+- Forums (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum)
+-- Forum: Second Floor (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=112)
+--- Forum: Board Meeting Room (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+---- Forum: Past Proposals & Discussions (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=50)
+---- Thread: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) (/showthread.php?tid=253)
Pages:
1
2
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - TempestShadow - 09-07-2018
Legalist Zombal;3239 Wrote:Looks fine to me, maybe we should have the roots shared between the WAD, VD and then one or two trusted "admins"? Basically have like Senior Admins(only like 2 people or so) that actually do most of the admining but Imki still hold the Root account so that nobody can pull weird crap in the future with some cit having root or whatever
But it looks good either way!
I'd prefer if we limit access to the Root account as much as possible.
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - Ryccia - 09-07-2018
Perhaps have the CLS, on the occasion that the Root Admin has lost citizenship, becomes inactive, or something equally devastating, on deciding on a new forum, with a new Root Admin, or keeping the forum for some reason?
Or we could perhaps allow Root Admins to be non-citizens, as long as they abide by Lazarene law and such, and leave the door open for either the CLS or the Assembly to decide if that is an issue and move to a new forum, or allow the Root Admin and their forum to remain.
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - Amerion - 09-09-2018
Legalist Zombal;3239 Wrote:Looks fine to me, maybe we should have the roots shared between the WAD, VD and then one or two trusted "admins"? Basically have like Senior Admins(only like 2 people or so) that actually do most of the admining but Imki still hold the Root account so that nobody can pull weird crap in the future with some cit having root or whatever
But it looks good either way!
I don't believe different people can have access to the root account and Imki still claim to hold the root.
In any case, it is not advisable for the root account to be shared, just as NS admins don't advise people to share a WAD account.
New Rogernomics;3240 Wrote:Only problem I could see with this is what if a few in the assembly hypothetically decided to remove an admin? On what grounds should an admin be removed? Is a trial required to remove citizenship and then admin? A super majority vote?
I think this warrants a separate discussion. It will be necessary, in the future, to detail admin policy - so that the public knows what is acceptable behaviour. I imagine an admin policy would also cover additions and removals to the admin team.
Ryccia;3245 Wrote:Perhaps have the CLS, on the occasion that the Root Admin has lost citizenship, becomes inactive, or something equally devastating, on deciding on a new forum, with a new Root Admin, or keeping the forum for some reason?
Or we could perhaps allow Root Admins to be non-citizens, as long as they abide by Lazarene law and such, and leave the door open for either the CLS or the Assembly to decide if that is an issue and move to a new forum, or allow the Root Admin and their forum to remain.
Based on the discussions on Discord, I think the consensus is to not make allowance for the root account holder but rather give warning to every person who is at risk of losing their citizenship due to inactivity.
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - Amerion - 09-09-2018
Just an additional note:
I have amended the language so as to only impact the administration team. As Sheep pointed out on Discord, moderation teams should be exempt from citizenship criteria as members may be non-citizens during joint festivals.
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - Amerion - 09-10-2018
I move for a vote on this amendment
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - McChimp - 09-10-2018
Before this goes to vote, and I appreciate I'm a little late, I probably ought to say that I'm not sure this is necessary.
The Mandate already requires that admins be citizens (at least when they are appointed). Given the OOC nature of the position I see no reason to legislate too deeply regarding their citizenship: does it really need to be written that the root admin should maintain an active and involved team? If it does, would that not be better written as an admin policy?
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - McChimp - 09-10-2018
I second the motion, though.
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - Amerion - 09-10-2018
McChimp;3330 Wrote:Before this goes to vote, and I appreciate I'm a little late, I probably ought to say that I'm not sure this is necessary.
The Mandate already requires that admins be citizens (at least when they are appointed). Given the OOC nature of the position I see no reason to legislate too deeply regarding their citizenship: does it really need to be written that the root admin should maintain an active and involved team? If it does, would that not be better written as an admin policy?
The Mandate implies that administrators hold citizenship status but it does not explicitly state the requirement. Comparatively, it has four subsections going into detail on the citizenship requirements of government officials. I understand that the two groups of people are not exactly comparable in terms of importance to our public infrastructure, but I also see no issue with clarifying what is a logical necessity. If a person is to be entrusted with access to Lazarus' forum and Discord control panels then it only stands to reason that they should be citizens of Lazarus. The alternative is simply nonsensical.
I am in full agreement with you that this Assembly should not legislate on admin policy (although I believe that the community would be well served if and when the administration team works with the general public in formulating its policy), however, I think this basic requirement does not amount to a restraint on the team.
As to your point of whether the root admin should maintain an active and involved team, I do not believe this amendment necessitates that; only that the root not lose (her) citizenship; something which I do not think is a possibility (or, if it is, will be an issue we shall have to address further down the track). I expect that Imki would transfer the root if she finishes with NationStates.
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - McChimp - 09-10-2018
Amerion;3332 Wrote:As to your point of whether the root admin should maintain an active and involved team, I do not believe this amendment necessitates that; only that the root not lose (her) citizenship; something which I do not think is a possibility (or, if it is, will be an issue we shall have to address further down the track). I expect that Imki would transfer the root if she finishes with NationStates.
But presumably the point, ultimately, of an admin citizenship requirement would be to ensure that all admins are active and involved. Why bother if not to achieve that? And could that not be more neatly achieved by an admin policy without cluttering up the constitution too much with an OOC institution?
RE: [Discussion] Off-site Property Administration Amendment (September 2018) - McChimp - 09-11-2018
The Off-site Property Administration Amendment is now at vote here.