Editorial Council Resolution 0010: Romanization

[Russell D. Jones]

Thank you for the clarification, Martin.  Sorry to be out of order.

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

Thank you for the clarification, Martin.  Sorry to be out of order.

I didn't mean to reprimand: I was just trying to provide info about the procedure. You have to make a motion by email to the Editorial Council list, as explained (in horrible detail) in the EC Rules of Procedure. If anyone wants to propose a specific motion, then contact me or ask here and I will advise. Otherwise, we will proceed to a vote on Res. 10 on Friday.

[J. Noel Chiappa]

It's not a policy. It's a set of policies. Each language has to have it's own policy set out. So the main Romanization page doesn't contain the policy, it is merely the portal to a set of sub pages that each contain their own policy for an individual language or script.

True, but the main page does contain some general guidelines, such as 'use an existing Romantization system, so people reading books outside CZ will recognize names here', etc.

Noel

[J. Noel Chiappa]

If we are to have expert editors, surely they can point to the common academic usage? ... One of the benefits of expert editors is that it should reduce the amount of bureaucracy and policy that's required reading for authors.

Alas, even experts can disagree - and often do! :-) (And when they disagree, it's often even more of a titanic battle, because they are even surer than an ordinary mortal that they are right... :-)

Think how many pages of policy one has to read on Wikipedia in order to get to the point where one can be an effective author.

Good point, though.

"Follow common usage"

Oh, that is a neat site. Thanks muchly for that pointer....

Noel

[Brian P Long]

A point of order:

If I am going to offer an amendment to the Resolution, should I send the text of my amendment with my email to the Editorial Council? Is the wording I hack out in the next couple of hours the be-all, end-all wording of the amendment, or can it be revised?

If I will not be able to amend the text, I will probably motion for another extension of the discussion period so that I can get the wording just so.

Thanks,
Brian

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

Brian: it is sufficient for you to announce to the Editorial Council mailing list that you have an intention to amend. With this, we can delay voting to give you time to work out something. I would also encourage you to work this out with participation from Members on a special amendment page, attached to the Resolution page. I will set this up for you. So, just send a notice of intention to amend to the mailing list, and stipulate how much time (realistically) you need the voting to be delayed by. I suggest at least another 14 days, but it is your decision.

[Brian P Long]

Thanks Martin. I was thinking that it would probably only take me a few days to work out the text of the amendment, but, upon reflection, it will probably take longer than that to get the folks who have contributed to this discussion to weigh in.

My sense of it is that everyone involved in this discussion has a slightly different sense of how we should proceed on the question of Romanization/Anglicanization/Naming Conventions. I just want to offer an amendment that spells out my opinion, and get an up-and-down vote. As I understand normal parliamentary procedure, the amender "owns" an amendment, and no one is able to change the text (though I think that someone else might be able to offer an amendment to the first amendment). Is this accurate?

Citizendium's version of parliamentary procedure is different in that no-one owns the text of a given amendment, and collaboration on the wording is encouraged.

I realize these questions stray from our current topic, but is this an accurate representation of the way Citizendium has adapted parliamentary procedure to our purposes?

-Brian

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

Anyone can offer amendments to anything, as i see the rules. However, the motion to amend is itself debatable. For the purposes of this amendment, I have asked the Chair to extend debate for 14 days (the Chair action can be challenged, if people really object). This is an easier way to proceed, rather than debating and voting on whether to allow you to amend your own resolution!

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

Please note the new page for the proposed revisions/ amendment. The page is currently blank but will be open for discussion on the related Talk page when there is some content.

http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Editorial_Council_Resolution_0010/Draft_Amendment