This is not (yet) an official project page. For now, refer to the original rules and regulations.
Citizendium's governance and content rules are established by the Citizendium Council, and must be in accordance with the Charter. Rules established by previous governing bodies are upheld by the Council, except where they contradict new rulings. (The second Editorial Council voted to uphold all existing [content] rules in 2011.)
The following is a list of rules established since the project was founded [hope is to collect all of them, including old EC rules], ordered by topic and relative importance. (Missing: rules on technical issues; rules passed by second Editorial Council or referendum - see lists. Some rules may be misfiled or wrongly-ranked.)
- FDN: foundational, i.e. rules which emerged early on through consensus or decisions of the Editor-in-Chief.
- EC1: rules established by the first Editorial Council, which oversaw all matters (replaced 2010).
- EC2: content rules established by the second Editorial Council, which was only responsible for articles (merged with the Management Council in 2013).
- MCL: administrative, legal or technical rules laid down by the Management Council (later merged with the Editorial Council).
- CCL: all rules passed by the Citizendium Council since its establishment in 2013.
- MED: interim decisions or rules made by the Managing Editor (these can be over-ridden by the Council).
- OMB: decisions made by the Ombudsman (role now performed by the Managing Editor).
- CCN: interim decisions taken by the Chief Constable.
The Citizendium is committed to maintaining your privacy. This website uses Google Analytics, a web analytics service provided by Google.
The subject(s) of images and other media hosted at Citizendium, or in some cases their heirs, should be presumed to enjoy certain rights of privacy and publicity associated with their images(s) and names(s).
Copyrights and media (FDN)
Topic informants (FDN)
The subjects of biographies, persons who have had unique and important experience of historical events, CEOs, politicians, judges, inventors, and others who are (or were) close to the subjects written about shall enjoy a special status in the Citizendium community as topic informants. While being a topic informant will not by itself confer the editorial privileges of decisionmaking and article approval, topic informants will enjoy several special rights.
You must post documentation when people release images under free content licenses; when important photos are simply unavailable or cannot be reasonably created and released under free content licenses, you may use copyrighted images in Citizendium if you obtain written permission from the copyright holder and can prove this.
The Citizendium has taken very careful measures to document all media on its site to standards that are unparalleled among similar sites. Includes real-name policy for media.
Citizendium articles are not: dictionary definitions, advertisements, essays or advocacy.
The Citizendium must not be used for self-promotion.
Neutrality policy (FDN)
We should fairly represent all sides of a dispute, and not make an article state, imply, or insinuate that any one side is correct. Articles should be "unbiased" or "neutral." As we mean this, to write neutrally is to write so that articles do not advocate any specific points of view; instead, the different viewpoints are all described fairly. We try to describe debates rather than taking one definite stand.
Role of the Constabulary (MCL rule 2011-013, 10 March 2011)
The Constabulary is the line organization entrusted to enforce Citizendium policy. Its decisions are authoritative and must be followed by all citizens. Failure to do so is an infraction of Citizendium rules of behavior, which may lead to disciplinary action, including banning. If a citizen believes a Constabulary decision violates Citizendium policy, he/she may appeal this decision to the Management Council. The Management Council will then consider the case and render a judgment. This judgment may confirm that the Constabulary decision implements current policy or indicate where it does not and direct the Constabulary to correct the problem. As a subcategory of the first outcome, the Management Council may decide the appeal is frivolous and quickly confirm the Constable decision without further comment.
When the Constabulary declines to take an action requested by a citizen, this decision may be appealed to the Management Council.
Deletion of derogatory comments (MCL rule 2011-003, 28 January 2011)
The constables may delete all personal comments that are derogatory to named individuals who are not public figures. Offenders shall be warned. Offenders who exhibit a pattern of personal attacks will be banned. This rule shall apply to all applications at citizendium.org. Forum thread.
