Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

A122 - Autonomy for the TSR MHoC Amendment Watch

Announcements
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    A122 - Autonomy for the TSR MHoC Amendment, The Rt Hon. Unown Uzer MPProposed by: The Rt Hon. Unown Uzer MP (UKIP)
    Seconded by: The Rt Hon. nebelbon MP (UKIP), the Hon. hazzer1998 MP (CON), the Hon. Wellzi MP (UKIP), the Rt Hon. Nigel Farage MEP MP (UKIP)
    Autonomy for the TSR MHoC Amendment
    The following shall be added to the Model House of Commons constitution in the section: "The Speaker":

    1.1.7) add or remove members from the TSR Government sub-forum, TSR Crisis Committee usergroup, and MP usergroup when necessary.

    A new section shall be added to the Model House of Commons constitution, named: "Community Team Intervention".

    The following shall be added to the Model House of Commons constitution in the section: "Community Team Intervention".

    14.1) The Community Team may not carry out any administrative duties within the TSR MHoC or sub-forums listed under the TSR MHoC sub-forum unless:

    14.1.1) the intervention is for the purpose of enforcing TSR Community Guidelines

    14.1.2) the House votes (where the number 'ayes' exceeds the number of 'noes' ) to give the Community Team administrative powers in the TSR MHoC, Division Lobby, or TSR Crisis Committee for a temporary period of time

    14.1.3) the Speaker, Deputy Speaker, or any member of the Support Team responsible for Debate & Current Affairs give permission for the Community Team to carry out administrative duties for a temporary period of time

    14.2) The Speaker, Deputy Speaker, and Support Team members in charge of the TSR MHoC or sub-forums listed under the TSR MHoC shall be responsible for all administrative duties given up by the Community Team.

    Notes:The Community Team have been known to be overburdened with work and there have been multiple cases where it has taken a very long period of time after a request was sent to them before the request was actually fulfilled. This amendment aims to reduce the workload of the CT and offer more autonomy for the TSR MHoC, where the elected Speaker can administer the MHoC without having to go through a bureaucratic process.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Is that the actual formatting or? In any case I'll give it a read but I don't see this being a big issue, although I don't know if it's something we'd be allowed to do either
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    RayApparently unless you have run this via the CT first I would condemn you for accepting this.

    First of all the speaker will not be able to do 1.1.7 to my knowledge because for even the CT to do that they need to access the computers in the office.

    Second the part about barring the CT form even entering this part of the site, if, quite frankly, rediculous. The CT are the people who are payed to uphold the rules and are in charge of how the site is run. This is like telling your boss to pay you for not working!!!

    An obvious nay.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    It looks much better now, I'll give it a read in a little bit and get back on each point
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    RayApparently unless you have run this via the CT first I would condemn you for accepting this.

    First of all the speaker will not be able to do 1.1.7 to my knowledge because for even the CT to do that they need to access the computers in the office.

    Second the part about barring the CT form even entering this part of the site, if, quite frankly, rediculous. The CT are the people who are payed to uphold the rules and are in charge of how the site is run. This is like telling your boss to pay you for not working!!!

    An obvious nay.
    Hear hear. It'd be nice to be able to run ourselves, but you have to accept that this won't be the case on TSR.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    RayApparently unless you have run this via the CT first I would condemn you for accepting this.
    There is precedent for items such as this being accepted for submission. Wether or not it passes is another matter entirely.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I will repeat the comments I made in the UKIP private forum: I am not convinced this is needed, the only time the Community Team get involved is removing the ineligible votes at General Elections, creating new forums, or for moderation issues; at the moment the Speaker, Support Team, Section Leaders, and Community Assistants can do all of the administrative work needed.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I will repeat the comments I made in the UKIP private forum: I am not convinced this is needed, the only time the Community Team get involved is removing the ineligible votes at General Elections, creating new forums, or for moderation issues; at the moment the Speaker, Support Team, Section Leaders, and Community Assistants can do all of the administrative work needed.
    May I enquire to why you seconded it then?
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    lmao MHoC trying to overthrow TSR
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    First of all the speaker will not be able to do 1.1.7 to my knowledge because for even the CT to do that they need to access the computers in the office.
    If TSR is still based on vBulletin, then you don't. You just need certain permissions on your account.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    May I enquire to why you seconded it then?
    I would not be against full autonomy for the MHoC if it was granted, but it as a big issue for me as the current set up is fine. I agreed to second it as I am not strongly against the amendment, and I stand by the comment I made earlier in the Common's Bar for anyone looking for seconders.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I would not be against full autonomy for the MHoC if it was granted, but it as a big issue for me as the current set up is fine. I agreed to second it as I am not strongly against the amendment, and I stand by the comment I made earlier in the Common's Bar for anyone looking for seconders.
    I didn't see your post, and that is fair enough in my books, more debate is what we need.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    If TSR is still based on vBulletin, then you don't. You just need certain permissions on your account.
    Having spoken to the CT in the past they need to access the data from the office which is what I'm told. Probably something to do with being a student site and keeping students safe.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Aye.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Having spoken to the CT in the past they need to access the data from the office which is what I'm told. Probably something to do with being a student site and keeping students safe.
    They don't 'need to' - they probably choose to. But I would question that anyway as I have seen CT members modding late at night when they won't be in the office.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I don't really care.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Absolutely no need to prohibit the CT from undertaking duties should they wish, and good luck not getting this vetoed by them if it does pass.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    They don't 'need to' - they probably choose to. But I would question that anyway as I have seen CT members modding late at night when they won't be in the office.
    Yes, the CT can mod late at night and there are special CT paid to do that but group rights, database searches ect. Are only done in the office.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    RayApparently unless you have run this via the CT first I would condemn you for accepting this.

