But what does the council have to do with it?
You're writing a Constitution for the Council, aren't you?
We are writing a constitution for the society. The council is a part of it, but not the only part of it. There are some advantages to this over having a super special constitution that only applies to the council.
First of all, legitimacy. As I said to PP, having a concrete constitution detailing the basics of running the society allows us to make a more accurate delineation as to what the society
is, as well as what counts as part of the society. Daniel suggested in the Wiki page that we are not the official Flat Earth Society. A constitution that goes beyond the site but does not ignore it allows the society to make situations such as our breakaway more official. Daniel wouldn't have been able to deny our existence if there had been a widely accepted constitution which allowed such a thing to happen. The main purpose behind having a constitution is to avoid situations such as what happened to the old site. If a site fails to abide by its constitution, the members will have a much easier time demanding change. If there's a process in place to free the site of tyrants or useless leaders we won't have to worry about a John Davis type situation.
In addition to all of that, it's frankly way simpler. Having a constitution that doesn't acknowledge the existence of admins or moderators makes it weird in some situations. Here's an example off the top of my head: if an official member gets banned, obviously they aren't going to be able to vote in an election. However, if we don't give a membergroup the specific ability to ban people, then this is actively unconstitutional. In order to fix this we'd need to put a system in place to allow official members to temporarily lose the right to participate in council matters, but that's just banning under a different name. We'd have to give the power to someone, and giving it to the council is a) needlessly overcomplicated and b) just begging for abuse. What if the council disagrees with the moderator's decision to ban the member? Thus, we need to create a moderator group. But who creates the moderator group? Again it shouldn't be the council, so now we have to create an administrator group. Ignoring problems like that invalidates the entire constitution.