User:D. Matt Innis/CurrentDraft/RevisedStructure: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Jess Key
(→‎Preamble: Seems I was editing an old version of the page. Reverted and fixed again.)
imported>Daniel Mietchen
(formatting)
Line 52: Line 52:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|1
{{!}}1
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|another word than restricted
{{!}}another word than restricted
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|restrict? how about "participants shall be called citizens"
{{!}}restrict? how about "participants shall be called citizens"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|is this necessary? The definition of "Citizens" is already in the preamble; real restrictions are in article 2
{{!}}is this necessary? The definition of "Citizens" is already in the preamble; real restrictions are in article 2
|1
{{!}}1
|Not Accepted (3 revise; 3 accept)
{{!}}Not Accepted (3 revise; 3 accept)


}}
}}
Line 81: Line 81:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|2
{{!}}2
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|#1 too easily abused
{{!}}#1 too easily abused
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|possibly delete "registers"
{{!}}possibly delete "registers"
|2
{{!}}2
|accept (4)
{{!}}accept (4)


}}
}}
Line 107: Line 107:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|3
{{!}}3
|accept
{{!}}accept
|but is it necessary?
{{!}}but is it necessary?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|what mission?
{{!}}what mission?
|accept
{{!}}accept
|Could be combined with 11; see also 1
{{!}}Could be combined with 11; see also 1
|revise
{{!}}revise
|role of editors needs to be defined in the charter, but this is not ideal
{{!}}role of editors needs to be defined in the charter, but this is not ideal
|accept
{{!}}accept
| but it's meaningless
{{!}} but it's meaningless
|reject
{{!}}reject
|superfluous
{{!}}superfluous
|3
{{!}}3
|not accepted (3 accept, 2 revise, 1 reject)
{{!}}not accepted (3 accept, 2 revise, 1 reject)


}}
}}
Line 135: Line 135:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|4
{{!}}4
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|accept
{{!}}accept
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"approved content"
{{!}}"approved content"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|mention approval; move "in" before enumeration
{{!}}mention approval; move "in" before enumeration
|4
{{!}}4
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)


}}
}}
Line 161: Line 161:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|5
{{!}}5
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|accept
{{!}}accept
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|
{{!}}
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|probably better to exchange 4 and 5
{{!}}probably better to exchange 4 and 5
|5
{{!}}5
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)


}}
}}
Line 187: Line 187:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|6
{{!}}6
|accept
{{!}}accept
|but needs a subheading above it
{{!}}but needs a subheading above it
|accept
{{!}}accept
|needs to be moved to editor section
{{!}}needs to be moved to editor section
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|but merge content of 8 into this
{{!}}but merge content of 8 into this
|Accept
{{!}}Accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|6
{{!}}6
|Accept (6)
{{!}}Accept (6)


}}
}}
Line 216: Line 216:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|7
{{!}}7
|revise
{{!}}revise
|change point two to read: "to make decisions regarding content matters, and" and no "ly" on "incorrectly"
{{!}}change point two to read: "to make decisions regarding content matters, and" and no "ly" on "incorrectly"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|get rid of "Group" of editors and #3
{{!}}get rid of "Group" of editors and #3
|revise
{{!}}revise
|accept Joe's changes
{{!}}accept Joe's changes
|
{{!}}
|
{{!}}
|Reject
{{!}}Reject
|this article needs limits
{{!}}this article needs limits
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"assure" is problematic, otherwise as per Joe
{{!}}"assure" is problematic, otherwise as per Joe
|7
{{!}}7
|Revise (5)
{{!}}Revise (5)


}}
}}
Line 241: Line 241:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|8
{{!}}8
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|delete
{{!}}delete
|content to go into 6
{{!}}content to go into 6
|Accept
{{!}}Accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|8
{{!}}8
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)


}}
}}
Line 267: Line 267:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|9
{{!}}9
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Removal of Editor status shall require a formal decision by the Editorial Council and may be appealed.
{{!}}Removal of Editor status shall require a formal decision by the Editorial Council and may be appealed.
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|to Joe's version or similar
{{!}}to Joe's version or similar
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|original version preferred: why a right of appeal?
{{!}}original version preferred: why a right of appeal?
|Accept
{{!}}Accept
|Joe's changes okay too
{{!}}Joe's changes okay too
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe
{{!}}as per Joe
|9
{{!}}9
|Not accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)
{{!}}Not accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)


}}
}}
Line 296: Line 296:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|10
{{!}}10
|accept
{{!}}accept
|(with Matt's introduction)
{{!}}(with Matt's introduction)
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|revise
{{!}}revise
|accept
{{!}}accept
|clarify "original content"
{{!}}clarify "original content"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|this role for the EC needs more thought
{{!}}this role for the EC needs more thought
|revise
{{!}}revise
|To develop policy on original content should mean also not to ban it.
{{!}}To develop policy on original content should mean also not to ban it.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|clarify "original content"
{{!}}clarify "original content"
|10
{{!}}10
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 321: Line 321:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|11
{{!}}11
|revise
{{!}}revise
|very slightly: change "to" to "in"
{{!}}very slightly: change "to" to "in"
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|per Joe "to" to "in"
{{!}}per Joe "to" to "in"
|reject
{{!}}reject
|Could be used against EC/Editors deciding subject is unacceptable fringe, advocacy, etc.
{{!}}Could be used against EC/Editors deciding subject is unacceptable fringe, advocacy, etc.
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|Accept
{{!}}Accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe
{{!}}as per Joe
|11
{{!}}11
|Not accepted (3 revise, 2 accept, 1 reject)
{{!}}Not accepted (3 revise, 2 accept, 1 reject)
}}
}}


Line 346: Line 346:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|12
{{!}}12
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept  
{{!}}accept  
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|but this has come a long way from the original paragraph we hashed out last November.
{{!}}but this has come a long way from the original paragraph we hashed out last November.
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|12
{{!}}12
|Accept as written
{{!}}Accept as written
}}
}}