    First of all the speaker will not be able to do 1.1.7 to my knowledge because for even the CT to do that they need to access the computers in the office.
    Allowing access to the Government sub-forum will be most likely down to them setting which usergroups can view and edit etc that sub-forum. For the CC, Parties, MP usergroup... the permissions of those groups are set out so we can, when given permission, accept and remove members.

    For the government sub-forum, I agree, that's probably something the CT will continue to have to do, as the Speaker doesn't have access to modCP (I presume!). For the rest of 1.1.7, the Speaker already does that.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    A122 - Autonomy for the TSR MHoC Amendment, The Rt Hon. Unown Uzer MPProposed by: The Rt Hon. Unown Uzer MP (UKIP)
    Seconded by: The Rt Hon. nebelbon MP (UKIP), the Hon. hazzer1998 MP (CON), the Hon. Wellzi MP (UKIP), the Rt Hon. Nigel Farage MEP MP (UKIP)
    Autonomy for the TSR MHoC Amendment
    The following shall be added to the Model House of Commons constitution in the section: "The Speaker":

    1.1.7) add or remove members from the TSR Government sub-forum, TSR Crisis Committee usergroup, and MP usergroup when necessary.
    This would require a TSR Government usergroup to be created then because at the moment, the only way you can remove a member from the Government subforum is to remove them from their respective party as well given how the permissions are set. In addition, I do feel that this is another case of over codifying, I mean do we really need an amendment saying that the Speaker can add and remove people from the CC and the MP usergroup? No, not really.

    A new section shall be added to the Model House of Commons constitution, named: "Community Team Intervention".

    The following shall be added to the Model House of Commons constitution in the section: "Community Team Intervention".

    14.1) The Community Team may not carry out any administrative duties within the TSR MHoC or sub-forums listed under the TSR MHoC sub-forum unless:

    14.1.1) the intervention is for the purpose of enforcing TSR Community Guidelines

    14.1.2) the House votes (where the number 'ayes' exceeds the number of 'noes' ) to give the Community Team administrative powers in the TSR MHoC, Division Lobby, or TSR Crisis Committee for a temporary period of time

    14.1.3) the Speaker, Deputy Speaker, or any member of the Support Team responsible for Debate & Current Affairs give permission for the Community Team to carry out administrative duties for a temporary period of time

    14.2) The Speaker, Deputy Speaker, and Support Team members in charge of the TSR MHoC or sub-forums listed under the TSR MHoC shall be responsible for all administrative duties given up by the Community Team.

    Notes:The Community Team have been known to be overburdened with work and there have been multiple cases where it has taken a very long period of time after a request was sent to them before the request was actually fulfilled. This amendment aims to reduce the workload of the CT and offer more autonomy for the TSR MHoC, where the elected Speaker can administer the MHoC without having to go through a bureaucratic process.[/field]
    This is where I have a big problem - what this amendment says is that we, the free users of this site, want to tell the Community Team, consisting of the owners of the site and company staff, what they can and can't do in their own forum. To me that it is ludicrous and is something which the CT aren't bound by even if we vote on it, so I don't see why we are. Additionally, I feel that devolving such matters down from the Speakership team to the House, even though the Speakership team can still involve the CT, is a path we should not be treading down, we risk it becoming moderation by committee. Finally, what are these administrative powers in particular? The term seems poorly defined. I urge everyone to vote no on this, the status quo works perfectly fine and CT have not intervened recently in the MHoC so I see no reason for this amendment.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 3, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.