---
# System prepended metadata

title: Forum Gotterfunken Constitution

---

# Forum Gotterfunken Constitution

## Preamble

```
Here we should insert a statement on the mission of the server 
and what it aims to be, making clear the two natures of it as
+ open discussion forum
+ organization with an aim to promote EU related action
```
The Forum Gotterfunken server is dedicated to the open discussions of issues and events concerning the European Union, its institutions, its Member States, its neighbors and relations and its citizen

It has been created with the intent to facilitate citizens from all over Europe to exchange views and experiences

In addition, yet separate, from this objective its founders hope that it can be a meeting point from which actions and event can be created and publicised to further the integration of European People

This document shall lay, in the interests of transparency and openness, the basic rules on which server operations shall be carried out

## Article 1 - Structure of the server
```
If we go with a portion of the server under stricter moderation
then here we should roughly outline the criterias where the
rougher moderation should be allowed

E.g: "The server shall consist of public and restricted channels,
public channels shall be accessible by all Regular users of the 
server, on public channels Moderators shall not restrict discussion
beyond enforcement of server rules or topic subject.

No one shall be removed from the server for his actions on a 
restricted channel as long as said actions wouldn't qualify as
a breach of the rules on public channels"
```

The server shall consist of public and restricted channels, reflecting the two distinct objectives of the server as described in the preamble.

Public channels shall be accessible by all users bearing the Regular role or equivalent and shall not be subject to moderation other than to enforce compliance with server rules, whether defined in this document or adopted in accordance to the process described in this document, or to ensure that conversations don't go off-topic in topic defined channels



```
We should specify the manner by which channels can be added, removed
or edited

E.g: "The Senate shall have sole power to add public channels or change
or remove an existing public channel.

Restricted channels can be created, destroyed or modified by the Admins 
without consulting the Senate or by the Senate subject to Admin veto"
```

## Article 2 - Roles and powers
```
Here is a general overview of the various roles and what they
represent in the server and for the project
```
1. Admins: an unelected position representing the founders of the project, retain ultimate oversight of the direction taken by the server
2. Senator: either indefinitely appointed or elected, the Senate is the main decision making body of the Server in its day to day decisions
3. Warden: `What is this again?`
4. Moderator: `I'd have a separate role for moderator automatically granted to all senators but this leaves open the door to non-senator mods`
5. Citizen: 
6. Regular:

```
Below is my understanding of what the roles are and what powers they
should have
```

### Article 2.1 - The admins
```
To be clear these are Snor, Dante and Kiki

Admins are the founders of the project, they have the last word on how
the server should look and act like. 

I think that, while it's pointless to try and put checks and balances
(and overall counterproductive) I think it'd benefit transparency if they
were to use this power explicitly as a unanimous group

So while each they should have admin powers individually I think it'd
be best if they refrained from acting alone but either act following a
senate decision or an explicit unanimous agreement of all three admins
```

```
I believe the Senate should have the same powers as the admins, that is:
anything the admins can do the senate can do so long as the admins don't
oppose it (unanimously)
```
1. All admins are senators and moderators
2. A decision of the Admins may be requested by a quorum of senators to be determined by a decisions of the admins but no larger than a supermajority of elected senators
3. A decision of the Admins may be also requested by a quorum of Citizens to be determined by the Admins
4. Where a decision of the admins may impact the status quo of the server the lack of unanimity in favour of the proposal will imply the rejection of any change to the status quo
5. For the purposes of the previous point a decision already adopted by the Senate shall be considered the status quo, therefore a veto requires unanimity
6. A decision of the admin overrules any other decision but may not go against this document unless such a decision follows the form prescribed for the amending of this document



### Article 2.2 - The senators
1. There shall be three classes of Senators: elected, permanent and de jure
```
De jure are admins and the warden
```
2. All senators shall be granted automatically the role of Moderators

