The ASB Constitution

[ZhengTann]

This thread will be tightly moderated to keep discussion focused. ​

Ever since the start of the 4th Council term, concerns about the ASB Constitution being outdated has been voiced out. That was 3 months ago, but (IMHO) due to promotion of users Texas Cloverleaf, Its_a_Random, and Dogfish44 into moderators (which, IIRC happens around that period), ASB is in a state of transition of powers, so it was put off. Now, as a community, we shall look into the ASB Constitution again, in hopes of keeping it up to date, at least for months to come. Here is the original ASB Constitution, broken down into Chapters:

Introduction

The ASB Constitution:

The aim of the Anime Style Battling Council is to rationally, quickly and efficiently judge and implement proposed for ASB by the larger ASB Community. It aims to build upon, not revert, the existing spirit of ASB by approving proposals that strengthens the mechanics of the game. The ASB Council recognises that changes are made only to fix an existing flaw in existing mechanics, or to make incremental improvements by way of small inclusions.

Chapter I

CHAPTER I: Selecting the Council

1. All council members are selected by a vote by the eligible ASB community, and
   • The eligible ASB community is defined as the users who have had no less than one month experience in ASB.
   • The vote is private, and will be sent to a standing member on the council via PM.
   • This voting will take place every six months, which will be the term of a council, and there are no restrictions on any user serving on consecutive councils.
   • The seven people who have achieved the most amount of votes from the community will be selected to be seated on the council.
2. There will be seven council members elected, and
   • They may step down voluntarily at any point during their term.
   • If at any time there are less than seven active users in the council, the council will decide among themselves via a vote who the replacement user will be, and the decision will be carried out in an efficient and timely manner.
3. Council members have a moderated but public social group that consists of the seven council members.
4. At any time, a member of the council may call a vote of no confidence (or of inactivity) regarding a fellow council member, and the active members of the council will engage a private vote regarding the member’s involvement in the council, and if only if there are no votes cast for keeping the council member, that user is ejected from the council. The period of inactivity must be a minimum of 2 weeks without doing anything ASB related.

Chapter II

CHAPTER II: System Changes

1. If a proposed change to the ASB system gains considerable support, be it on IRC or the Feedback thread, the council may make a decision on its implementation, under the following guidelines:
   • The proposal must be at least a week old before the council begins council discussion and voting on the proposal, so as to give all users a chance to respond to the proposal.
   • After the time has passed and the community response to the proposed change is still positive, the council may begin private discussion and voting process.
   • If the vote passes, the change is considered implemented in any way the council decrees, so long as there is no veto present from a relevant power.
2. Proposals that lie within the council’s control include changes to specific moves, abilities, items, minor changes to game mechanics, and any major change to the game’s mechanics must also obtain a public approval from Deck Knight, such major proposals including but not limited to,
   • Changes to how damage is calculated, or to the concept of the battle system as a whole.
   • Inclusion of a mechanic that lies outside of the existing spirit and rule-set of ASB.
3. In cases where a motion has been passed for a decision that directly alters or amends powers given to the ASB Council, that is to say anything not initially agreed upon as to their role and power, a decision towards the motion regarding the powers granted to the ASB Council must be dictated by Deck Knight, the only authority greater than the ASB Council and thus outside the conflict of interest.
4. Voting takes place through the following process:
   • Satisfying guidelines for a proposal, a member of the council creates two new threads in the Council Social Group (ASB council plans) for the proposal, one titled DISCUSSION and the other VOTING, outlining the proposal in the Original Post of both threads, in the Council Social Group.
   • The council may discuss among themselves on IRC (#ASBCouncil) or on the discussion thread in the Council Social Group, at all times taking into account feedback from non-Council members.
   • The council will in due time publicly vote in the voting thread created for that proposal.
   • If the proposed change receives a majority vote from the council, it is considered implemented and the change announced in all relevant areas.

And here is the Amendment on how proposals will be done (Chapter II, item 1)

Hide

Proposal for how proposals are done (amended):

Feedback thread is redone. A proposal is posted, and rather than debate the proposal in the thread people quote the post and say either "I support this proposal and wish to move this to a discussion", or "I disagree with this proposal and wish to move it to discussion". Alternatively, a person can respond with "I agree with this proposal but do not believe this proposal should go to discussion" or "I disagree with this proposal and believe it should not be slated for discussion". The first five votes will be counted.