Penalties for infractions (MCL rule 2011-017, 09 April 2011)
The following are established as infractions of Citizendium rules of professional discourse with the specified penalties. "Disturbing the Peace" occurs when two or more correspondents in any discussion venue of Citizendium engage in personal attacks on each other. "Taunting" occurs when one correspondent in any discussion venue of Citizendium engages in personal attacks on any other correspondent without retaliation by those attacked. A personal attack is any derogatory reference to another correspondent. Spirited discourse that attacks arguments or positions without reference to their author or supporter is not a personal attack.
Disturbing the Peace and Taunting carry the same disciplinary penalties. The first offense will generate a warning by the Constabulary. The second offense carries a penalty of 3 months ban from all Citizendium wikis and fora. The third offense carries a penalty of 6 months ban from all Citizendium wikis and fora. The fourth offense carries a penalty of a permanent ban from all Citizendium wikis and fora.
Appeals of Constabulary decisions (MCL rule 2011-015, 22 March 2011)
The following guidelines control appeals made to the MC in regards to constable decisions:
An appellant must have standing in the dispute. Standing means the decision under appeal directly involves him or her. An appeal by someone without standing will be dismissed.
Both the involved constable(s) and the appellant must provide their analysis why the decision under dispute either satisfies or contravenes CZ policy, the latter to include a constable decision based on non-existent policy. The Ombudsman will collect the relevant information for the appeal and present it on either the MC private communications board (for appeals the appellant or involved constables request remain private) or on a public board that only the MC and Ombudsman may modify.
The MC may request the Ombudsman to collect further information from the disputants and present it as part of the appeal process. The presentation of appeal evidence is a matter for the Ombudsman and not for the disputants. The Ombudsman is required to present all evidence provided to him by the disputants, but disputants are not parties to the discussions of this evidence by the Management Council. The Ombudsman may provide his views on the merits of the case, but does not have a vote on the disposition of the appeal.
Appeals will be based on the policy that existed at the time of the appealed decision. Appeal judgments by the Management Council will not include the provision of new policy. If an appeal identifies conditions requiring new policy, the Management Council will establish this policy in a separate administrative action.
The Management Council has complete flexibility in the judgments rendered for a particular appeal case. However, some common outcomes are: 1) denying the appeal without comment (for appeals the MC judges to be frivolous), 2) denying the appeal with comment, 3) confirming the appeal, and 4) acknowledging part of the appeal as meritorious. In the first two cases, the constable decision stands. In case 3 the decision is reversed. In case 4, the Management Council will specify how the decision should be modified to conform to CZ policy.
Rules for appeals to the Management Council (MCL rule 2011-033, 15 July 2011)
The following set of rules shall apply to all appeals presented to the Management Council
Once the Management Council notifies an appellant that his case is on the docket, i.e. is actively being considered:
1. All members with standing in the appeal (appellants), and witnesses, are invited to submit their evidence and arguments to the OMB, in a structured, numbered, and terse manner to facilitate subsequent rebuttals by other parties. Each appellant is allowed to nominate citizens (witnesses) who may, but are not compelled to, provide input for the appeal, and this input must be structured according to the format specified above. Input from witnesses will be provided directly to the OMB. Excess puffery, emotion and verbage shall be deemed unresponsive to the matter at hand and summarily dismissed from consideration by the Management Council. In addition, any part of CZ law pertinent to the matter at hand (the act leading to punishment) must be noted at this stage. In subsequent rounds, additional laws may only be brought up if they directly refute a point of law or witness evidence from a previous round. Parties will have 1 week to submit their round 1 documents from the time the MC notifies the appellants.
2. Appellants will receive the submissions of all other appellants as soon as is practical by the OMB.
3. All appellants may submit, again to the OMB, rebuttals that directly address, by number, evidence and arguments submitted during the initial round of proceedings. Witnesses do not participate in the rebuttal stages. Arguments, additional evidence, or CZ laws that does not refer explicitly to a numbered item of previous evidence, argument, or citation of law shall be deemed unresponsive and will not be considered by any persons or panels sitting in judgement of such proceedings. New evidence is not allowed at this stage unless it directly refutes evidence presented during the round of submission (step 1 above). Rebuttals shall both be numbered for ease of counter-argument, and within them refer to the evidence number to be rebutted.