### Article 2.3 - The warden
```
I think a single warden is enough if it's supposed to be a direct 
representative of the people. I don't think admins need to elect a warden
since they already are represented in the senate.
```

```
Any citizen should be allowed to put itself up as a candidate 
We should set up a system using eurobot such that people can change 
their votes dynamically 

Votes should also be reset every week or so (in anyway a much shorter
time span than the senatorial election)

A warden should be considered elected as long as it has a certain
threshold of votes and no other candidate has more votes
```

1. Wardens are de jure member of the senate
### Article 2.4 - The moderators
```
I would have a distinct role for moderators so that we might in the
future consider having non senators act as moderators
```

```
Moderators should be allowed to issue mutes or semi-kicks (
that is restricting user to a channel accessible only by mods, senators
and semi-kicked users)
```
### Article 2.5 - The citizens
```
We should establish a clear path for citizenship such that if a certain
quorum of citizens or senators or admins thinks a Regular should be a
citizen they become one

Accession to citizenship should be forbidden during a certain period 
leading up to a Senatorial election
```
### Article 2.6 - The regulars

## Article 3 - Moderation
```
This article should define what are the moderation criteria for:
+ Public channels
+ Restricted channels
+ Topic restricted channels

By this I mean that we should set for each of these categories:
+ A minimum of allowed contribution (some guidelines guaranteeing
that as long as you follow them you won't have trouble with mods)
+ The appeal procedure (is the Senate the only oversight body?)
+ The punishment for faulty moderation on the side of the moderator (
you could maybe lose moderator privileges for a certain period
while remaining a senator)
```

```
As an example for public channels I'd say that you should always have the
benefit of a warn or mute before a kick or ban

Moreover I'd suggest the senate deciding on kicks and bans by voting 
through DMs with Eurobot, if a supermajority of senators disagrees with the 
Ban then I would suggest suspending the moderator privileges of the 
original mod for a week and of those who agreed with him for 2 days
(senators can't see how others have voted and can't change their vote,
this should induce a certain amount of restraint in moderators)
```

```
On the other hand I'd say that for restricted channels moderation rules 
should be set by the admins and the only limit being a @citizens ping 12 
hours before they take effect

At the same time an offense in restricted channels should only lead to a
withdrawal of the role granting access to that channel at most. Unless 
the offense would've been a kickable offense in the public channels as
decided according to the same procedure as above
```

## Article 4 - Voting and decision making

### Article 4.1 - Voting in the Senate
```

```

### Article 4.2 - Popular votes
1. A popular vote of all citizens is to be considered advisory unless otherwise stated
2. A vote can be called by
    1. A majority of elected senators
    2. A majority of senators
    3. A quorum of citizens achieved following a procedure and threshold to be set by the senate but requiring no more than 50% of citizens and giving no less than 48 hours to collect adhesions
    4. The warden
3. Voting shall follow the same procedure as the senatorial election
4. A quorum on the vote may be set by the senate but shall not exceed 75%

### Article 4.3 - No confidence votes
```
These can be called by either the admins or the warden and kick off a 
popular vote. 
Winning this popular vote is the only way to disband the senate and call for 
early election

If the vote fails the senate shall not be disbanded (not even by the
admins, admins can anyway overrule any ruling by the senate so they don't
need to disband it)
```

### Article 4.4 - Impeachments
1. Senators and wardens may not be impeached unless they committed a bannable offense as determined by the previously described procedure
2. Admins may not be impeached or banned except by unanimous agreement of the other admins
```

```

## Article 5 - Elections

### Article 5.1 - Senatorial elections

### Article 5.2 - Warden elections
```
I think there should be a poll in a bot only channel which resets every week
and in which everyone has only one vote, as long as the poll is live votes 
can be changes and the person with most votes (as long as it's more than a 
quourum) automatically becomes warden

If the ranking were to change after the election then the previous warden 
shall be given 1 hour to wrap up any ongoing business such as senate 
discussion, however the new warden shall take power immediately
```
## Article 6 - Amendments to this document