Line 371: Line 371:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|13
{{!}}13
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Define "general public" as college undergraduate
{{!}}Define "general public" as college undergraduate
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|"general public" might need clarification
{{!}}"general public" might need clarification
|13
{{!}}13
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)
}}
}}


Line 396: Line 396:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|14
{{!}}14
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|In other words, accept
{{!}}In other words, accept
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Specialist material — including original research — shall be welcome, within the limits set by the Editorial Council. It shall be put into context with background information and non-specialist material.
{{!}}Specialist material — including original research — shall be welcome, within the limits set by the Editorial Council. It shall be put into context with background information and non-specialist material.
|14
{{!}}14
|Accept (4)
{{!}}Accept (4)
}}
}}


Line 421: Line 421:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|15
{{!}}15
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Articles formally judged to be of high-quality by editors shall be designated "approved", protected and kept permanently available.
{{!}}Articles formally judged to be of high-quality by editors shall be designated "approved", protected and kept permanently available.
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|like Joes version
{{!}}like Joes version
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Joe's revision acceptable
{{!}}Joe's revision acceptable
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|Joe's revision acceptable
{{!}}Joe's revision acceptable
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe
{{!}}as per Joe
|15
{{!}}15
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 446: Line 446:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|16
{{!}}16
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"Official Posts" must be clearly defined in Article 17, 18, or 19: "The Citizendium shall be governed by five official posts: MC, EC, ME, O, and Constabulary."  You have to declare your variables before you use them.  Declaring them here resolves confusion in Article 24.
{{!}}"Official Posts" must be clearly defined in Article 17, 18, or 19: "The Citizendium shall be governed by five official posts: MC, EC, ME, O, and Constabulary."  You have to declare your variables before you use them.  Declaring them here resolves confusion in Article 24.
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|16
{{!}}16
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)
}}
}}


Line 472: Line 472:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|17
{{!}}17
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|combine 17,18,19
{{!}}combine 17,18,19
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|revise as per Russell's comment on art. 16; merge with 18 & 19
{{!}}revise as per Russell's comment on art. 16; merge with 18 & 19
|17
{{!}}17
|Accept (4)
{{!}}Accept (4)
}}
}}


Line 500: Line 500:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|18
{{!}}18
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|not "assisted by"
{{!}}not "assisted by"
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|see art. 17
{{!}}see art. 17
|18
{{!}}18
|Accept (4)
{{!}}Accept (4)
}}
}}


Line 528: Line 528:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|19
{{!}}19
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|they have their own functions
{{!}}they have their own functions
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|see art. 17
{{!}}see art. 17
|19
{{!}}19
|Accept (4)
{{!}}Accept (4)
}}
}}


Line 562: Line 562:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|20
{{!}}20
|revise
{{!}}revise
|slight: in third point, "and" should be "and/or"; in eighth point, remove extra word "the"
{{!}}slight: in third point, "and" should be "and/or"; in eighth point, remove extra word "the"
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|both Joe and Russell's good
{{!}}both Joe and Russell's good
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Joe's changes OK
{{!}}Joe's changes OK
|revise
{{!}}revise
|this is a horrible mess and needs complete rewriting -- probably into two or three articles
{{!}}this is a horrible mess and needs complete rewriting -- probably into two or three articles
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Joe's changes okay; Period should be "90 days or more."  Add to last point that "should the referendum pass, the new seats shall be filled immediately from the pool of reserve members."
{{!}}Joe's changes okay; Period should be "90 days or more."  Add to last point that "should the referendum pass, the new seats shall be filled immediately from the pool of reserve members."
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe, but not convinced the 90-days limit should be in the charter
{{!}}as per Joe, but not convinced the 90-days limit should be in the charter
|20
{{!}}20
|Revise (6)
{{!}}Revise (6)
}}
}}


Line 587: Line 587:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|21
{{!}}21
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|when is the ME elected?
{{!}}when is the ME elected?
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|clarifications needed on procedure
{{!}}clarifications needed on procedure
|Revise
{{!}}Revise
|There is no explanation of how the ME is elected.
{{!}}There is no explanation of how the ME is elected.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Howard and Russell
{{!}}as per Howard and Russell
|21
{{!}}21
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 612: Line 612:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|22
{{!}}22
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|wording is fine and moving would be too.
{{!}}wording is fine and moving would be too.
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|needs more specification -- eg about chief constable
{{!}}needs more specification -- eg about chief constable
|Revise
{{!}}Revise
|move
{{!}}move
|accept
{{!}}accept
|needs "." at end
{{!}}needs "." at end
|22
{{!}}22
|Accept (4)
{{!}}Accept (4)
}}
}}


Line 637: Line 637:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|23
{{!}}23
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|when is omb elected
{{!}}when is omb elected
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"Monitor" rather than "vet"
{{!}}"Monitor" rather than "vet"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|the concept of combined councils has not been defined
{{!}}the concept of combined councils has not been defined
|Revise
{{!}}Revise
|move
{{!}}move
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Matt
{{!}}as per Matt
|23
{{!}}23
|Revise (5)
{{!}}Revise (5)
}}
}}


Line 669: Line 669:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|24
{{!}}24
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Do we really want *all* Citizens to be eligible?  Even those who join a few days before the election?  I think they should be required to have been members for at least 90 days and to have contributed to the project -- either through working on an article or serving in an official role -- in the 90 days prior to the election.
{{!}}Do we really want *all* Citizens to be eligible?  Even those who join a few days before the election?  I think they should be required to have been members for at least 90 days and to have contributed to the project -- either through working on an article or serving in an official role -- in the 90 days prior to the election.
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|remove #4 "all officials have to contribute". what is contribute? Can Gareth Leng hold a position? does contribute mean edit?
{{!}}remove #4 "all officials have to contribute". what is contribute? Can Gareth Leng hold a position? does contribute mean edit?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Agree with Joe. Also, by reference, etc., it needs to be clear "two offices" doesn't include Editor
{{!}}Agree with Joe. Also, by reference, etc., it needs to be clear "two offices" doesn't include Editor
|revise
{{!}}revise
|many problems here, needs discussion on precise terms and conditions
{{!}}many problems here, needs discussion on precise terms and conditions
|Revise
{{!}}Revise
|Clauses 5 and 6 should be moved to Article 30.
{{!}}Clauses 5 and 6 should be moved to Article 30.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe (though without 90-days rule) and Russell. Also: "eligible"
{{!}}as per Joe (though without 90-days rule) and Russell. Also: "eligible"
|24
{{!}}24
|Revise (6)
{{!}}Revise (6)
}}
}}


