Editorial Council Resolution 0007: Editorial Council membership rules

[Robert_W_King]

I think we have a real opportunity here to change the status quo on age-ist policies.

[Hayford Peirce]

Pitt the Younger was Prime Minister at 24.  The U.S. Constitution stipulates that Representatives shall be at least 25 (this was a while before Pitt came along), that Senators shall be 30, and Presidents 35.

That said, I do think that some sorts (plural) of age limits should be drawn up.  I think, for instance, that anyone in a Constabulary position should be older than an Author, and that an Editor should also be older than an Author.  Whether calmness, judgment, and disinterested decision making grow with age can, of course, be argued, but I myself would say that, all things considered, they do.  So why not a U.S. Constitution-type of hierarchy?

Beginning, mebbe, with 65, the age of truly distinguished Solons like Yours Truly, hehe

[Stephen Ewen]

I think we have a real opportunity here to change the status quo on age-ist policies.

Why not have the body made up of 50/50 editors/authors?

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

I think there is a reason to have a majority of editors -- to guide CZ with experience of research, publication and quality control. Something like 2/3 editors is my suggestion.

[Aleta Curry]

... I do think that some sorts (plural) of age limits should be drawn up.  I think, for instance, that anyone in a Constabulary position should be older than an Author, and that an Editor should also be older than an Author....

Hayford, we may have a problem if all editors have to be older than you!      (Who told you to put your DOB on your user page?) 

[Stephen Ewen]

I think there is a reason to have a majority of editors -- to guide CZ with experience of research, publication and quality control. Something like 2/3 editors is my suggestion.

Do PhDs have a corner on that over other professional people?  Say, a business owner, a novelist, a journalist? 

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

No, which is why newspapers print absolute crap most of the time, especially about scientific and economic issues.

Actually, some high quality newspapers do have PhD journalists. I was interviewed by one with a PhD in economics from Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung who wrote an excellent article. Probably his editor also had a PhD: Germans take these things seriously.

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

That said, I do think that some sorts (plural) of age limits should be drawn up.  I think, for instance, that anyone in a Constabulary position should be older than an Author, and that an Editor should also be older than an Author. 

Yes, well, then perhaps the Editor-in-Chief should be older than the Editors, which means Larry needs to be at least 70.

[RJensen]

>>Pitt the Younger was Prime Minister at 24<< And more to the point, Newton, Einstein and Watson were 25 when they made their great discoveries. But an encyclopedia is not the place to announce e=mc^2  People with spectacular new ideas should be grad students in physics, not editors at CZ.   

[Aleta Curry]

Well, look, do we all agree on what, exactly, the Editorial Council are required to do?  I ask because we might all agree that a certain amount of life experience/maturity is required (or preferred) in order to do XYZ in a competent manner.  One might also consider how the sustained responsibility will affect the immature person--would being on the Editorial Council at CZ leave a sensitive 16-year-old scarred for life?

While we're looking at the subject of age requirements historically (and this may be where Martin is going with this) there's nothing consistent about how westerners have looked at age.  If the punishment for stealing was having a hand chopped off, you got your hand chopped off; didn't matter if you were young.  How old were Major Andre and Nathan Hale when they were hanged?  Of course, that all changed with the Victorians, but things are not really so settled even now.  From what I read coming from America, people are continually revisting when children can be tried as adults, when they can consent to sex, up till quite recently there were universities where women had curfews (maybe still some in more conservative enclaves even now?) so girls were old enough to legally vote, but not to decide when to go to bed! 

At what age can one...drive a car...get married...be conscripted to the millitary...carry a gun?  We're still talking about societies where you need to be a minimum age to marry, but anyone can have a baby.  Go figure.

So Steve, age is a bit more complicated of a matter than your posts would have us believe.

[Joe Quick]

I think there is a reason to have a majority of editors -- to guide CZ with experience of research, publication and quality control. Something like 2/3 editors is my suggestion.

