# The WRC Presents: A Draft of the Constitution of the World Cube Assocation



## Vincents (Apr 5, 2012)

Hi guys,
for the past couple of months, the WRC has worked on a Constitution for the WCA. We've decided to make the current draft public for discussion. You can view it here. Please keep in mind that while this is a draft, most of the institutions we've put in place are here to stay, unless someone offers a significant and well-reasoned argument why something should be changed. Once the Board approves this, it will go into effect (and the amendments process would be the only way to change something).

As for an update of what we're doing, Lucas and Shelley are working on a new unified official scrambler, and Regulations and Guidelines are coming.


----------



## Godmil (Apr 5, 2012)

Thanks for posting this, intersting read. I'm actually loving the fact that the WCA needs a constitution. Seems very professional 
It's interesting that the board members are limited to a 10 year run. Seems weird to think of Tyson and Ron stepping down.


----------



## jonlin (Apr 5, 2012)

Godmil said:


> It's interesting that the board members are limited to a 10 year run. Seems weird to think of Tyson and Ron stepping down.



You're right.
You could change the line in 1a, Rubik's and other twisty puzzles.


----------



## keyan (Apr 5, 2012)

Not accessible from China.


----------



## Pedro (Apr 5, 2012)

> 2e1a) (...) Members should be familiar with MySQL and Microsoft Excel, and should be willing and able to devote time on a weekly basis to posting competition results.





> 2e2b) Members should be familiar with MySQL and Microsoft Excel, and should be willing and able to devote time on a weekly basis to posting competition results.



Either place is fine for me, but both seems unnecessary.


----------



## Vincents (Apr 5, 2012)

Chris, is it all of Google Docs that don't work? (aka if I share it with you, will you be able to see it?)


----------



## keyan (Apr 6, 2012)

Yup.


----------



## Vincents (Apr 6, 2012)

Direct copy-paste:



> (Preamble? goes here). Also, I haven’t mentioned yearly performance reviews for delegates, not having gotten a response from Tyson. - Vincent.
> 
> Article 1: Purpose
> 
> ...


----------



## Ranzha (Apr 7, 2012)

Check the numbering. Other than that, looks very good and promising =)


----------



## aronpm (Apr 7, 2012)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> Check the numbering. Other than that, looks very good and promising =)


 
If you think there's an issue you should be more specific.


----------



## drewsopchak (Apr 7, 2012)

Can we change the title of "chairman" to something else.... I don't like the idea of referring to Tyson as "chairman Mao".
I also think having term limits is stupid; the potential for corruption seems negligible.


----------



## JonnyWhoopes (Apr 7, 2012)

drewsopchak said:


> Can we change the title of "chairman" to something else.... I don't like the idea of referring to Tyson as "chairman Mao".
> I also think having term limits is stupid; the potential for corruption seems negligible.


 
Do you have any reasons other than "not liking the idea" for removing the term Chairman? Do you have any alternative terms to use?

The potential for corruption may seen negligible at the moment, but it still exists. We also need to keep in mind that this is a long term constitution, not something meant for the here and now. This is meant to be used for as long as the WCA exists (modified as necessary of course).


----------



## Ranzha (Apr 7, 2012)

aronpm said:


> If you think there's an issue you should be more specific.


 
The regulation-style numbering is faulty. For instance, there are three "2b2b"s. One is correct, one should be "2b2c", and the other should be "2b3b".


----------



## Vincents (Apr 7, 2012)

We'll fix the numbering; we originally had it formatted another way, and may have made some mistakes converting it to the current WCA Regulations style numbering.

A lot of the design in this document was made to guard against corruption at any level, while still maintaining the freedom for the Board to get things done in a quick and efficient manner (hence the final bit giving all unnamed powers back to the Board). However, there should still be some sort of control to guard against corruption (or just plain stupidity).

Without resorting to general elections, which would be horribly inefficient and could very well lead to a sort of nepotistic system or a campaign season, there weren't many reasonable ways to do this. I am, however, open to better suggestions than the one big check we have (constitutional amendment, and term limits to a lesser extent). A big issue we have been struggling with is yearly performance reviews for the delegates (unfortunately, there are so many that the Board might not have time to adequately do them all every year without losing their own effectiveness).