Line 696: Line 696:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|25
{{!}}25
|revise
{{!}}revise
|retain "good standing" and define it as "not banned"
{{!}}retain "good standing" and define it as "not banned"
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|remove good standing (even prisoners get to vote). replace vague sufficient time with 2 weeks.
{{!}}remove good standing (even prisoners get to vote). replace vague sufficient time with 2 weeks.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Prisoner votes get complex, but the point stands for non-banned citizens
{{!}}Prisoner votes get complex, but the point stands for non-banned citizens
|accept
{{!}}accept
|old version preferred
{{!}}old version preferred
|accept
{{!}}accept
|Sp: qith --> with
{{!}}Sp: qith --> with
|revise
{{!}}revise
|retain "good standing"; also add temporal limit like "every Citizen registered before the beginning of the nomination period (or vote), unless they lose their good standing before the end of the voting period." Also spelling: "qith"
{{!}}retain "good standing"; also add temporal limit like "every Citizen registered before the beginning of the nomination period (or vote), unless they lose their good standing before the end of the voting period." Also spelling: "qith"
|25
{{!}}25
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 721: Line 721:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|26
{{!}}26
|accept
{{!}}accept
|with Matt's deletion
{{!}}with Matt's deletion
|delete
{{!}}delete
|not sure if that is the same as accept deletion
{{!}}not sure if that is the same as accept deletion
|accept deletion
{{!}}accept deletion
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept deletion
{{!}}accept deletion
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|feedback should be mentioned somewhere, but not necessarily in the charter; could go into interim guidance, though
{{!}}feedback should be mentioned somewhere, but not necessarily in the charter; could go into interim guidance, though
|26
{{!}}26
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)
}}
}}


Line 748: Line 748:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|27
{{!}}27
|accept
{{!}}accept
|with Matt's changes
{{!}}with Matt's changes
|accept changes
{{!}}accept changes
|remove strikout text
{{!}}remove strikout text
|reject
{{!}}reject
| -- most concerned about O being the representative of the Citizens,different from ME
{{!}} -- most concerned about O being the representative of the Citizens,different from ME
|revise
{{!}}revise
|reject changes, but may need minor tweaking
{{!}}reject changes, but may need minor tweaking
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept changes
{{!}}accept changes
|as per Matt
{{!}}as per Matt
|27
{{!}}27
|Accept (4)
{{!}}Accept (4)
}}
}}


Line 780: Line 780:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|28
{{!}}28
|accept
{{!}}accept
|with Matt's changes; also see my note to article 30
{{!}}with Matt's changes; also see my note to article 30
|accept changes
{{!}}accept changes
|remove strikout text and add bold text
{{!}}remove strikout text and add bold text
|revise
{{!}}revise
|change/clarify "vet"
{{!}}change/clarify "vet"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|minor changes needed in wording
{{!}}minor changes needed in wording
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|replace "vet"
{{!}}replace "vet"
|28
{{!}}28
|Not Accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)
{{!}}Not Accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)
}}
}}


Line 810: Line 810:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|29
{{!}}29
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"environment" is unclear
{{!}}"environment" is unclear
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|nominate or appoint constables - which is it?
{{!}}nominate or appoint constables - which is it?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|more precise wording and concepts needed
{{!}}more precise wording and concepts needed
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"environment" must be defined; remove "and" in clause 2; Clause 3: advise who?; Clause 4: public awareness of what?
{{!}}"environment" must be defined; remove "and" in clause 2; Clause 3: advise who?; Clause 4: public awareness of what?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Matt and Russell
{{!}}as per Matt and Russell
|29
{{!}}29
|Revise (6)
{{!}}Revise (6)
}}
}}


Line 839: Line 839:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|30
{{!}}30
|revise
{{!}}revise
|this article properly belongs above article 28, and point four belongs in article 28
{{!}}this article properly belongs above article 28, and point four belongs in article 28
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|this article just sux... so how many members does the EC have?
{{!}}this article just sux... so how many members does the EC have?
|
{{!}}
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|too many ambiguities; needs rephrasing and tightening
{{!}}too many ambiguities; needs rephrasing and tightening
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Move: should be before individual discussion of councils; Clause 2: does that mean "Each council is resonsible for writing its own by-laws?"; Clause 4 should be moved to Article 28.
{{!}}Move: should be before individual discussion of councils; Clause 2: does that mean "Each council is resonsible for writing its own by-laws?"; Clause 4 should be moved to Article 28.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe and Russell
{{!}}as per Joe and Russell
|30
{{!}}30
|Revise (5)
{{!}}Revise (5)
}}
}}