4. All appelants shall receive the rebuttals submitted during the first rebuttal stage (Step 3 above) as soon as is practical.
5. After the round 2 submissions are sent (not necessarily received) to the parties, all appellants have 1 week to submit a final round of rebuttals. Only evidence and arguments that specifically address the rebuttals of Step 3 are allowed.
6. The Management Council adjudicates the appeal. The only official involvement of the MC occurs in this step. However, if MC members wish to ask questions after the first submission and after the provision of each rebuttal round, they may.
Blocking of Council members (MCL rule 2011-035, 26 July 2011)
If an Editorial Council or Management Council member is blocked by the Constabulary for violations of Citizendium's polices on behavior, the other members of the affected council shall decide whether the blocked member shall continue to participate in its deliberations during the period of time that block remains in force. If the appeal (including, if necessary, consideration by an Appeals Board) fails, the member will be removed from the council and the seat held deemed vacant.
Monitoring the forums (CCN decision, 1 November 2010)
- Constables are responsible for keeping public behavior within professional guidelines, and
- Forums are designed as a safer place than the wiki to discuss differences in opinon and controversial subjects, and
- Constables are not supposed to interfere with the production of content/policy, and
- Most forum posts contain some amount of content/policy, and
- A portion of a few forum posts contains unprofessional comment, and
- Removal of a post removes content, and
- Constables are not expected to edit Citizens' posts, and
- Most forum users are aware of the expected rules of behavior, and
- Documenting deleted posts is time consuming for forums without histories, and
- Quicker responses may prevent further degeneration, and
- Considering the well reasoned response to this question by our Ombudsman
The new constabulary will now:
*Remove the entire contents of any post that contains any portion of unprofessional behavior and replace the comment with the text "(Replace)", and
- Send a copy of the post to the user's email address that is supplied to the forum software.
The Citizen may then
- Replace the text "(Replace)" with the professionally rephrased comment, or
- Do nothing
If the Citizen replaces the post, and
- The rephrased comment is not considered improved, then
- The comment will be removed permanently and the citizen will be subject to the guidelines of the Constabulary Blocking Policy
Forum posts that do not contain any content and are only unprofessional will be removed without chance of replacement and the constable will apply the policies described in the Constabulary Blocking Policy according to the good, pragmatic, common sense of the constable on duty.
Email discussions (CCN decision, 31 October 2010)
As a result of this forum discussion concerning release of private email discussions, for constabulary purposes, and until directed otherwise, I think that the way I will be planning to handle this is the following:
- Emails can be forged, and
- Any comment taken out of context is more likely to be misinterpreted, and
- It is not inherently apparent to all email recipients that their discussions might be revealed to others
Private email discussions shall be defined as:
- Email discussions that do not use CZ resources.
Public email discussions shall be defined as:
- Email discussions using CZ resources and
- Include a prior acknowledgement by all recipients that their privacy rights are released.
Public enforced email discussions shall be defined as:
- Email discussions using CZ resources and
- Include a request to include the constabulary or Chief Constable on their list for monitoring purposes
- Email groups should decide on their type prior to commencing discussion.
- Private emails should not be forwarded to the constabulary email.
- Public emails may be forwarded to the constabulary, but administrative actions may not be applied on the email alone.
- Public enforced emails will be subject to the defined Citzendium behavior policies and constables will use their good, pragmatic, common sense in evaluating the proper response to offenses in said email.
- Changing email type is not retroactive.
- In the event that an email appears to threaten your life, the constabulary is in no way prepared to handle such abuse and suggests that;
- you contact the police.
Approval standards (FDN)
Articles must be encyclopedic, accurate, neutral, coherent, comprehensive, well-written, university-level, not original research, legal and responsible.