If in the five votes on a proposal, at least two say to not move to debate, the council members can amongst themselves through private chats/IRC take any option:

• Instantly vote to implement the proposal
• Move proposal to discussion
• Ignore the proposal entirely

If fewer than two of the first five votes say to not move to debate, the council will default to moving the proposal to discussion. Whichever course of action the council decides on will be posted in the feedback thread.

Assumming a proposal garners the required support to discuss, a discussion is then opened. Discussion will last until such time that the discussion has either become inactive or gotten out of hand (at the discretion of the council). Once this point has been reached, council members will hold a public vote, using single vote for polls with 2 options and IRV for polls with more than 2 options. The options shall consist of the current system (ie, no change), the original proposal and any amended proposals with decent support. If, after all council members have voted, the vote is tied or otherwise in deadlock, Deck Knight reserves the right to cast a tiebreaking vote. If this still results in a tie in a poll that uses IRV, there will be another vote between the remaining options in that poll.

In the event that a proposal does not get five votes on it within 25 posts of its inception, the proposal may be bumped by making a post containing a link to the proposal and additional links to all votes cast on the proposal with the stances being mentioned in the post. This process may be repeated as necessary every 25 posts after each bump; however, if a proposal ends up with four votes on it twice in a row, the council may make a decision to veto, discuss or implement the proposal based on the votes so far.

* * * * *​

This may seem like a lot to discuss, but surely we can do this, by starting off small - kidding, we can't. The very object of discussion requires us to start big. VERY BIG.

• Is it necessary to retain the ASB Constitution, or should it be abolished or replaced?
  
• Being the very foundation of the ASB Council itself, would the Council be retained, abolished, or replaced, along with the Constitution?

Questions that weigh heavy indeed. But as an ASBer who is always up for a dialogue, I do ask that we bear them and weigh our responses, because this is one of the very few (if not the first) times that the Constitution is in serious discussion ever since it's inception upon the keyboard of a literal firebrand. Even if you think of yourself as a new user, your feedback will be much appreciated, and you can read back on that linked thread to understand the past.

Fire away ^_^

 

[Dogfish44]

Remove the contitution, but retain the council. I'm fairly sure we can trust the council to behave in a sensible manner -.-'

Or at very least update this constitution:

• Chapter I.1: Update to the 3 Month Cycle, acknowledge that it's a public vote.
• Chapter I.3: No longer a social group, instead note the existence of the IRC Channel or remove entirely.
• Chapter II.1: Remove - most changes the council makes are small ones that don't need a week. This also means remove the amendment -__-
• Chapter II.2: With DK's power change this probably wants a look at.
• Chapter II.3: See above
• Chapter II.4: Update to account for the loss of Social Groups

 

[Deck Knight]

As far as sections II.2 and II.3:

II.2 is pretty much fine as is. The only changes I'm concerned with are ones that change it to an entirely different game.
II.3 can be mostly scrubbed because II.2 enumerates the only remaining power I consider important to my ownership role, and the Council's powers at current pretty much end at that edge anyway.

The amended language would be:

II.2: Proposals that lie within the council’s control include changes to specific moves, abilities, items, minor changes to game mechanics, and any major change to the game’s mechanics must also obtain a public approval from Deck Knight, such major proposals including but not limited to,

• Changes to how damage is calculated, or to the concept of the battle system as a whole.
• Inclusion of a mechanic that lies outside of the existing spirit and rule-set of ASB.

II.3: Any decision passed by majority vote of the council that directly alters or amends powers given to the ASB Council, that is to say anything not initially agreed upon as to their role and power, is considered to be in effect unless it grants a power or powers that would violate section II.2.

 

[ZhengTann]

I'm in favour of removing Chapter I.3 entirely, since it's a restricted channel and we don't have the manpower nor the need to maintain it.

And looking at the Amendment part, I do not think it needs to be abolished. Right now we have a couple of issues just sitting right there in Feedback because no one in the Council thinks that they could/should create a thread for discussion/voting. So what I would like to propose is a simple solution.

• Anyone may put an idea forward in the Feedback thread.
• Anyone else that agrees that it should be discussed (even if they hate the idea, or have a better one of their own) can hit the "Like" on that post. Comments may still be provided on individual proposals, if deemed necessary.
  
