Editorial Council Resolution 0007: Editorial Council membership rules

[Larry Sanger]

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.

I'm not sure that's true, Steve.  Examples would help.

[Supten]

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?

For those who want to be refreshed about the duties of the Editorial Council, a look at http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Editorial_Council_Rules_of_Procedure may be in order.

[Supten]

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

Not necessarily, especially if you look at the technological innovations and literary and other artistic advances made by so many dropouts from various schools all around the globe.

[Supten]

No, I was not referring to author participation, which I support. I meant solely in terms of its structural position, it will be largely staffed by people with a temporary presence, who will feel awkward about confrontations on issues which they are new to. There has to be a balance between permanent and transient in any governance structure. Look at the US Supreme Court for an example of permanance; or various Italian governments in the last decades for examples of transience. Something in between is desirable.

I am sure that at the end of this discussion period there will be significant amendments to the original resolution, followed by voting on the amendments, as outlined in http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Editorial_Council_Rules_of_Procedure

[Stephen Ewen]

I'm not sure that's true, Steve.  Examples would help.

My point is that I can't confidently produce that, accounting for all statements on the matter.  I'd like to see a codified limits/rights statement on EC purview.  That seems a foundational tabulation for all other evaluations, I think you'll agree.

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

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.

Well, it is not so obvious, I suppose. It is an argument about institutions which underpins this comment: institutions evolve through a learning process, which is specific and to a great extent predicated on the character and interactions of its original participants as well as its structure and structural context. [Sorry this is so heavy] I had imagined the CZ Editorial Council to be a sort of guiding force from experts on how to set standards and quality, while also attending to the needs of authors and editors. This implies a degree of permanance of its composition -- how permanent, I won't try to say.

Your resolution seems to be redrafting the concept to be more like a governing chamber, than a consultative council. It bears more analogy with a parliament, than with an expert advisory body. I always thought that was more suitable as the role for the Executive Committee.

So, the temporary occupants of the Ed. Council will in theory have a lot of power, but I doubt that in practice it will be evident. If they respond to their "voters" they will tend to follow popular opinion; this is not so bad, but it is different from offering independent advice. Even if there is some degree of independent thinking going on, the lack of people with experience in that post has implications for the learning experience of the institution itself.

I think what I am saying is what I said in an earlier post, that there has to be a mechanism for continuity of the institution, somewhere between the example of the US Supreme Court and what is now proposed. The current proposal may lead to a GREATER political role, rather than less, for the Ed. Council, which I know is the opposite of what you intend. At the same time, for the reasons I offer above, the actual effectiveness of such an institution may be less and its real power thereby reduced.

These are preliminary thoughts, and I am open to any sort of comment on them.

[Paul_Ellsworth]

Having read a number of posts and being very interested in participating, let me pitch in from an outside view.

I utterly reject the idea that a person should have to be a college graduate in order to be an Editor. There isn't a college graduate requirement for congress, for mayor of a town, or all local "real world" newspapers (though most are college grads anyway) to run for President of the US, or any number of other real world important stuff.

I liken the current status of the Citizendium to being like an early continental congress, so I'm asking something along the lines of "If Benjamin Franklin were available today with his wit and wisdom, but no degree, would you exclude him from your list of editor's if he volunteered?" That said, Ben had built up a body of wisdom that was well recognized, even if no degree is in place.  So a person ought to be able to be nominated to become an editor no matter what their education.  With an appropriate editorial council resolution supporting either a voting committee or quorum count required to approve a person becoming an editor.  In my case someday I think it would be cool to be on the Citizendium editorial council -- if and when I have made sufficient contributions -- yet I have no intent on going back to finish my college degree simply so that I can do so.

Secondarily, in the body of the main resolution, I wasn't sure where an author had to edit in order to be considered for the editorial council...  I read it as being "main page", but I think you meant "in the main wiki".

[Larry Sanger]

Hey Paul, please sign up for a Citizendium account.  The forums are "Citizens only."  [Added later: or is this you? http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Paul_C_Ellsworth ]

Folks, Paul Ellsworth is at work on software that digitizes parliamentary procedure.  It's really, really exciting.

To respond to one substantive point Paul makes: there is a huge difference between the U.S. Congress and the Citizendium, viz., the latter is an expert-guided reference project, and the former is the legislature of a country and every aspect of the lives of people in the country.  I agree that there should not be education requirements for government representatives; but for an expert-guided reference project, it might make sense.

[Aleta Curry]

Having read a number of posts and being very interested in participating, let me pitch in from an outside view.

I utterly reject the idea that a person should have to be a college graduate in order to be an Editor. There isn't a college graduate requirement for congress, for mayor of a town, or all local "real world" newspapers (though most are college grads anyway) to run for President of the US, or any number of other real world important stuff.

Not sure where this came from, Paul.  We already do have editors who don't have university degrees.  They're a minority, but they do exist.  I mean, we would surely let Jimmy Breslin or Mikhail Baryshnikov become editors?

[Martin Baldwin-Edwards]

Well, it is my contention that the Editorial Council should not be like a Congress. On the other hand, there is no reason why people without university degrees cannot be Editors -- provided that they have sufficient expertise in an area. I hadn't realised that Baryshnikov had applied -- did we reject him, then, Aleta? 

[Denis Cavanagh]

Personally I think the editors/Constables age cutoffs are a little irritating. I have no desire to be a constable, but surely people of a younger age (Such as 19 year olds like myself who are deeply committed to this project) should have an equal voice to someone who is 30 years old? A certain academic cutoff  should be in place for editors of course, such as having a PhD (How else would we have experts?) but I'm not convinced on the necessity of age cut-offs for constables. All this said however, its important that some decorum is maintained in the EC. My opinion is that for now the Council should comprise only two or three authors, with provision for more authors as time goes on.

[Larry Sanger]

Well, it is my contention that the Editorial Council should not be like a Congress. On the other hand, there is no reason why people without university degrees cannot be Editors -- provided that they have sufficient expertise in an area. I hadn't realised that Baryshnikov had applied -- did we reject him, then, Aleta? 

That's interesting--what do you mean when you say it should not be "like a Congress"?  In what way shouldn't it be?

[Aleta Curry]

My interpretation of Martin's earlier post was that the Council should be advisory, i.e. giving expert advice, as opposed to parliamentary, representing the interest of constituents.  But I should probably let Martin speak (write) for himself.

[Denis Cavanagh]

What exactly is the role of the Council? An advisory body? A decision making Unit? A group that chooses the Editor in Chief? I'm quite unsure. I'm sure like most of us here that we agree Larry deserves major control of the project, especially in this, its early phase. (When the creator deserves both the time and support to implement the ideas necessary to continue its expansion)

[Aleta Curry]

Hi Denis-see Supten's reply No. 31, above