----------



## Erik (Apr 10, 2012)

I really like the idea of the constitution. It gives more insight in how the WCA functions and what it wants to do. The WRC looks like very nice new committee that:
1. reliefs the Board with work
2. ensures the Board gets more organized input to changes

At the moment the situation is more or less that the Board can do whatever they want for a period of time they want. More structure is necessary imho seeing the growth of our community. This constitution will change this a bit in the positive sense imho.
I wonder who will be the new Board member(s) considering the fact that mr. Akimoto is not active anymore (as far as I know).

Questions recommendations I have:
--------------------------------------------------
Lots is formulated about how the WCA functions, sends its reports, makes its decisions etc. Few however (or at least not enough imho) is said about the obligation to inform the public about made decisions, changes in the formation of different committees etc. So far as how I understand it the public will only receive information about:

- The WCA Competition Regulations and Guidelines
- Decisions on amendments about the Regulations and Guidelines
- Information from the Incident Logs (the sharing or not sharing of information that is made public is up to the WRC)

Taking into account that the WCA only exists and has power because the whole community gives it this power by recognizing it as being the official body for competitions, I would like to encourage more information available to the public in general. I understand that in incident reports you have to leave out some details and that not every discussion between board members should be public, just like the fact that delegate reports about competitions are not public. It has for example been quite a while since we heared something about the new regulations. Luckily I know people in the WRC so I could ask them personally and actually hear they are really busy. I'm very happy they are busy!, but to the outside world it might not seem so. 

However I'd like to see at least the following happenings be made public when they occur. Some of them are really obvious and already take place but they are not in the draft of the constitution, it would tie some loose ends together if this was formulated in the constitution as well:

- The election, retreat of board members, delegates, WRC members, IAC committee build up. 
- Online lists of the latest formation changes on the persons on the first point (here I assume that mr. Akimoto is no longer active, otherwise these lists are already there).
- All investigations the IAC is investigating, at the moment the investigation is started and is concluded. Of course filtering out sensitive information should take place, but at least a summary would be nice.
-------------------------------------------------
A few times (at selecting new board members, or voting about amendments) it is stated the Board will vote on a decision. When the Board only consists of 3 (or 2?) people as it is at the moment, a voting is a bit odd isn't it? Maybe lots of conversation will take place before the voting to make sure the result that is agreed up on will be achieved ?, it at least is not stated as such.
------------------------------------------------


Please don't see this as kicking against the draft! I really like it as it is and merely want to improve it.


----------



## Vincents (Apr 11, 2012)

Erik said:


> I really like the idea of the constitution. It gives more insight in how the WCA functions and what it wants to do. The WRC looks like very nice new committee that:
> 1. reliefs the Board with work
> 2. ensures the Board gets more organized input to changes
> 
> ...


 

Erik,

Thanks for your extensive comments. I know transparency has sometimes been an issue in the past, especially with regards to rulings and Regulations; that's the issue the publishing and updating of the Competition and Guidelines are meant to address.

I can mention right now that we have over 150 issues to work with in regards to Regulations; the highest priority right now for the WRC is the adoption of the Constitution, followed by a unified body of scramblers, followed by new Regulations. I personally will make it a policy to post more frequent updates as soon as our first task is accomplished.

I believe the power to update the website is currently in the hands of the Board, who may or may not delegate that to the Results Team. I will make some inquiries and get back to you regarding this matter, though I believe currently Tyson is out-of-town (well, out of his home area) exploring possibilities for future competitions, and Ron is in the process of reviewing the Constitution. I did, however, make another note under the powers of the Board to keep the website updated.

With regards to your comments on investigations: I understand and sympathize with the sentiment that the average cuber may be frustrated by the lack of information regarding WCA Incidents; others may simply be curious in proceedings. However, much as things operate in the United States (and perhaps other countries, but I cannot speak for them), I believe it would be prudent for involved parties such as the IAC to avoid commenting on ongoing proceedings, if only to guard the integrity of investigations. I do agree that more information should be disseminated, which is why Lucas originally proposed the Incidents Log; we hope that it will be deployed with data to satisfy both the curious and the involved, while still guarding the sensitivity of relevant information where appropriate.


----------



## hyunchoi98 (Apr 11, 2012)

IMO it should be 
Article I Section I Clause I ....


----------

