(Moved to Vote)The Patrician Rank -- Increasing its Meaning/Worth

[deRougemont]

The Patrician Rank -- Increasing its Meaning/Worth

Proposed by: deRougemont

Required Supporters:
Milites (Patricians): Sétanta, Oldgamer
Burgenses (Citizens): happyho, Hotspur

*******

[Note: The Patrician rank has become quite controversial. Some think it should not even exist. However, this proposal is not a referendum on whether it should exist or not, but rather on how it can be improved since it does exist. Thus we ask that those who are opposed to the rank to be courteous to those who are not, and not vote against this amendment due to opposition to the rank itself, but instead considering whether or not it will improve the rank as it is at present. Thank you, dR]

In light of the failure of Perikles' "Redefining the Patrician Rank" bill, it is my intention to continue the effort to solve the "Patrician Problem". The rank suffers from both a questionable raison d'etre and from a lack of nominees. Previous attempts at solving this issue have consisted of Perikles' idea of making the rank mostly honorary (and thus relatively irrelevant) to my previous idea of a "Conclave" that would assure future nominations (but add more lamentable bureaucracy).

However, the rank's current malaise - in every aspect - stems from its current unconvincing definition. What do we really want it to be? The proposal below intends to not only give the rank more worth, but to encourage more Patricians to be diligent in nominating those who deserve recognition for their contributions as Citizens. How does it do so? By increasing both the length of time that a TWC member must invest in the site as a member, and as a Citizen. The qualifications for obtaining the Patrician rank will ensure that it is one of distinction not only for one's special contribution(s) to the site, but also for being a long-standing, senior member of the community. This will become increasingly important as the site continues its exponential growth.

Thus by adding this temporal requirement, other Patricians with the ability to nominate Citizens will feel it is worth their time to recognize Citizens who have been members over a long period of time, who have made substantial contributions, who are experienced with the site's general operation, and who are therefore deserving of the ability to hold a senior position at the site.

I ask everyone to help us make this rank an important part of TWC's system of recognizing merit and contributions by its outstanding citizens.

*******

The bill will change the Syntagma thus (though of course this won't effect anyone who is already a Patrician or who is in the process of being selected as one):

Article 1 Section 3

Milites (Patricians) are those Burgenses (Citizens) who have continued to excel in their position within the forum by contributing to a greater extent than their citizenship requires.

A Burgenses may be nominated to this rank by another Miles in accordance with Article 4 below. Milite is awarded by the Parliamentum (CdeC) 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 an active TWC member for no less than six months, a Burgensis for no less than one month three months and have no warnings at the time of their election.

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

Changes made to the original bill:

1. The word "active" has been added to the six-month time limit in the bill.

[Hotspur]

You do realize that by those standards you wouldn't be eligible for patrician-hood for another month, right?

[deRougemont]

You do realize that by those standards you wouldn't be eligible for patrician-hood for another month, right?

Yep. I'm not the point; the rank is. Also, it should be pointed out that all current Patricians or those in the process of becoming Patricians will be grandfathered in under the old requirements. It would only effect future candidates.

[Hotspur]

How exactly does this make it more likely that a patrician will nominate citizens?

And I'm just busting chops about the other thing.

And what are we doing up at 2:00 am?

[deRougemont]

How exactly does this make it more likely that a patrician will nominate citizens?

By giving the rank more meaning. As it stands now, it doesn't have enough clout for other Patricians to bother nominating other Citizens. Look at all the Patricians who have meandered through this forum since I posted and not so much posted an opinion. That in itself is telling. If it's worth having, people will be more likely to nominate (so goes my theory). Mind you, this is a first step, not a panacea. It's also not the most obvious solution, but makes sense with all things considered.

And I'm just busting chops about the other thing.

I predicted that would be the first response... was only waiting for it.

And what are we doing up at 2:00 am?

Being insomniacs. I'm going to bed right now.

