I think that telegram notifications are a reasonable practice if CitComm has the time, but that should be left up to their discretion. In the interest of allowing for a more streamlined process I propose that we remove the requirement for telegram notifications.
1 Like
I would be curious how significant sending acceptance / rejection telegrams is as a portion of CitComm’s overall workload. If it is a burdensome task task the elimination of which would save substantial time, then I would support this amendment. But if it will result in de minimis increase in efficiency, then I would prefer to keep the additional point of contact for new citizens who might not (yet) be regularly checking the forums.
Perhaps @Pronoun can shed some light on this.
It’s annoying because it’s a very manual process that’s difficult to automate or even to streamline in simple ways. For example — I can’t control-click on the “send telegram” button in between editing the telegram/recipients because it produces an error about failing a security check (ironic?). So I have to input every telegram from scratch.
Ultimately I think it’s probably manageable? It’s not so much the time for each individual application as it is a more general sense of fatigue over the long run. Or — I find it kind of inelegant but I suppose practical — a RMB ping or something could be easier, like a “please welcome our newest citizens” message that doubles as a notification.
This is just my personal experience, to be clear. It’s possible @Griffindor feels differently.
I like this idea!
As for my experience, I don’t find the notification portion of the process particularly tedious. I just copy a template, insert a link, and send it.
If we moved to accepting applications by default and only flagging/looking into apps that cause concern, I think the process would become more manageable.
1 Like
I like it a lot too! Removes burden from the CitComm and publicizes citizenship to the RMBers. I’d rather see this substitution implemented than only the elimination of the telegram.
I liked the telegram cuz it gave suspense…
Here’s an alternative draft. I thought that it wouldn’t be ideal if we also pinged for denied applications on the RMB, so i thought that it would be better to inform the denied applicant through telegram (it shouldn’t be much of a burden anyways, since this rarely happens).
Let me know if there are problems with the wording.
This may be unpopular but I don’t think notifications should be required by law. If CitComm wants to do them then that’s their prerogative but I don’t think not doing them should be a failure in their duties, which is what it would be if notifications continue to be required.
Our focus should be on simplifying the process enough that citizens can be accepted swiftly enough that notifications aren’t required, not making the process so onerous that CitComm needs to do various manual steps.
1 Like
I agree with Kris. I don’t think notifications should be a requirement. Perhaps the law could encourage them, but I don’t think it should require them.
I don’t think the law needs to do that much, no?
1 Like
It should be up to CC to decide how they inform the applicant
1 Like
The idea of the draft I proposed was also and advertisement one, other than for the informative purpose: to publicize citizenship in the RMB. It’s completely fine for me though if we instead leave freedom to the CitComm on how to inform the applicant.
3 Likes
I think if CitComm (or even an executive-led engagement initiative) wanted to voluntarily post on the RMB about the outcome of a citizenship application, that would be laudable and encouraged. However, I don’t think we should legislatively require it, and I don’t think it would meaningfully reduce the work required for CitComm.
I agree with Kris. An application decision should be posted in the application thread so anyone (including the applicant) can see it. Anything beyond that is extra.
1 Like
We do also get the automatic notification through the forum when somebody is added to the Cit or Leg group. So I think it’s fine to remove the requirement, and if CitComm wants to post it on the RMB too or by whichever other way, that’s perfectly fine.
I move Kringle’s draft to a vote.
Second
We are now at a vote!