Line 867: Line 867:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|31
{{!}}31
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|should be clear that ME makes decisions about content (which constables can't do)
{{!}}should be clear that ME makes decisions about content (which constables can't do)
|reject
{{!}}reject
|Agree with Russell, although Clause 1 could apply to overlap with EC. Clause 2 would have to establish within MC policy, and allow for other representatives to be named case-by-case by the MC, or, as appropriate, EC
{{!}}Agree with Russell, although Clause 1 could apply to overlap with EC. Clause 2 would have to establish within MC policy, and allow for other representatives to be named case-by-case by the MC, or, as appropriate, EC
|revise
{{!}}revise
|check with original formulation -- things seem to be missing here
{{!}}check with original formulation -- things seem to be missing here
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Clause 1 sounds like the ME has power overlap with Constables; clause 2 sounds like power overlap with MC.  Is this all that remains of the ME?  Why have one?
{{!}}Clause 1 sounds like the ME has power overlap with Constables; clause 2 sounds like power overlap with MC.  Is this all that remains of the ME?  Why have one?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Russell, Howard, Matt
{{!}}as per Russell, Howard, Matt
|31
{{!}}31
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 897: Line 897:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|32
{{!}}32
|accept
{{!}}accept
|with Matt's changes, but I wonder if we should limit the ability of a group of Citizens to initiate a new referendum on a specific rule or guideline for a period of time after it has come up for a referendum.  We don't want to allow the possibility that a same minority could continuously or repeatedly push an issue just to tire everyone out and get their way.
{{!}}with Matt's changes, but I wonder if we should limit the ability of a group of Citizens to initiate a new referendum on a specific rule or guideline for a period of time after it has come up for a referendum.  We don't want to allow the possibility that a same minority could continuously or repeatedly push an issue just to tire everyone out and get their way.
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|when we get huge, it won't take much to create cabals that can force referendums infinitum
{{!}}when we get huge, it won't take much to create cabals that can force referendums infinitum
|accept
{{!}}accept
|Joe's point well taken
{{!}}Joe's point well taken
|revise
{{!}}revise
|this whole concept needs rethinking. Did we have this right in our draft submitted to Peter?
{{!}}this whole concept needs rethinking. Did we have this right in our draft submitted to Peter?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|The first two sentences contradict each other.  A citizen may demand a referendum (sounds like a right) but this right is meaningless unless you've got a six or more like minded citizens.  Uh, now that I think about it. the current quorum size for a referendum is 7.  Seven citizens at this point can call a referendum.  Joe's point is also important to consider
{{!}}The first two sentences contradict each other.  A citizen may demand a referendum (sounds like a right) but this right is meaningless unless you've got a six or more like minded citizens.  Uh, now that I think about it. the current quorum size for a referendum is 7.  Seven citizens at this point can call a referendum.  Joe's point is also important to consider
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe, Matt, Russell; what about coupling this to some function of the number of Citizens who made at least one edit during the month preceding the initiation of the referendum?
{{!}}as per Joe, Matt, Russell; what about coupling this to some function of the number of Citizens who made at least one edit during the month preceding the initiation of the referendum?
|32
{{!}}32
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 925: Line 925:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|33
{{!}}33
|revise
{{!}}revise
|accept Matt's changes, and remove "but" from point one
{{!}}accept Matt's changes, and remove "but" from point one
|revise  
{{!}}revise  
|address Russell's points
{{!}}address Russell's points
|accpt
{{!}}accpt
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|this is vague; needs to vest responsibility in a Chief Constable and determine who or what makes the community policy
{{!}}this is vague; needs to vest responsibility in a Chief Constable and determine who or what makes the community policy
|reject
{{!}}reject
|there is no explanation of how that "community policy" is to be established.  "where this is "  Where what is?  What is "this?"
{{!}}there is no explanation of how that "community policy" is to be established.  "where this is "  Where what is?  What is "this?"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Russell  
{{!}}as per Russell  
|33
{{!}}33
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 950: Line 950:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|34
{{!}}34
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|needs to be merged with 35
{{!}}needs to be merged with 35
|Accept
{{!}}Accept
|but see my next comment.  The O has become powerless
{{!}}but see my next comment.  The O has become powerless
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|34
{{!}}34
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)
}}
}}


Line 978: Line 978:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|35
{{!}}35
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise or reject
{{!}}revise or reject
|Russell makes good sense
{{!}}Russell makes good sense
|revise
{{!}}revise
|i agree with russell
{{!}}i agree with russell
|reject if not revise
{{!}}reject if not revise
|This says that the ONLY power of the O is to refer the matter to an appropriate body.  I thought the O was to be more than a referral agency.  If he/she is, then language should be here to describe the powers and actions that the O can take.
{{!}}This says that the ONLY power of the O is to refer the matter to an appropriate body.  I thought the O was to be more than a referral agency.  If he/she is, then language should be here to describe the powers and actions that the O can take.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Russell
{{!}}as per Russell
|35
{{!}}35
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 1,003: Line 1,003:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|36
{{!}}36
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|36
{{!}}36
|Accept as written
{{!}}Accept as written
}}
}}


Line 1,030: Line 1,030:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|37
{{!}}37
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|delete
{{!}}delete
|merge with 36
{{!}}merge with 36
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|37
{{!}}37
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)
}}
}}


Line 1,058: Line 1,058:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|38
{{!}}38
|revise
{{!}}revise
|for clarity, the opening should read: "An Appeals Board shall consist of Citizens who were not previously directly involved, as follows:"
{{!}}for clarity, the opening should read: "An Appeals Board shall consist of Citizens who were not previously directly involved, as follows:"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|per Joe and add  to "not previously directly involved 'in the dispute'"
{{!}}per Joe and add  to "not previously directly involved 'in the dispute'"
|reject
{{!}}reject
|More than 1 by EC and MC; prefer 3 but will accept 2
{{!}}More than 1 by EC and MC; prefer 3 but will accept 2
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|Joe's revision also acceptable
{{!}}Joe's revision also acceptable
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|38
{{!}}38
|not accepted (3 accept, 2 revise, 1 reject)
{{!}}not accepted (3 accept, 2 revise, 1 reject)
}}
}}


Line 1,083: Line 1,083:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|39
{{!}}39
|accept
{{!}}accept
|with Matt's addition
{{!}}with Matt's addition
|accept
{{!}}accept
|the appeal board just decides if there are grounds for appeal.  An editorial issue needs to go back to the EC and a behavior issue goes back to the MC.  We can't let the MC make an editorial decision.
{{!}}the appeal board just decides if there are grounds for appeal.  An editorial issue needs to go back to the EC and a behavior issue goes back to the MC.  We can't let the MC make an editorial decision.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|I don't understand it. Agree with Russell--why remand?
{{!}}I don't understand it. Agree with Russell--why remand?
|delete
{{!}}delete
|this is already covered by existing procedure; why complicate things in this way?
{{!}}this is already covered by existing procedure; why complicate things in this way?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|I think it means that the Appeals board may remand the case back to the MC for re-hearing.  Why can't the appears board just make its own ruling?
{{!}}I think it means that the Appeals board may remand the case back to the MC for re-hearing.  Why can't the appears board just make its own ruling?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|better to give them the right to rule on their own, rather than always having to pass things back
{{!}}better to give them the right to rule on their own, rather than always having to pass things back
|39
{{!}}39
|Not accepted (3 revise, 2 accept, 1 reject)
{{!}}Not accepted (3 revise, 2 accept, 1 reject)
}}
}}