Topic choice (FDN)
Constraints on the choice of article topic: (1) topics should be plausible as encyclopedia article topics; (2) redundancy - if one topic is quite similar to another, then the less common topic name should in many cases be redirected to the more common topic name.
Contributors may write a short start of a new article, called a "stub", of about 150-250 words usually. Stubs may be written solely to introduce the topic of the article in such a way that you or other authors can use the stub as written to continue on to develop the article. Include a definition or description of the topic.
Article formatting (FDN)
The purpose of every article (as distinguished from lists and other supplementary material) in the Citizendium is to introduce every aspect (or many aspects) of the topic named in its title, but at a very general level.
How to title articles.
How to disambiguate article titles.
How to include notes and references in articles. See also formatting mathematics.
Citizendium does not use categories for navigation; categories are confined to technical pages and workgroups.
Article inclusion policy (EC2)
An article may be deleted by editorial decision in cases where all three of the following criteria are met: a) it has significant weaknesses; b) that deleting its content would remove nothing of importance from the project; and c) that the article is unlikely to be improved as there is no active interest from any member of Citizendium in developing it. This policy was passed by the Editorial Council on December 6th, 2010 as motion PR-2010-008.
Until Citizendium grows to the stage when the current dearth of Editors no longer exists, or no longer is of severity to present a serious problem finding appropriate Editors to nominate, or reject the nomination of, articles for approval, Citizendium will allow Editors with established track-records to nominate for Approval the articles they predominantly authored, with the following provisos:
- The article belongs to one of the Workgroup categories for which the Editor has Editor status.
- The Approvals Manager judges the Editor's responses to comments from authors-at-large to be satisfactory in terms of edits to the article and to rebuttals to critiques.
- The Editorial Council concurs with the Approvals Manager's judgment.
That affirmative decision will enable the Approval Process to accelerate without compromising article quality given the provisos stated that provide safeguards by both the Approval Manager and Editorial Council.
Indeed, quality might improve, as the Editor's reputation is more at stake.
Editors whose articles are being considered, and authors-at-large, may comment on the Talk Page of the article. An Editorial Council member who happens to be an Editor-in-consideration is expected to recuse himself/herself from concurring or not with the Approval Manager's judgment.
It is intended that this decision stay in effect until most Workgoups have adequate numbers of truly active Editors to support the Approval Process, or until overridden by the Editorial Council.
Time and date (MED)
For communication within Citizendium, time and date should be assumed to refer to UTC, unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Within Citizendium articles, a distinction is to be made for events that are or were confined to one time zone, or not. If an event was confined to one time zone, the Citizendium article should state the respective times in local time and date (as defined at the time of the event) if possible. If an event occurred across several time zones, it is strongly recommended that the Citizendium article state the time and date according to UTC. In both cases, exceptions require justification by a relevant Editor.
Personal galleries (FDN)
Your personal photo and other image galleries are welcome on the Citizendium.
This document offers guidance to those who wish to reuse Citizendium content.
Editorial Council Resolution 0003: launch Eduzendium (EC1)
Whereas, Citizendium needs to renew and extend its recruitment efforts;
Whereas, Citizendium needs to attract contributors that will provide high quality, accurate, and timely information;
Whereas, inviting professors and their students to contribute content to Citizendium is a highly appropriate method for satisfying both above mentioned goals;
Resolved, That the Council adopts the Eduzendium initiative as one of its official recruitment efforts and that Sorin Adam Matei is selected as its leader, with the title Academic Content Coordinator.