• Once a Council member sees an arbitrary amount of likes (5, or maybe 3, since Policy Center doesn't get much attention), a Discussion thread may be opened.

This way, we can cut down on the postcount issues (no need for one-liner posts saying "Support, Discuss") and keep a decent track on Feedback. This also allows Council members to act independently, since it would be difficult to be online at the same time to agree on whether to discuss Proposal A, B, and C. Anyways, here's the updated Constitution, in keeping with the lack of social groups, #asbcouncil, term period, and Deck's amendment above.

Slightly Updated Constitution

The ASB Constitution:

The aim of the Anime Style Battling Council is to rationally, quickly and efficiently judge and implement proposed for ASB by the larger ASB Community. It aims to build upon, not revert, the existing spirit of ASB by approving proposals that strengthens the mechanics of the game. The ASB Council recognises that changes are made only to fix an existing flaw in existing mechanics, or to make incremental improvements by way of small inclusions.

CHAPTER I: Selecting the Council

1. All council members are selected by a vote by the eligible ASB community, and
   • The eligible ASB community is defined as the users who have had no less than one month experience in ASB.
   • The vote is public, and will be conducted in the Policy Center subforum by a forum moderator.
   • This voting will take place every three months, which will be the term of a council, and there are no restrictions on any user serving on consecutive councils.
   • The seven people who have achieved the most amount of votes from the community will be selected to be seated on the council.
2. There will be seven council members elected, and
   • They may step down voluntarily at any point during their term.
   • If at any time there are less than seven active users in the council, the council will decide among themselves via a vote who the replacement user will be, and the decision will be carried out in an efficient and timely manner.
3. At any time, a member of the council may call a vote of no confidence (or of inactivity) regarding a fellow council member, and the active members of the council will engage a private vote regarding the member’s involvement in the council, and if only if there are no votes cast for keeping the council member, that user is ejected from the council. The period of inactivity must be a minimum of 2 weeks without doing anything ASB related.

CHAPTER II: System Changes

1. If a proposed change to the ASB system gains considerable support, be it on IRC or the Feedback thread, the council may make a decision on its implementation, under the following guidelines:
   • After a proposal is posted, people may quote the post and say either "I support this proposal and wish to move this to a discussion", or "I disagree with this proposal and wish to move it to discussion". Alternatively, a person can respond with "I agree with this proposal but do not believe this proposal should go to discussion" or "I disagree with this proposal and believe it should not be slated for discussion". The first five votes will be counted.
   • Assuming a proposal garners the required support to discuss, a discussion is then opened. Discussion will last until such time that the discussion has either become inactive or gotten out of hand (at the discretion of the council).
     
   • Once this point has been reached, council members will hold a public vote, using single vote for polls with 2 options and IRV for polls with more than 2 options. The options shall consist of the current system (ie, no change), the original proposal and any amended proposals with decent support.
   • If the vote passes, the change is considered implemented in any way the council decrees, so long as there is no veto present from a relevant power.
2. Proposals that lie within the council’s control include changes to specific moves, abilities, items, minor changes to game mechanics, and any major change to the game’s mechanics must also obtain a public approval from Deck Knight, such major proposals including but not limited to,
   • Changes to how damage is calculated, or to the concept of the battle system as a whole.
   • Inclusion of a mechanic that lies outside of the existing spirit and rule-set of ASB.
3. Any decision passed by majority vote of the council that directly alters or amends powers given to the ASB Council, that is to say anything not initially agreed upon as to their role and power, is considered to be in effect unless it grants a power or powers that would violate section II.2.
4. Voting takes place through the following process:
   • Satisfying guidelines for a proposal, a member of the council creates two new threads in the Policy Center subforum for the proposal, one titled DISCUSSION and the other VOTING, outlining the proposal in the Original Post of both threads, in the Council Social Group.
   • The council may discuss among themselves on IRC (#capasb) or on the discussion thread in the Council Social Group, at all times taking into account feedback from non-Council members.
   • The council will in due time publicly vote in the voting thread created for that proposal.
   • If the proposed change receives a majority vote from the council, it is considered implemented and the change announced in all relevant areas.

