in a derogatory fashion. Well, considering that most seem to support just opening the Curia, why not try it. I mean, what do we have to lose by giving it a shot.

[Sétanta]

If you are ignoring the opinions of the general populace (most active members) and those who have given to TWC but aren't interested in the current return offering of patronisation, isn't that likely to result in a less successful forum?

No. Prove to me that most active members care about site policy, and you will have something to build your case upon, but right now all I see is a current dissatisfaction with the Curia (don't worry happens every couple months for no reason) so instead of making it better, it is just being cast aside in essence.

[the Black Prince]

..but, but, but, there are plenty of people out there more than worthy and responsible who have no desire to become citizens, not because they are not interested in the future of TWC, but in some cases because they see this as some weird elitist role play. I'm sure they don't want say in everything and hence wouldn't be clogging up discussion on every minor matter just for the fun of debating, but they might actually have something to add on topics they are experienced in.

the answer isn't to allow everyone in, just to reach out to some members who have formed some mistaken opinions, no doubt helped by certain propoganda efforts.

Convince these members otherwise...
remind them of what the purpose of citizenship actually - recognition for contribution. A citizen doesn't have to partake of the Curia, thats his right as a reward for his contributions

[Aristocrat]

the answer isn't to allow everyone in, just to reach out to some members who have formed some mistaken opinions, no doubt helped by certain propoganda efforts.

Convince these members otherwise...
remind them of what the purpose of citizenship actually - recognition for contribution. A citizen doesn't have to partake of the Curia, thats his right as a reward for his contributions

Just because one doesn't agree with you does not mean they are wrong or have been brainwashed by propaganda. It's called freedom of will, deal with it.

Personally I think a universal poll with links at the top (announcement section) of every forum would at least give a scope to this entire argument, as time and again I see people saying "Most people don't care", when the truth, as evidenced by a lot of regular members helping with the site in the January disturbance, is that, in certain situations, most people do care.

They care when there is something that has a direct impact on them, they don't care when there is a vote about awarding some obscure title to some guy who did something 2-3 years ago, and why should they?

The point is that people will be able to have to their say, not that we are trying to tear away some virtual sense of superiority from the civitates. It's not about taking away that feeling you get when log in, post in a thread, see that wonderful badge next to your name and take extra pride in the fact that some other guy halfway across the world doesn't have that badge.

As for the argument as to "people could simply become civitates"...well, put simply, being a civitate seems too close to being an out and out nerd. Go read the results of the poll on the front page, nearly half of the voters find the whole latin scheme, civitates system, rather weird.
Just because they don't want to jump through your virtual hoops and bend to fit into the virtual box you have created they are instantly marginalised.

You want a reward for contribution? Fine, look at that flashy badge, and (hopefully when it is done) look at the flashy medals you will have, then look at the staff ranks, you can join those.

To sum up:

• Your attitude is insulting, develop some tact. (I don't agree with you therefore I am...it's called an opinion, and this isn't the courtroom).
• Just because you have that (or any) flashy badge next to your name does not make you infinitely superior in every way then regular forum members.
• A lot of regular members do care about how the site is run, but see the whole civitate system and get turned off by it.
• Just because something was right and proper a few years ago does not mean it is still valid today.
• You are a prime example of the type of civitate that infuriates (sp?) regular members, unwilling to look at change, lest your nice secure box get rattled.

[Sétanta]

One thing I was struck by was that peopel such as Bigfootedfred were very enthusiastic about helping end the problems caused by the mass sackings in January.

Just because people reject the idea of patronisation does not mean that they either do not care or are not putting someithng into this site. Indeed, everyone is putting in the most preciosu thing they have - their time.

No, no I agree. Like I said, just posting in an intelligent manner is the most important aspect of TWC. The January crises brought out everybody who cared about TWC, not necessarily it's day to day government. You can't have a stable government if every single citizen (or member) is part of that government. There is too much going on. You need some level of focus, and I believe that the people who are willing to put in the time to get noticed and then awarded Citizenship have shown that they care about TWC. It doesn't mean others don't, though. Then, many of those Citizens contribute to the Curia, the dogma writing, law signing, debatorama that is, and always has been, the Curia.

On the basis that this was a Community spirit that ran right through the various echelons of the site, I think that maybe those within the Curia should take a step back and re-evaluate what being a Citizen is and, more importantly, what it means to deny it to members who are interested. The Curia is in a much better shape now than it has been for many months. My aspiration was to get some life back in this venerable... erm.. set of pixels and I think that has, been achieved. I have also been somewhat enamoured with the idea of decentralising decision making. I might be going about it the wrong way but the desire is there.

I don't think we are denying members who are interested. Or, at the very least, if we are denying members who are interested it is for a reason. I am interested with Congress. I think Congress has problems. Does that mean Congress gives me a free plane ticket to Washington City and a vote? No.

If members are interested in the Curia, in assisting the TWC government, it is not that much to ask that they contribute something to the Forum and the Community in the way of Total War related material or at least posting above average. If that is too much to ask, then why do people bother?

[Hotspur]

As for the argument as to "people could simply become civitates"...well, put simply, being a civitate seems too close to being an out and out nerd. Go read the results of the poll on the front page, nearly half of the voters find the whole latin scheme, civitates system, rather weird.

Watch the name calling there bub. I am not a nerd. I'm a dork. And the Latin naming scheme has nothing to do the rank system.

Allow me to give the perspective of a new civitate, without the interpersonal baggage that seems to infect most of the discourse here. I like to debate. I like to shred someone's argument with facts and links and the all-powerful Wiki. I made civitate because of this and the fact that I did it without losing my temper and attacking a member, not the argument. If I had never been patronized, I would have changed nothing. For me, a good debate - and by good I mean when I utterly obliterate a ridiculous statement - is it's own reward. The fact that I made civitate, that Last Roman thought my presence had value in the Curia is simply icing on the cake.