Line 1,111: Line 1,111:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|40
{{!}}40
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|open to Russell's revised phrase
{{!}}open to Russell's revised phrase
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|revise phrase "be restricted to a smaller audience"
{{!}}revise phrase "be restricted to a smaller audience"
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|40
{{!}}40
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)
}}
}}


Line 1,139: Line 1,139:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|41
{{!}}41
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|No official decision shall contravene this charter.
{{!}}No official decision shall contravene this charter.
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|needs to acknowledge greater power of external laws
{{!}}needs to acknowledge greater power of external laws
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"bound by THIS charter"; "decision reached" by whom?  Is this intended to be a limit on the powers of the officials?  It should say so.
{{!}}"bound by THIS charter"; "decision reached" by whom?  Is this intended to be a limit on the powers of the officials?  It should say so.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Russell
{{!}}as per Russell
|41
{{!}}41
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 1,169: Line 1,169:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|42
{{!}}42
|accept
{{!}}accept
|with Matt's deletion
{{!}}with Matt's deletion
|accept
{{!}}accept
|with Matt's deletions
{{!}}with Matt's deletions
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Restore deletion about impaired users
{{!}}Restore deletion about impaired users
|revise
{{!}}revise
|this is a pot-pourri of different things. they need to be separated out and places elsewhere, if they are desired
{{!}}this is a pot-pourri of different things. they need to be separated out and places elsewhere, if they are desired
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Deletion okay; clauses dealing with ME should be moved to Article 31; Last sounds like a saving clause, if so, is should be more clearly stated.
{{!}}Deletion okay; clauses dealing with ME should be moved to Article 31; Last sounds like a saving clause, if so, is should be more clearly stated.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|reject deletion
{{!}}reject deletion
|42
{{!}}42
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 1,194: Line 1,194:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|43
{{!}}43
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|delete
{{!}}delete
|if we need to state the license in the charter
{{!}}if we need to state the license in the charter
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Make it a generic "open source" license -- thinking of WP discussions
{{!}}Make it a generic "open source" license -- thinking of WP discussions
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|I'm not persuaded that the license must be explicitly stated.  Charter should give guidelines about acceptable licenses.;
{{!}}I'm not persuaded that the license must be explicitly stated.  Charter should give guidelines about acceptable licenses.;
|
{{!}}
|better not to state the exact license in the Charter, but to use a generic definition of "open", e.g. as per http://www.opendefinition.org/ : “A piece of knowledge is open if you are free to use, reuse, and redistribute it — subject only, at most, to the requirement to attribute and share-alike.”
{{!}}better not to state the exact license in the Charter, but to use a generic definition of "open", e.g. as per http://www.opendefinition.org/ : “A piece of knowledge is open if you are free to use, reuse, and redistribute it — subject only, at most, to the requirement to attribute and share-alike.”
|43
{{!}}43
|Not accepted (3 revise, 2 accept, 1 reject)
{{!}}Not accepted (3 revise, 2 accept, 1 reject)
}}
}}


Line 1,219: Line 1,219:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|to something true
{{!}}to something true
|revise
{{!}}revise
|With trepidation since we don't know status of CF. Perhaps "the legal owner" or words to that effect if CF gets preempted?
{{!}}With trepidation since we don't know status of CF. Perhaps "the legal owner" or words to that effect if CF gets preempted?
|accept
{{!}}accept
|I dont know what to say on this issue
{{!}}I dont know what to say on this issue
|REVISE
{{!}}REVISE
|Is the CF an official body?  if so it should be mentioned in articles 17-19; if I sit on the CF can I sit on the MC?  How is the CF elected?  Who are they?  what do they do?  Because we're a website we have to have an owner so we have to have something like the CF.
{{!}}Is the CF an official body?  if so it should be mentioned in articles 17-19; if I sit on the CF can I sit on the MC?  How is the CF elected?  Who are they?  what do they do?  Because we're a website we have to have an owner so we have to have something like the CF.
|revise
{{!}}revise
|role of the CF needs to be clarified; shouldn't it better go to transition rules? What if it never gets founded?
{{!}}role of the CF needs to be clarified; shouldn't it better go to transition rules? What if it never gets founded?
|44
{{!}}44
|Revise(4)
{{!}}Revise(4)
}}
}}


Line 1,243: Line 1,243:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|45
{{!}}45
|revise
{{!}}revise
|slightly: add "original" before the first instance of "Citizendium"
{{!}}slightly: add "original" before the first instance of "Citizendium"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|what mission?
{{!}}what mission?
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|Will branches have their own EC/MC? Can one sit at the EC of several branches?
{{!}}Will branches have their own EC/MC? Can one sit at the EC of several branches?
|45
{{!}}45
|Not Accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)
{{!}}Not Accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)
}}
}}


Line 1,269: Line 1,269:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|46
{{!}}46
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|agree with Russell, we will need to officially delegate that power
{{!}}agree with Russell, we will need to officially delegate that power
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|"Informally agree?"  that'll take forever.  How about Chief Constable or Secretary of EC?
{{!}}"Informally agree?"  that'll take forever.  How about Chief Constable or Secretary of EC?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|needs to be formal
{{!}}needs to be formal
|46
{{!}}46
|Not Accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)
{{!}}Not Accepted (3 accept, 3 revise)
}}
}}


