Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Decriminalizing Lateness
On 5/8/22 17:44, Edward Murphy via agora-discussion wrote: A good start, but has room for improvement. Suggested revision: 4. For filled offices with a weekly report, the number of weeks in scope, and the number and percent of those weeks during which the officeholder published its weekly report. 5. For filled offices with a monthly report, the number of months in scope, and the number and percent of those months during which the officeholder published its monthly report. For this purpose, the 13 most recent complete weeks and 3 most recent complete months are in scope, but only those for which the officeholder held that office continuously since it started; and percentages of 0/0 are to be reported as n/a. Oh I really like that. Added to the local copy! -- nix Herald, Collector
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Decriminalizing Lateness
nix wrote: Amend R2138 "The Associate Director of Personnel" by appending: 4. For filled offices, the percent of reports that have been published in a timely fashion since either this clause was added to the rules or the last change in officeholder for the office, whichever is more recent. A good start, but has room for improvement. Suggested revision: 4. For filled offices with a weekly report, the number of weeks in scope, and the number and percent of those weeks during which the officeholder published its weekly report. 5. For filled offices with a monthly report, the number of months in scope, and the number and percent of those months during which the officeholder published its monthly report. For this purpose, the 13 most recent complete weeks and 3 most recent complete months are in scope, but only those for which the officeholder held that office continuously since it started; and percentages of 0/0 are to be reported as n/a.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Decriminalizing Lateness
On 5/7/2022 3:50 PM, nix via agora-discussion wrote: > On 5/7/22 16:57, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: >> I agree with moving to something like this in principle, but I think that >> the metric needs work. >> >> - you can clear your name by resigning and re-deputizing for the office; > > FWIW if someone did do this they'd then have to do their job well > afterwards for it to stick and doing that would be somewhat conspicuous, > so it doesn't seem like a big issue? I'm basing this on the fact that officers did it so often to get a Cyan ribbon (without the conspicuousness costing them anything) that we modified Cyan. I suspect, like Cyan, it's something we'd say when it happened "well that's allowed but undesirable so we should fix it systemically, not impeach or anything." Just trying to save introducing something we'd want to fix? -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Decriminalizing Lateness
On 5/7/22 16:57, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: I agree with moving to something like this in principle, but I think that the metric needs work. - you can clear your name by resigning and re-deputizing for the office; FWIW if someone did do this they'd then have to do their job well afterwards for it to stick and doing that would be somewhat conspicuous, so it doesn't seem like a big issue? - there's no notion of forgiving the past without resigning in this manner; - as time goes on in an office, each missed report contributes less %, so it means the longer you hold the office the less the % matters and the less you might care (I have learned this point playing Wordle lol). These both seem like good arguments to perhaps reset it on a time-frame. Quarterly would match with what we've done for blots before. Overall this seems opposite of what we'd want a metric to do - which would be to go lower if you missed a present/recent report, but forgive the more distant past. So I'm concerned this incentivizes what we don't want? -G. -- nix Herald, Collector
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Decriminalizing Lateness
On 5/7/2022 1:02 PM, nix via agora-business wrote: > Amend R2138 "The Associate Director of Personnel" by appending: > > 4. For filled offices, the percent of reports that have been > published in a timely fashion since either this clause was added > to the rules or the last change in officeholder for the office, > whichever is more recent. I agree with moving to something like this in principle, but I think that the metric needs work. - you can clear your name by resigning and re-deputizing for the office; - there's no notion of forgiving the past without resigning in this manner; - as time goes on in an office, each missed report contributes less %, so it means the longer you hold the office the less the % matters and the less you might care (I have learned this point playing Wordle lol). Overall this seems opposite of what we'd want a metric to do - which would be to go lower if you missed a present/recent report, but forgive the more distant past. So I'm concerned this incentivizes what we don't want? -G.
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Decriminalizing Lateness
Note that this doesn't *actually* decriminalize it since all SHALL violations are criminalized. But it does help prepare larger changes, and discourage specifically targeting it. -- nix Herald, Collector