Editorial Council Resolution 0004: launch subpages (EC1)
Whereas, reference information of the same sort that is sought in an encyclopedia can without a great change of mission be added to an encyclopedia project;
Whereas, it has been part of our declared intention, since the project was originally announced, that we might expand to include other sorts of information;
Whereas, our Citizens have already on several occasions added such information alongside traditional encyclopedia article drafts;
Whereas, information of different types grouped together in sets about individual topics are more useful than having the same information ungrouped;
Resolved, That the Citizendium adopts subpages as a new format and tool, as described in CZ:Subpage Pilot (which see). In particular,
(2) "default" subpages, links to which are listed even if there is no content on the page yet, are to include Related Articles (see example), Bibliography (see example), and External Links (see example);
(3) among a wide variety of other subpages, the Citizendium will begin to invite, and include, signed articles, according to the policy explained at Signed Articles (which see, and see also this example);
(4) all new subpage types will be announced to the Council, which will have the option of discussing and voting on them;
(5) when articles are approved by Citizendium editors, it will be understood that all of the associated subpages are being approved as well; and
(6) note that in coming months, when we reorganize and expand our leadership, we may well choose editors responsible for different subpage types.
Editorial Council Resolution 0005: English language etiquette (EC1)
Whereas, Citizendium is in need of a protocol for managing international variants of the English language on its pages
Resolved, That the Council adopts the following:
ENGLISH LANGUAGE ETIQUETTE ON CITIZENDIUM
CONSIDERING that all international variants of the English language (e.g. US English, UK English, Australian English, Canadian English) have equal validity on Citizendium;
WHEREAS certain international differences of spelling, grammar and syntax are incompatible with each other within a single article;
DESIRING that CZ should be accessible to all users of the English language, whether as authors or readers;
The following rules should be observed by all authors and editors:
(1) Each article will be written in a specific variant of English, which will be determined by the first author who develops it beyond the category of stub. The English variant should be notated on the Talk page; the technical way to do this will be specified elsewhere.
(2) Subsequent contributors to that article should try to conform with the usage, where this is possible. Where it is not, authors should request on the Talk page for a native speaker to adjust the spelling, style etc. of their contribution.
(3) Alternative spellings and usages should be included in the article text when there is potential for confusion or ambiguity. This would not normally include trivial spelling differences, such as color-colour, labeled-labelled, paediatric-pediatric, etc.
(4) Where the topic of the article has different regional spellings, the first author (beyond a stub) will select the specific English variant, as in (1) above. Alternative spellings will redirect to that as the primary spelling, although it may be necessary to indicate regional differences of spelling or usage within the article. Whenever possible, authors are requested to use common dialect-neutral names for the primary spelling.
(5) Where the name of the topic of the article differs regionally, e.g. aubergine-eggplant, the first variant written beyond a stub will be the primary article and others will redirect to it. (Again, authors are asked to use available dialect-neutral words as the primary spelling.)
(6) In rare cases, when it is unclear that regional names refer to identical things (e.g. French fries and chips), there may be two separate articles, although they should refer to each other.
(7) As a transitional measure, for articles existing before the development of this policy, the language variant for each page will be determined and noted on the Talk page by area Editors or Authors.
(8) Exceptionally, the Editor-in-Chief has the authority to reset the language variant for any particular article.
Editorial Council Resolution 0006a - What's Your Article? (EC1)
Whereas, there is no credible online project that invites everyone to submit his or her single best encyclopedia article; and there is no credible online project that invites people to impart the message they regard as most important to the world;
Whereas, collaborative communities such as MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube have grown because people want an outlet express their personalities, and this leads to viral growth; and the aforementioned projects potentially have this viral feature;
Whereas, we lack a program that allows people to receive personal credit for article drafts that they have created by themselves, and that there is some demand for such a program;
Resolved, That the Citizendium adopts the initiatives as described on What's Your Article?
Editorial Council Resolution 0009: Proposal on Recipes (EC1)
Whereas, The Recipes Subpage and Accompanying Usage Policy states that a new subpages option will be added to the subpages template and an accompanying content policy will govern its usages, described on CZ:Recipes.
Resolved, That the Council adopts the document "CZ:Proposals/Recipes_Subpage_and_Accompanying_Usage_Policy," to be implemented by a group designated to do so.