Line 1,294: Line 1,294:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|47
{{!}}47
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|all Citizens registered before the announcement of the voting period on ratification
{{!}}all Citizens registered before the announcement of the voting period on ratification
|47
{{!}}47
|Accept (5)
{{!}}Accept (5)
}}
}}


Line 1,319: Line 1,319:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|48
{{!}}48
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|48
{{!}}48
|Accept (6)
{{!}}Accept (6)
}}
}}


Line 1,344: Line 1,344:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|49
{{!}}49
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|reject
{{!}}reject
|lets face it, larry can stop it anytime he wants
{{!}}lets face it, larry can stop it anytime he wants
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|reject
{{!}}reject
|But then what if Larry doesn't; i'm not ever sure why this is here; Larry doesn't need to approve anything (well, except that it's still his website).
{{!}}But then what if Larry doesn't; i'm not ever sure why this is here; Larry doesn't need to approve anything (well, except that it's still his website).
|accept
{{!}}accept
|I think it is better to have such an official end to his role; we should make sure, though, that he hands over all info on financial and server matters; something for interim guidance?
{{!}}I think it is better to have such an official end to his role; we should make sure, though, that he hands over all info on financial and server matters; something for interim guidance?
|49
{{!}}49
|Accept (4)
{{!}}Accept (4)
}}
}}


Line 1,369: Line 1,369:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|50
{{!}}50
|revise
{{!}}revise
|slightly: add "honorary" before the word "title"
{{!}}slightly: add "honorary" before the word "title"
|revise
{{!}}revise
|per Joe.  again, larry can pull the plug anytime he wants
{{!}}per Joe.  again, larry can pull the plug anytime he wants
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|accept Joe's change; do we need to be explicit that the honorary title Editor in chief carries no powers or duties?
{{!}}accept Joe's change; do we need to be explicit that the honorary title Editor in chief carries no powers or duties?
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Joe
{{!}}as per Joe
|50
{{!}}50
|Revise (4)
{{!}}Revise (4)
}}
}}


Line 1,396: Line 1,396:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|51
{{!}}51
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|accept
{{!}}accept
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|Accept
{{!}}Accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|51
{{!}}51
|Accept as written
{{!}}Accept as written
}}
}}


Line 1,421: Line 1,421:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|52
{{!}}52
|reject
{{!}}reject
|I still believe there are good reasons to allow pseudonyms, so long as one or more responsible officials are made aware of them in case of disputes
{{!}}I still believe there are good reasons to allow pseudonyms, so long as one or more responsible officials are made aware of them in case of disputes
|reject
{{!}}reject
|per Joe
{{!}}per Joe
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|accept
{{!}}accept
|
{{!}}
|52
{{!}}52
|Accept (4, with 2 reject)
{{!}}Accept (4, with 2 reject)
}}
}}


Line 1,445: Line 1,445:
{{CharterVote
{{CharterVote
|Discussion={{
|Discussion={{
|Addendum
{{!}}Addendum
|reject
{{!}}reject
|Leave it out and post it as recommendations by one or more of the committee members on a separate page associated with the charter drafting cluster.  Add an article under Part VII that states that Councils shall review current/previous policies and procedures for accordance with the charter and provide a link to our suggestions  
{{!}}Leave it out and post it as recommendations by one or more of the committee members on a separate page associated with the charter drafting cluster.  Add an article under Part VII that states that Councils shall review current/previous policies and procedures for accordance with the charter and provide a link to our suggestions  
|reject
{{!}}reject
|agree with Joe. if there are good powers and duties they should be moved now
{{!}}agree with Joe. if there are good powers and duties they should be moved now
|
{{!}}
|
{{!}}
|delete
{{!}}delete
|contents can be included in a memorandum attached to hte charter
{{!}}contents can be included in a memorandum attached to hte charter
|Keep some of this.  A lot of the powers and duties got moved here.
{{!}}Keep some of this.  A lot of the powers and duties got moved here.
|
{{!}}
|revise
{{!}}revise
|as per Russell
{{!}}as per Russell
|53
{{!}}53
|Not Accepted (3 reject, 2 revise)
{{!}}Not Accepted (3 reject, 2 revise)
}}
}}



Revision as of 05:50, 16 July 2010

My CUrrent Draft

This draft document shall serve as the basis for public discussion. It represents a compromise amongst the drafters, who may have different individual opinions on some aspects of this Charter.

Preamble

Citizendium is a collaborative effort to collect, structure, and update knowledge and to render it conveniently accessible to the public for free. It is created by volunteers — henceforth Citizens — who contribute under their real names and agree to a social covenant centered around trust.


Part I: Citizenship and Editorship

Article 1

Participation at the Citizendium shall be restricted to Citizens.


Article 2

Citizenship shall be open to anyone who

  1. meets a few basic conditions as defined by the Management Council,
  2. registers and contributes under his or her real name, and
  3. agrees to the Citizendium's fundamental principles as defined by the Charter.


Article 3

Citizens shall contribute freely within the limits of the project's mission.


Article 4

The Citizendium community shall recognize the special role that experts play

  1. in defining content standards in their relevant fields and
  2. in assuring that the site's content is reliable and meets high quality standards.


Article 5

Citizens shall act responsibly and in a civil manner: derogatory or offensive commentary will not be tolerated.


Article 6

Editors are Citizens whose expertise in some field of knowledge is recognized and formally acknowledged by the community.


Article 7

The group ofEditors shall have to assure the quality of the Citizendium's content. They shall review and evaluate articles and shall have the right

  1. to approve high-quality articles that treat their topic adequately,
  2. to decide in disputes over specific content matters, and
  3. to remove incorrect(ly) or poorly presented content.


Article 8

Official recognition of expertise — obtained through either education or experience — and its scope shall be based on guidelines established by the Editorial Council.


Article 9

WithdrawalRemoval of Editor status shall require a formal decision by the Editorial Council and shall enjoy the full rights of appeal.


Part II: Content and style

Article 10

An Editorial Council shall be empowered to develop policy on content and style, including but not limited to original content.