[Perikles]

So you want to make the requirements stricter?

My support I'm afraid has to be held back, but only just...

[Tom Paine]

Too strict. We'd have so few new patricians, and the time limit is a pointless (that is, in terms of merit-assurance) requirement anyway!

[deRougemont]

So you want to make the requirements stricter?

Yes. The rank is in need of being clearly defined from that of a "mere" Citizen. As things now stand, they are too similar, making the Patrician rank seem irrelevant. This bill will remedy that.

Too strict. We'd have so few new patricians, and the time limit is a pointless (that is, in terms of merit-assurance) requirement anyway!

It should be strict, as it is a senior rank. A rank of seniority should reflect seniority, no? And a time requirement is the best way to beef up the rank. Over time one learns about the site, its operation, its people and thus that person does acquire experience. That experience is far from pointless, Oz. It also represents their dedication to the site. Many come and go; some stay for the long haul. Let this rank represent those who stay and contribute.

Also, few Citizens are being patronzied now. Why? I assume not because of lack of candidates, but rather a lack of worth on the part of the rank itself (as I've stated above already). Thus this attempts to tackle two issues at once. Superficially it may seem counter-intuitive, but short of abolishing the rank or creating another bureau, this method is the surest route to go in improving the rank and encouraging more nominations.

[Sétanta]

I support. Six months is NOT a long time at all. Six months shows that you are willing to put in the time and effort to TWC. That time and effort is what the Patrician rank is all about. There are few Patrician candidates as is, and if they are worthy of the rank through other means, then the time should not be an issue. I do not think it is strict at all.

Too strict. We'd have so few new patricians, and the time limit is a pointless (that is, in terms of merit-assurance) requirement anyway!

We have few as is. The time limit, like I said, insures dedication. Being active for five months and then gaining the rank and then disapearing shines poorly on the rank as a whole. Six months insures that somebody will stay around for a while. It isn't like they have to be a Civitate for six months, just a member. Three months Civitateship is the old time limit, too, and there weren't any problems with that (under the old old system that is). Most people have been a member for six months by the time they become a citizen.

[imb39]

It is simply crazy to make this rank even harder to attain. I do not support. Are we flooded with candidates? Is there a need? If the rank needs fixing, slapping a plaster over the mouth of the patient and suffocating it will remove one set of symptoms, I suppose.

[Erich von Manstein]

I've got to say, I'm not sure how taking away my Patrician badge is going to help things In all seriousness though, making the rank harder to attain is only going to make the problem worse - the CdeC is just now beginning to churn out Patricians and many of them wouldn't qualify under the proposed changes.

I'm afraid I don't support.

[deRougemont]

@imb and Manstein

Why is it that the crux of my argument for this bill is not acknowledged or addressed before being rejected?

If you give the rank a higher benchmark and thus status, those who have the ability to nominate will not be as comfortable at reneging on their responsibility to nominate worthy candidates as is the case now. Please consider my grander idea here. This may be an unorthodox approach, but this is not a superfluous bill.

Finally I ask this: how else could we possibly save the rank from its tendency to stagnate and sink into relative meaninglessness? Consider that there may not be any other options available. There may be a flurry of nominations now, but what about 2 months from now and after? Have we just acquiesced to the idea the the Patrician rank must from now on fall into one crisis after another for nominations to be made?

I've got to say, I'm not sure how taking away my Patrician badge is going to help things

Of course everyone who receives the rank before this bill passes will be grandfathered in. Except me of course!

[Sétanta]

I don't think we want to be churning out Patricians. We want there to be some sort of reasonable time limit. Six months as a member is not a long time, not by any stretch of the imagination. Three months as a Citizen is not a long time, not by any stretch of the imagination.

I think that making some sort of time limit insures that people willing to give the time will earn the rank. Being a Patrician is not a one time thing, do a lot for the site then disapear. It is about continually giving.