Editorial Council Resolution 0010: Romanization (EC1)
Whereas, The Romanization Proposal states that a page called CZ:Romanization will be created to deal with issues of how to romanize foreign words, place names and so on that are normally written in other scripts. Subpages for individual languages would be created, e.g. CZ:Romanization/Japanese.and an accompanying content policy will govern its usages, described there.
Resolved, That the Council adopts the document "CZ:Proposals/Romanization," to be implemented by a group designated to do so.
Editorial Council Resolution 0011: Stylesheets (EC1)
Whereas, CZ wishes to promote a professional image, which requires some consistency of style and format of articles;
Whereas, different disciplines may require different approaches, thus ruling out a common standard for all articles, even within the same workgroup;
Whereas, general guidance for authors remains limited, and is easier to develop within workgroups;
Resolved, That Citizendium will develop a range of workgroup stylesheets for the guidance of authors and editors
Editorial Council Resolution 0013: Medical Disclaimers (EC1)
Whereas, The Medical Disclaimers proposes to include medical disclaimer phrases on all articles relating to prescription drugs and medical conditions. Resolved, That the Council adopts the document "CZ:Proposals/Medical_Disclaimers," to be implemented by a group designated to do so.
Editorial Council Resolution 0014: Subgroups (EC1)
Whereas the breadth of some workgroups is huge, and it makes sense to break them down into more natural subgroups; and
Whereas the academic disciplines have specialties and sub-specialties, there is also an interdisciplinary need for subgroups; and
Whereas having subgroups would encourage specialist experts in these fields to join the Citizendium; and
Whereas readers will be able to use the subgroup categories to focus on articles in a particular specialist field and will help readers come to learn the Citizendium's navigational tools;
THEREFORE be it
Resolved, that the Editorial Council adopt the document "CZ:Proposals/Subgroups" as policy.
Registration and membership of Citizendium
Pseudonyms (MCL rule 2011-006, 2 February 2011)
Recognizing that one purpose of Citizendium is to establish knowledge through expert guidance, pseudonyms undermine the principle of expertise by the anonymity of authors; however pseudonyms may be granted only on a case-by-case basis by special resolution of the Management Council. Pseudonyms may be granted in cases only when the identity of an author may endanger the life, person [i.e. bodily harm], or property of the author. Pseudonyms will not be granted in cases where the reputation of the author may be damaged by the writings of the author. Authors must be responsible for what they write.
Editorial Council Resolution 0012 Inactive Editors (EC1)
Whereas, Editorship of the Citizendium should mean something more than that someone has set up an account here;
Whereas, Many of the persons listed as Editors have not done any work on behalf of the project;
Resolved, That a Citizendium editor may count himself an active Citizendium Editor if he or she has either edited CZ in the previous three months, or performed more than 500 edits in the previous year. If those conditions are not met, then any Citizen may change your various "CZ Editor" categories to "Inactive CZ Editor" categories, subject to correction by the Editor-in-Chief. For instance, the category on an editor's user page might be changed from Category:Chemistry Editors to Category:Inactive Chemistry Editors. Any editor will be empowered to delete the word "Inactive" him- or herself, once he or she has edited the wiki. (For simplicity, editing the wiki once every three months will suffice.)
User page rules (MCL rule 2011-009, 11 February 2011)
The MC officially approves the user page rules contained in revision http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=CZ:User_pages&oldid=100754848.
Citizens may not edit each others' user pages, or subpages thereof, unless such a page is clearly labeled as inviting contributions from others, as per Category:Editable user pages. Constables will have the authority to edit user pages to bring them into conformity with the above rules; they will, however, first make a request that the author do so him- or herself. Purely technical edits like fixing categories, templates or redirects shall be exempted from requiring permission or prior notification.