Article 11

The Citizendium shall welcome contributions to all fields of knowledge.


Article 12

All articles shall treat their subjects comprehensively, neutrally, and objectively to the greatest degree possible in a well-written narrative, complementing text with other suitable material and media.


Article 13

All basic material shall be intended for the general public. It shall be presented as clearly as possible, without unnecessary complications, and advanced topics shall be made as accessible as possible.


Article 14

Specialist material — including (within the limits set by the Editorial Council) original research — shall be welcome, too. It shall be put into context with background information and non-specialist material.


Article 15

High-quality articles shall be distinguished as approved articles and be protected and kept available permanently as citable references.


Article 16

The Citizendium shall remain free of advocacy, advertisement and sensationalism.


Part III: Organization and offices

Article 17

The Citizendium shall be devoted to transparent and fair governance with a minimum of bureaucracy.


Article 18

It shall be governed by two Councils:

  1. an Editorial Council; and
  2. a Management Council,


Article 19

The councils will be assisted by the following:

  1. a Managing Editor,
  2. a Constabulary, and
  3. an Ombudsman.


Article 20 (old 3637)

  • Each year, half the members of the two Councils shall be elected.
  • For newly elected members, the term of office shall begin on first of January for the Editorial Council, and on first of July for the Management Council.
  • Any Citizen may nominate and support one or more candidates for a Council.
  • A Citizen who is supported by another Citizen becomes a candidate by declaring the intention to serve for the whole term.
  • Any Citizen accepting a nomination shall retreat immediately from any involvement in the election's organization.
  • The candidates collecting the most votes shall be elected.
  • Citizens who received votes may serve as reserve members.
  • A Council member who becomes inactive or unavailable for a period of 90 days, shall be replaced by a the reserve member receiving the next highest votes.
  • In the absence of reserve members, interim replacements may be appointed by the Council concerned.
  • Any Council may propose a change of its size by an even number of members; this proposal shall be subject to a referendum held together with the next election.


Article 21 (old 3738)

The Managing Editor shall be elected by simple majority. For this election, up to four candidates shall be selected by the Management Council, taken from a list of Editors nominated by the community.


Article 22 (old3839)

Constables shall be appointed by the Management Council


Article 23 (old3940)

The Ombudsman shall be nominated by the Combined Councils and appointed by majority Citizen vote.


Article 24 (old 22)

All official posts shall be subject to the following conditions:

  1. All Citizens shall be elegible.
  2. The term of office shall be two years, renewable. The term of any replacement shall end when the original term ends.
  3. No Citizen may serve in two offices at the same time.
  4. All officials shall continue to contribute as Citizens throughout their terms.
  5. Each Council or official may appoint delegates to perform specific tasks for a specific period of time.
  6. The responsibility for the actions of a delegate shall always remain with the appointing Council or official.


Article 25 (old 35)

Elections and referenda shall be organized by the Managing Council and carried out by the Constabulary, qith the following conditions:

  1. Sufficient time Two weeks shall be provided for nominations and for discussions of the issues brought about during the nomination period.
  2. All Citizens in good standing — as defined by the Management Council —, regardless of status, shall be entitled to vote.


Article 26 (old 20)

All decision processes shall take place in a way that allows every interested Citizen to follow it and support it with feedback.


Article 27 (old 4041)

An official who seriously neglects the office may be recalled by two thirds vote of the Combined Councils. with exception of

  1. the Managing Editor, who shall be recalled if both Councils demand it (separately), and
  2. the Ombudsman, whose recall shall require a qualified majority of two thirds in a referendum.



Part IV: Community policy

Article 28 (old 23)

The Editorial Council is responsible for content and style policies. In particular, it shall

  1. vet, coordinate, and supervise the Editors and their activities activities of Editors, and
  2. encourage and supervise cooperation of Citizens in their effort to create, development and organization of the Citizendium's content.


Article 29 (old 24)

The Management Council is responsible for the community's environment and its technical and economic resources. In particular, it shall:

  1. nominate and supervise the activities of Constables,
  2. manage technical matters (software and hardware), and
  3. advise on matters of administration of financial and legal obligations of the Citizendium.
  4. It shall also establish and maintain public awareness, and
  5. invite and establish collaboration with external partners on any matters relevant to the project's mission.


Article 30 (old 25)

Each Council shall

  1. have a quorum corresponding to the simple majority of its members, and
  2. develop written guidelines to define and explain methods of communicating with that particular Council,
  3. consider any issue properly brought in front of it by any of its members or by a number of Citizens that meets its quorum.
  4. In the Editorial Council, a number of members corresponding to the quorum shall be Editors while the rest of the members shall be Citizens who are not Editors.


Article 31 (old 26)

The Managing Editor has the following duties:

  1. to ensure — by means of executive decisions — that the principles and policies of the Citizendium are effectively and coherently observed;such decisions shall be based on established policy unless required in the case of a policy deficit. They may be overruled by the appropriate Council.
  2. to represent the Citizendium in its relations with external bodies, such as the mass media, and academic or non-academic institutions.


Article 32 (old 36)

Citizens may demand that contested rules or guidelines are submitted to a referendum.

  • A referendum may be initiated by a group of Citizens corresponding in size to the sum of the quorums of the two Councils.
  • A referendum shall be decided by simple majority of the votes validly cast.
  • Any amendment to and any change of this Charter shall require a referendum and shall be ratified if accepted by a qualified majority of two thirds of the votes validly cast.
  • Creating any further office or special rôle shall require an excellent reason and a referendum.
  • Any change of the license shall require a referendum.


Part V: Behavior and dispute resolution

Article 33 (old 27)

The Constabulary shall enforce the Citizendium's rules of behavior as determined and centrally documented by community policy, covering equally all Citizens including those with official positions. In particular, Constables

  1. shall only intervene in matters of behavior but not in matters of content.
  2. shall act with reasonable pragmatism and leniency, and only in those situations where this is clearly covered by existing rules.


Article 34 (old 28)

An Ombudsman shall assist in dispute resolution.