And since this thread has been inactive for a long time, let's put a 48-hour window before I rewrite the Constitution according to feedback from this thread. Note that we do need more support than a word or two from a moderator, so please provide comments if you're one of the few that was calling for a Constitution update.

 

[ZhengTann]

Since nobody said anything about this, I suppose that means that as long as it is written well within reason, we'd have no problems following this. So I present to you an amended version. Main changes include:

• Amending II.1 to make use of the "Like post" feature in the forum. This will at least help the Council decide if any issue raised in Feedback warrants a separate Discussion/Voting thread.

The ASB Constitution:

The aim of the Anime Style Battling Council is to rationally, quickly and efficiently judge and implement proposed for ASB by the larger ASB Community. It aims to build upon, not revert, the existing spirit of ASB by approving proposals that strengthens the mechanics of the game. The ASB Council recognises that changes are made only to fix an existing flaw in existing mechanics, or to make incremental improvements by way of small inclusions.

CHAPTER I: Selecting the Council

1. All council members are selected by a vote by the eligible ASB community, and
   • The eligible ASB community is defined as the users who have had no less than one month experience in ASB.
   • The vote is public, and will be conducted in the Policy Center subforum by a forum moderator.
   • This voting will take place every three months, which will be the term of a council, and there are no restrictions on any user serving on consecutive councils.
   • The seven people who have achieved the most amount of votes from the community will be selected to be seated on the council.
2. There will be seven council members elected, and
   • They may step down voluntarily at any point during their term.
   • If at any time there are less than seven active users in the council, the council will decide among themselves via a vote who the replacement user will be, and the decision will be carried out in an efficient and timely manner.
3. At any time, a member of the council may call a vote of no confidence (or of inactivity) regarding a fellow council member, and the active members of the council will engage a private vote regarding the member’s involvement in the council, and if only if there are no votes cast for keeping the council member, that user is ejected from the council. The period of inactivity must be a minimum of 2 weeks without doing anything ASB related.

CHAPTER II: System Changes

1. If a proposed change to the ASB system gains considerable support on the Feedback thread, the council may make a decision on its implementation, under the following guidelines:
   • After a proposal is posted, people may like the post. Alternatively, the post may be quoted, and another user may provide feedback towards the proposal to help garner attention and support.
     
   • Assuming a proposal garners the required support to discuss (being "liked" and/or quoted 5 times or more), a discussion is then opened. Discussion will last until such time that the discussion has either become inactive or gotten out of hand (at the discretion of the council).
     
   • Once this point has been reached, council members will hold a public vote, using single vote for polls with 2 options and IRV for polls with more than 2 options. The options shall consist of the current system (ie, no change), the original proposal and any amended proposals with decent support.
   • If the vote passes, the change is considered implemented in any way the council decrees, so long as there is no veto present from a relevant power.
2. Proposals that lie within the council’s control include changes to specific moves, abilities, items, minor changes to game mechanics, and any major change to the game’s mechanics must also obtain a public approval from Deck Knight, such major proposals including but not limited to,
   • Changes to how damage is calculated, or to the concept of the battle system as a whole.
   • Inclusion of a mechanic that lies outside of the existing spirit and rule-set of ASB.
3. Any decision passed by majority vote of the council that directly alters or amends powers given to the ASB Council, that is to say anything not initially agreed upon as to their role and power, is considered to be in effect unless it grants a power or powers that would violate section II.2.
4. Voting takes place through the following process:
   • Satisfying guidelines for a proposal, a member of the council creates two new threads in the Policy Center subforum for the proposal, one titled DISCUSSION and the other VOTING, outlining the proposal in the Original Post of both threads, in the Council Social Group.
   • The council may discuss among themselves on IRC (#capasb) or on the discussion thread in the Council Social Group, at all times taking into account feedback from non-Council members.
   • The council will in due time publicly vote in the voting thread created for that proposal.
   • If the proposed change receives a majority vote from the council, it is considered implemented and the change announced in all relevant areas.

Tagging moderators Its_A_Random, Dogfish44, and Texas Cloverleaf for a final review. If you three could just like this post, I'll edit it into my post #2 at Feedback (or you guys can do it if you have the time ^_^)

EDIT: This has been put into Feedback for instant implementation. If anyone has a beef with it, feel free to raise the issue again.