[Perikles]

I promised myself not to reply, but your argument for this is totally illogical and absurd. You say:

If you give the rank a higher benchmark and thus status, those who have the ability to nominate will not be as comfortable at reneging on their responsibility to nominate worthy candidates as is the case now.

So you expect people to nominate more because the ranks restrictions have been made tighter? Making the rank restrictions tighter does not distinguish the rank and will not encourage people to nominate more, to think so is totally wrong.

how else could we possibly save the rank from its tendency to stagnate and sink into relative meaninglessness? Consider that there may not be any other options available. There may be a flurry of nominations now, but what about 2 months from now and after? Have we just acquiesced to the idea the the Patrician rank must from now on fall into one crisis after another for nominations to be made?

Making the rank restriction tighter does not stop if from fading, or already being meaningless, it just stops more people gaining the rank and continues the perceptions it already has. Instead of it going from 'crisis' to 'crisis' why don't we just scrap the whole thing? I still haven't been given a good reason for it's existence let alone anything else.

[deRougemont]

I'm glad you replied, my nemesis.

So you expect people to nominate more because the ranks restrictions have been made tighter?

Yes, again, the more substantive the rank becomes, the more likely it will be used to distinguish long-term contributors. You may not think it will, but I do, Set does, and Oldgamer does, and so will others.

Making the rank restrictions tighter does not distinguish the rank and will not encourage people to nominate more, to think so is totally wrong.

It does distinguish the rank more. If the Pulitzer prize were given to any third-rate paperback writer, it would be meaningless and largely ingored. But by increasing the standards needed to be nominated for it, it is coveted, encourages great writing, and and is seen as a great way for experienced writers to praise and reward new writers. This is the principle on which I've based my idea.

Making the rank restriction tighter does not stop if from fading, or already being meaningless, it just stops more people gaining the rank and continues the perceptions it already has.

It doesn't stop more people from getting the rank. As I wrote to Oz, the site is older than six months, so there will always be a steady group of candidates available each month. Add that to increasing the meaning of the rank (and therefore the amount of attention given to it) and you will increase the number of nominees. The problem now is that there are so many Patricians that don't take the rank seriously, and thus don't bother to nominate folks. That is exactly the atmosphere that this proposal will remedy.

Instead of it going from 'crisis' to 'crisis' why don't we just scrap the whole thing? I still haven't been given a good reason for it's existence let alone anything else.

As the site continues to grow and the Citizen population with it, this will be a great way to distinguish outstanding, long-term Citizens. This has always been its objective, and it is a valid one. Thus it will become even more worthwhile than ever as time passes. The only problem has been determining what the appropriate standards would be.

I ask you, Perikles, and others who question the rank: Give this attempt at revitalizing the rank a chance. You lose nothing whether this succeeds or fails, so there is no reason not to support it. However, if this idea succeeds, the community will have created another venerable institution, and we all win.

[happyho]

It also represents their dedication to the site. Many come and go; some stay for the long haul. Let this rank represent those who stay and contribute.

This is the line that does it for me, what is it we want the Patrician rank to represent? Do we want to have a rank that represents those members that have made a significant contribution to the site and the Curia and have been long standing members? Or do we want a rank that may or may no longer have any relevance, because that is where the rank is headed if we don't find a compromise that can work.

deRougemont's proposal I believe offers the opportunity to make it so that the Patricians that are brought up in the future will be members that have proven themselves over time. This will give more value to the rank because it will be known that these were members that took their role in the Curia seriously enough to stick around long enough to earn a nomination from an existing Patrician when the waiting period is over. The fact that it will not be an automatic promotion will also help give the rank more value since only those that have proven themselves will have the rank.

It is simply crazy to make this rank even harder to attain. I do not support. Are we flooded with candidates? Is there a need? If the rank needs fixing, slapping a plaster over the mouth of the patient and suffocating it will remove one set of symptoms, I suppose.