Article 35 (Old 29)

Whenever possible, disputes shall be settled informally at the lowest possible level. Specifically, the following shall apply:

  1. Any party involved in a dispute may contact the Ombudsman for assistance in dispute resolution.
  2. When a formal decision is necessary or demanded, the Ombudsman shall facilitate the presentation of the issue to the appropriate body.
  3. The Management Council shall provide a formal mechanism of resolution that allows each disputant to fully and thoroughly present their relevant positions.


Article 36 (old 30)

Appeals of formal decisions shall be possible.


Article 37 (old 31)

Formal decisions will only be reviewed when a disputant can show an Appeals Board that either:

  1. New information is available; or
  2. A technical error was made during the previous formal procedure.


Article 38 (old 32)

An Appeals Board shall consist of previously not directly involved Citizens, as follows:

  1. one member nominated by the Editorial Council,
  2. one member nominated by the Management Council, and
  3. one member nominated by the Ombudsman.


Article 39 (old 33)

Successful Appeals will be allowed to re-enter the Management Council dispute resolution process, limiting the discourse to the new information or addressing the impact of the technical error in the previous procedure.


Article 40 (old 34)

Normally, dispute resolutions should be heard in public. However,

  1. Participants may request that disputes be heard privately.
  2. Privately heard disputes forfeit their right to appeal on technical grounds.
  3. in exceptional cases, part of a dispute resolution process may be restricted to a smaller audience. Such an exception shall require public justification by the Ombudsman.


Part VI: Administrative matters

Article 41 (old 21)

All Citizens, including officials, shall be bound by the Charter, and no decision reached shall contravene it.



Article 41 42

  • As far as possible, special requirements of visually or otherwise impaired users and for responsibly exercised automated access shall be taken into account.
  • The Managing Editor shall intervene against article content that is inappropriate, in particular, if content
    • violates criminal or civil law or
    • is discriminatory or slanderous against persons or groups of persons, on the basis of religion, religious belief, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender.
  • Violations of the Charter shall only be tolerated when forced by external laws.


Article 42 43

The Citizendium adopts CC-by-sa 3.0 Unported (original source) as the license for its own original collaborative content.The Citizendium Foundation reserves the right to upgrade the license version number (not the license) on behalf of contributors. The licensing of content incorporated from elsewhere shall follow the conditions of the respective originators.


Article 43 44

The Citizendium shall be owned and controlled by the Citizendium Foundation, a non-profit organization.


Article 44 45

The official language of the Citizendium shall be English. Branches of the Citizendium in other languages shall share the same mission as defined by this Charter. All language versions shall require approval by the Management Council.


Part VII: Transitional Measures

Article 45 46

The community shall informally agree on a Citizen who is charged with organizing the ratification process and the initial elections until the Councils are installed.


Article 45 47

For the purpose of the ratification of this Charter and the initial elections to the Councils, all Citizens with an account that is not blocked shall have the right to vote.


Article 46 48

This Charter shall be ratified if accepted by two thirds or more of the votes validly cast in a referendum for this purpose. The Charter shall enter into force on the day following its ratification.


Article 46 49

The Editor-in-Chief shall officially certify the ratified Charter within a week after the closing of the referendum. This act ends his term of office.


Article 47 50

The former Editor-in-Chief Larry Sanger shall be awarded with the title Founding Editor-in-Chief in acknowledgement of his achievements for the Citizendium. (suggested in [1])


Article 48 51

The first elections to the Councils shall take place as soon as possible after the Charter has been ratified.

  1. The initial size of the Editorial Council shall be 7 members, that of the Management Council 5 members.
  2. A number of members corresponding to the quorum shall be selected, by lot or personal agreement, to serve shortened terms until the next regular election that is at least half a year after the initial election.


Article 50 52

  • Within a month after the entry into force of this Charter, all existing pseudonym accounts shall be closed by the Constabulary, and the respective user pages protected; the Citizens concerned may renew registration under their real names.


MATERIAL THAT SEEMS MERELY TO BE LISTED AT THE END (!!)

Addendum: Interim guidance for the transition period


  • As long as the administrative prerequisites for implementing the Charter are not entirely fulfilled, the rules listed in this section shall provide interim guidance to the Editorial Council, Management Council, and other bodies.
  • Such material may be modified by those bodies by their normal procedures, without a full Charter amendment.

Review of previous policies

  • The Councils shall review all existing policies and vote on each of them which falls under their realm, in view of complementing the general guidelines in this Charter with an evolving set of specific policy guidelines.
  • The Editorial Council shall review the current list of Editors.
  • The Management Council shall review
    • privacy policies, including access by search engines, and
    • policy on licensing and republication of user and talk pages.

Constabulary

  • Constabulary tools include: advice and instruction on wiki or through Citizen email, removal of offensive text, and warning and banning of users.

Languages

  • The Management Council shall elaborate a strategy and policy on handling the establishment of branches in languages other than English.

Administration

  • The Management Council shall elaborate a strategy and policy on handling the legal, financial, and technical operations necessary for the project to fulfill its mission.

External partnerships

The Management Council shall develop and implement at its earliest convenience a policy for

  • interested external observers to provide feedback on Citizendium content in a manner convenient for them and the project.
  • collaboration with external partners, paying particular attention to fostering the collaboration with instructors by way of Eduzendium, and with external experts or professional organizations for the purposes of providing or reviewing content at Citizendium.

Research and teaching

  • The Editorial Council shall elaborate a strategy and policy on incorporation of teaching and research into Citizendium.
  • Research results that have not been formally published should be clearly labeled as such. So should articles that have been part of student coursework.

Registration of new Editors

To streamline the CZ:Editor Application Review Procedure, applications for Editorship shall be processed in two consecutive steps:

  • All verified Editor applicants shall initially be registered as Citizens, enabling them to start contributing while the application is being reviewed.
  • The application for Editorship shall be reviewed by the Editorial Personnel Administrators (to be appointed by the Editorial Council) who shall strive to make a decision within one week.