The Curia is not role-playing to me. Maybe it's the father and husband in me, but I appreciate the risk Ian took in purchasing TWC. I appreciate the time, effort, blood and tears the technical branch has investing in keeping the site operational and the content branch has invested in drawing new members in. Because I can appreciate all that has gone into this site, I want to see it successful. Every game has the fan site to go to for mods and news and discussion of the game you just spent fifty bucks and God knows how many hours playing. I want TWC to be that site for the Total War franchise.

I can't mod or skin or script or whatever it is the modders do. What I can do is be active in the Curia, I can try to find ways to make this website more successful. I think there are members who want the same thing and like me couldn't mod their way out of a paper bag, but unlike me they have no interest in the Thema Devia. I think there might be some good ideas out there and I want to hear them. This means letting everybody in. It means throwing everything under the sun against the wall and seeing what sticks. It means letting go of the pettiness and the squabbles and the jealousies. It means putting TWC above yourself and living up to the responsibilities that come with that shiny badge.

So I put it to you, Patrician and Civitates, Artifex and Optifex, Divi and Emeriti and Senatorii all: Do you serve TWC or does TWC serve you?

I serve.

[deRougemont]

I can't mod or skin or script or whatever it is the modders do. What I can do is be active in the Curia, I can try to find ways to make this website more successful. I think there are members who want the same thing and like me couldn't mod their way out of a paper bag, but unlike me they have no interest in the Thema Devia. I think there might be some good ideas out there and I want to hear them. This means letting everybody in. It means throwing everything under the sun against the wall and seeing what sticks. It means letting go of the pettiness and the squabbles and the jealousies. It means putting TWC above yourself and living up to the responsibilities that come with that shiny badge.

Wonderful pro argument... As long as the non-citizens are in a lower house per the other proposal. I think, Hotspur, that letting in non-Civs into debates in the Curia will lead to a lot of jealousy (on their part), righteous crusading, servile pandering, general tom-foolery, mocking, petty divisiveness, etc on a large scale. In fact, that's why the segregation exists. By being patronized into the Citizenship, current Citizens recognize your ability to not do the above, but to be stable enough to contribute to legislative debates. This stability would fall apart if everyone were let into the Curia. The Curia would become a Circus. A noble idea, but wrong.

[Hotspur]

Wonderful pro argument... As long as the non-citizens are in a lower house per the other proposal. I think, Hotspur, that letting in non-Civs into debates in the Curia will lead to a lot of jealousy (on their part), righteous crusading, servile pandering, general tom-foolery, mocking, petty divisiveness, etc on a large scale. In fact, that's why the segregation exists. By being patronized into the Citizenship, current Citizens recognize your ability to not do the above, but to be stable enough to contribute to legislative debates. This stability would fall apart if everyone were let into the Curia. The Curia would become a Circus. A noble idea, but wrong.

How is that any different from what goes on in the Curia right now? We have self-righteous crusading and petty divisiveness going on literally while we speak.

I will admit that the potential for the Parliamentum to become filled with spam exists, but if we make it perfectly clear that there will be a zero tolerance rule on disruptive posts (and lets face it - after we ban a few members) I think the message will get across.

Do we have a dedicated Curial moderator? If not, then I would make it a requirement before letting non-civs in. I don't want the Curia being disrupted and chaotic anymore than you do, but I think that letting the non-civs in will do more potential good than harm.

BTW - I know you're a fellow Tar-Heeler, so what in the world are you doing up at 2:30 am?

[Aristocrat]

How can I explain this without sounding like an ass?

This isn't (from my perspective at least...it may be from Profs (partly anyway, as his posts vary in this regard)) about taking the power away from civitates, about removing the merit part from meritocracy, about simply rattling a few people's cages (which it has it seems).

It is about, that when the time comes that the curia gets to discussing something that truly impacts on non-civitate members, be they modders or simply normal members, about that these non-civitate members have a direct input into the outcome of this process.

Every time I bring this point up the attitude I see in the responding posts is: "Well I am a civitate/Patrician/Divus/Senatorii/Whatever, I have been here longer, made flashier posts, contributed, so I surely know what is better for the site, surely".
What this attitude fails to take into account however, is that the "ranked classes" make up only a very small part of the membership of this site, be it active or otherwise, and the "non-ranked" members are stuck with the Questions and Suggestions forum.

To put it simply, I want to see some form of fair representation (at the very least) of the "plebs" (...I dislike that word and it's concotations) which has some form of power in the decision making process.

Edit: Edited till I get my ideas straight in my own head. I had posted an idea, but it wouldn't go any way towards what I am trying to see established, I want regular members, who for example, see that the curia is discussing a bill and/or voting on a bill about (whatever), to be able to take part in that discussion, and cast their vote, because, when you get right down to it, their opinion is just as valid as yours, like it or not, you are not superior just because you believe it so.

[the Black Prince]

Do we have a dedicated Curial moderator?

yes, the Curator. Poor overburdened soul that he is...

i think Ian makes an interesting point

One thing I was struck by was that peopel such as Bigfootedfred were very enthusiastic about helping end the problems caused by the mass sackings in January.

Just because people reject the idea of patronisation does not mean that they either do not care or are not putting something into this site. Indeed, everyone is putting in the most precious thing they have - their time.

the people who don't want to be citizens already contribute in their own way. If we open the Curia to such people, they're not likely to change the way they operate. They've already shown their not interested in participating in the Curia, if they were, people like BFF could easily have become a citizen by now.


Of course, if we want to reduce citizenship to a mere pretty badge, and turn TWC from a site in which contributing members have a say in the forum they've invested in, into a democratic farce, so be it.