The proposal by deRougemont does not seem to make the rank harder to attain, all it does is add a bit of time to the requirements. If someone is worthy he or she will still get the rank, they will not need to jump through burning hoops after all. While at the same time that they are waiting for the 3 month period to end, that Citizen will be learning and gaining even more experience in the meantime making them even more effective when they do go for Patrician.

I've got to say, I'm not sure how taking away my Patrician badge is going to help things In all seriousness though, making the rank harder to attain is only going to make the problem worse - the CdeC is just now beginning to churn out Patricians and many of them wouldn't qualify under the proposed changes.

I'm afraid I don't support.

Never did deRougemont say his proposal would be retroactive. If it were to pass, those members that were already made Patrician before the changes were made or those undergoing their votes presently would all retain their rank should they pass their nomination. It would only be those that came up after the changes were made that would have to go through the waiting period. I don't see how that makes the rank harder to attain, all it seems to do is maintain the onus on existing Patricians to propose new Citizens for Patrician when the 3 month period is over.

Not only that, this problem is one that has been known for quite some time, why is it that everybody is now so concerned that this proposal won't work because of how long it would take to become eligible for the rank? This is not a problem that appeared just a minute ago. It is also not the kind of problem that can be wished away. It is something that may take time to fix, but once it has been fixed we will be able to move on to other more important matters.

If as you say the CdC is churning out Patricians right now, wouldn't that mean that there is now a safety net of sorts in place? That would I think give us enough time to make these changes to the rank while leaving us with enough Patricians until more Citizens finish the 3 months waiting period. It would only be the most recent additions that would have as long as three months to serve before being eligible.

How about we allow the Patrician rank, which is as you note essentially meaningless and worthless constitutionally, to die? What benefit does it bring to the site at all, one is forced to ask...

How about we don't? Why don't we instead invest a little time and effort to fix whatever problems are plaguing this rank? As far as your assertion that it is a useless rank, perhaps you would not feel so strongly if you didn't have the Senatorii badge to distinguish yourself from common Civitates? Don't get me wrong Ozy, I may think that the real useless rank here is Senatorii but I wouldn't support it's removal, you and the others that have it earned it and should keep it. The same thing goes for the Patrician rank.

If memory serves me correctly there are two Patricians who have a right to the Senatorii badge yet prefer to identify themselves as Patricians. That in itself is telling, let's not forget that people come and go from these forums, it is inevitable. I think that is one of the reasons that we should not only maintain the Patrician rank but we should do all we can to ensure that it is a rank that has worth and meaning. That I think is the crux of deRougemont's proposal, this way we ensure that those that are brought up to Patrician are not fly by night members. Oldgamer made this point as well, members would know that the Patricians of TWC are long standing members that are in it for the long haul and can be relied upon.

So yes I very strongly support this proposal.

[Tom Paine]

How about we allow the Patrician rank, which is as you note essentially meaningless and worthless constitutionally, to die? What benefit does it bring to the site at all, one is forced to ask...

[deRougemont]

How about we allow the Patrician rank, which is as you note essentially meaningless and worthless constitutionally, to die? What benefit does it bring to the site at all, one is forced to ask...

This is not what I said. This is how Perikles wanted to make the rank with his bill and how others may feel about it. My problem is that it is far too close in it's requirements to the rank of Citizen. By applying the standards this proposal recommends, the standards will become more distinct, give the rank more worth and make it more relevant.

For those who believe the rank is "dying", allow us to give it a chance to become something better. What does it hurt? I don't understand bashing the rank at one moment and then saying these standards are too strict in another...

[Belisarius]

It would be practically impossible to open a vote stripping members of Patrician and obtaining the majority needed.

[Tom Paine]

So long as it was made nonretroactive it wouldn't strip anyone. But then it tends to not add value to the Patrician rank. I'd argue that time spent on a site showed nothing anyway, but that's another matter.