"Editors of their own user pages and subpages thereof" is to be interpreted as meaning that while Editors can rule on matters of content and style within the scope of their Editorship, users can rule on matters of content and style within their own user pages and subpages thereof, provided that such ruling does neither
- contravene any other part of the Charter (especially Articles 5 on civility and 23 on advocacy and advertisement) nor
- interfere with the ability of other Citizens to manage content on the site according to the principles laid out by the Charter (e.g. Article 34, point 8 on managing technical matters).
Citizens do not generally have the right to edit each other's user pages and subpages thereof without explicit permission. Exempted from this rule are purely technical edits as well as Constabulary action.
Resignations from the project (MCL rule 2011-008, 11 February 2011)
Citizens who wish to leave Citizendium may email email@example.com to formally resign from the project. The Constabulary will block that user's account from editing, place a notice at the top of their user page stating "This user has resigned from Citizendium" and protect their user page. From that point the user will no longer be considered a Citizen and therefore no longer be subject to rules applying to Citizens nor have the rights conferred to Citizens.
Any user who has resigned and wishes to rejoin the project may email firstname.lastname@example.org to formally request reinstatement. This request will be passed to the Management Council who will consider the request. Should the request be granted the user account will be unblocked, the user page unprotected and the user will be once again considered a Citizen.
Post-resignation reinstatement waiting period (MCL rule 2011-045, 23 November 2011)
First-time resignations are subject to a three-month waiting period from the date of resignation before a reinstatement request is granted.
For each citizen, the waiting period imposed on him/her is doubled each time he/she is reinstated.
Management Council policies and procedures
Voting (MCL rule 2010-008, 3 November 2010)
(1) All our voting on any subject shall occur over a 24 hour period or until all five members have voted, whichever comes first, so that all of us in greatly different time zones can participate in making decisions.
(2) All our votes shall be decided by a simple majority. Thus, at least three (3) yes votes shall mean that the matter being voted upon is approved whereas at least three (3) no votes shall mean that matter is not approved.
(3) Once a motion has not changed for 24 hours, any member can request to end discussion. Upon a second, debate shall close and a vote on the resolution will be taken. If all members agree, a vote to end discussion may occur prior to the end of the 24 hour wait period.
(4) Postings by the chair as the chair shall not be recognized as seconding any proposal nor shall they be considered in the calculation of a quorum.
Protection of policy pages (MCL rule 2011-007, 11 February 2011)
Any policy page officially approved by the MC will be protected. Any future edits to the page (excluding spelling and grammar edits) will require a vote from the MC.
Top priority of Management Council (MCL rule 2011-011, 4 March 2011)
Until resolved, the top-priority issue for the Management Council is finding a long-term funding solution for Citizendium. Activity addressing this issue will take precedence over that addressing any other issue.
Elections procedure (MCL rule 2012-001, 18 January 2012)
Management Council motion 20 is rescinded and replaced by the following:
Elections for Citizendium officials must satisfy the following:
1. Nominations shall be collected and collated by the election committee.
2. A candidate must be nominated by at least one citizen other than the candidate himself.
3. Only those nominees who accept their nomination shall be candidates eligible to appear on the ballot. Accepting a nomination serves as a declaration of commitment, in the case of being elected, to fulfill this function until the limit of the term.
4. When multiple vacancies exist for an office (e.g., Council seats), the ballot shall give citizens the opportunity to vote for as many candidates as there are vacancies. The ballot shall clearly indicate how many vacancies are eligible for votes.
5. Ballots indicating votes for more candidates than vacancies for any particular office, or ballots voting both for and against resolutions shall be declared invalid. The whole ballot shall not be counted.
6. The right to vote shall not be denied to any unblocked Citizen whose accounts were created at least 30 days prior to the election.
7. No citizen may vote more than once in any election. The first ballot received by the election committee shall be the ballot counted. No citizen may cast more than one vote for any single candidate. Ballots violating this rule shall be declared invalid and not counted.
8. Candidates receiving the most votes shall be elected.
9. In the case of a tie, an immediate run-off election shall be held by the elections committee. A run-off election shall be completed within ten days.