Do PhDs have a corner on that over other professional people?  Say, a business owner, a novelist, a journalist? 

No, but many of the people in those positions are also eligible to be editors. 

I think it's quite a good idea for the editorial council to have more seats for editors than for authors.  Its role, in my mind at least, is to deal with setting policies for the functions that are assigned to editors: approval, article policy, etc.  So editors should be well represented.  Authors should clearly have a voice but I doubt that they need a fifty percent voice for their concerns to be heard.  The judicial board will deal with non-editorial conflicts so there is a better argument to be made for including authors more prominently there.

---------

As far as age limits go, I think invoking ageism here is silly.  Maturity is far more important.  Maturity comes with age -- maybe not at the same age for everyone, but life experience is required.  I do think 30 is a bit extreme though; I like to think that I have some sense about me at the tender age of 23.

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

As far as age limits go, I think invoking ageism here is silly.  Maturity is far more important.  Maturity comes with age -- maybe not at the same age for everyone, but life experience is required.  I do think 30 is a bit extreme though; I like to think that I have some sense about me at the tender age of 23.

I agree completely, Joe. I have met too many immature idiots [including ones with PhDs] who are 40+ to think that any proxy measure is  reliable: statistically, they mean something, but that is not helpful for a small editorial board. Let's make rules where we really need them, but not precise inflexible rules with approximate rationales. I hate those.

[Stephen Ewen]

Its role, in my mind at least, is to deal with setting policies for the functions that are assigned to editors: approval, article policy, etc. 

That's the rub.  It is not really limited to just such things but basically has broad authority over anything and everything that happens on the wiki - basically, authority over whatever your eyes may see when you visit CZ, except as that may be purely technical. That's why, even if only for PR matters, 50/50 might be a good idea.   I actually don't see vote outcomes being really any different with such a composition, but again, it may be a very good idea for PR reasons and so as to raise the perceptions of legitimacy and make authors feel they are really vested.   

Also, with regard to age, I think it likely that CZ will one day have a majority of authors under 25.  This is not to pick on age, but if authors are picked through sortion, then the ones with substantial life experience are necessarily at a numerical disadvantage for being selected.  That strikes as just a plain stupid way to go.

[Larry Sanger]

Yes, the resolution significantly reduces the current power and autonomy of the Editorial Council. Whether or not this is desirable, I leave for others to say.

How does it do that?  I don't understand.

[Larry Sanger]

Why would the founders of the U.S. Constitution place a minimum age of 30 to serve as a representative in Congress?

One cannot be a constable unless 25 and a college graduate.  Why?  But one can be in the EC if 15?  16?  18?  How is this congruent?

You've got a good point there, Steve.  I'm inclined to add a minimum age limit; I also would be inclined to add a minimum education level.  Such things just didn't occur to me.  I might be willing to forego the minimums for the elected positions.

The disputation here would look very similar to that which we had over minimum requirements for constables.  When Robert says, with perfect justification, that young people can make very valuable governance contributions, he can't be gainsaid.  But I still support minimums, perhaps supplemented with "youth representatives"; it is a matter, in short, of probabilities, fairness, and feasibility.  Generally, but not universally, younger people have immature judgment, but maturity of judgment is crucial in governance.  If there were a fair way to test young people for mature judgment, then we would have a test we could use on everyone.  But I would not trust any test, or test administrator, to make decisions about who is "in" and who is "out."  Some combination of age and education is an imperfect, but fair, indicator.

This is why there are some pretty young people on the Executive Committee--the youngest is, I think, 19 or 20.  Another fellow just graduated from college but I don't know how old he is.  I feel very comfortable with these guys on the committee; they both provide invaluable help and useful insight.  But since I know them, I can appoint them directly.  In the same light we might recognize unusual ability and judgment of people below the minimums (whatever they are) by vote.

All this said, I utterly reject that any of the policies we have in place, or contemplated here, are "ageist."  Is it "ageist" to deny 14 year olds the vote?  (Please don't answer that...)