10. The election committee shall count the ballots not more than two days after the completion of any election. Upon completion of an election and the counting of the ballots, the election committee shall announce the results listing each of the candidates and the number of votes they received and indicating who was elected.
11. All ballots shall be held for 90 days after the complete announcement of the election result, which includes the time necessary to conduct any run-off elections. Ballots shall not be used for any other purpose than to determine which candidates are elected and which referenda pass. Ballots shall only be viewed by the election committee and by the election results auditor.
Number of votes (MCL rule 2011-028, 08 May 2011)
When using the simple majority voting method for council elections, the number of votes on a ballot may be less than or equal to the number of open seats.
Assignment of seats with different term lengths (MCL rule 2011-040, 6 September 2011)
Election nomination information shall explicitly specify the termination date of open seats. When an election includes more than one seat on a particular council, those seats shall be filled according to the following procedure. The council seats are ordered by the the length of their remaining term. After the ballots are counted, candidates for those seats are ordered by the number of votes they receive. Seats are assigned according to these two orderings, i.e., assign the seat with the longest remaining term to the candidate with the most votes, assign the seat with the second longest remaining term to the candidate receiving the next highest number of votes, and so forth. If there is a tie (two-way, three-way or more), assign the tied candidates to the corresponding seats at random until all open seats are filled. The election committee is responsible for the random assignment with the stipulation that all election committee members shall witness the selection process and that the procedure used and its results are published to the whole community.
Auditing of results (MCL rule 2011-029, 06 June 2011)
It shall be the duty of the Chair of the MC, barring conflict of interest (i.e., running for re-election), to audit the report of the elections committee, by access to the ballots, and report the results to the MC. Should the chair not be available for this task, the MC shall appoint one of its own to serve.
Management Council forum boards (MCL rule 2010-007, 2 November 2010)
(1) The Management Council will have a publicly accessible forum board which is read-only to anyone not on the Management Council. It will be used for the majority of discussion between members of the Management Council.
(2) The Management Council will have a private forum board which is hidden from anyone who is not on the Management Council. It will be used for sensitive discussions between members of the Management Council. The definition of 'sensitive discussions' is defined elsewhere.
(3) The Management Council will have a public forum board on which any Citizen may post, reply and view topics. It will be used to allow Citizens to publicly communicate with the Management Council.
(4) The Management Council will have a private forum board on which any Citizen may post, however they will only see topics that they have started. It will be used to allow Citizens to privately communicate with the Management Council.
The Management Council requests the ME to become the primary CZ blog author. This request has the following caveats:
- The CZ blog is Wordpress based, not wiki based. Technical staff will not install a wiki based blog in the foreseeable future.
- The ME will use the blog only to discuss Citizendium related issues.
- Blog posts are official Citizendium communications and must conform to all Citizendium policies.
Chief Constable Emeritus (MCL rule 2010-003, 27 October 2010)
The Chief Constable Emeritus is to remain available for consultation by the MC or Constabulary on matters pertaining to the Constabulary.
Treasurer (MCL rule 2011-021, 28 April 2011)
The Management Council creates (as per Article 35 of the Charter) the position of Treasurer, whose responsibilities are to manage the financial details of Citizendium. These include, but are not limited to: 1) collecting donation and other revenue; 2) banking these funds in an appropriate account; 3) paying bills, such as hosting costs; and 4) running campaigns, such as donation drives, that result in additional revenue; 5) present monthly public financial statements to the Management Council; and 6) any other tasks as assigned by the Management Council. The Management Council may appoint any citizen to this position and may also remove the current holder of the position.
Editorial Council rules (to sort)
Referendum rules (to complete)
Rules that have been established by community vote
|Announcements | Discussions | Proposed motions | Rules | Decisions reached and motions passed | Members | Other|
|CZ:Home | Workgroups | Personnel | Governance | Proposals | Recruitment | Contact | Donate | FAQ | Sitemap | Other|