Quote from: Lüc on March 18, 2020, 05:06:00 AM
This addresses what I feel was an egregious mistake: that Justices may serve as partisan MCs, but not as Senators, a position that is generally understood to be less partisan. My amendment would reverse the situation: Justices may not serve as MCs, but may serve as Senators.

I think the reason it is like this is because Senators have more power per person than MCs

Quote from: Lüc on March 18, 2020, 04:22:02 AM
If anything, this emergency might be a good time to bring back the much fabled Talossa Evening Chat Show :P

Super down for this: what would be a good day for you?

Për on all bills and motions.

I do not think joining the Royal Society merits post-nominals, given how easy it is to do it.

With due respect, it appears to me that this bill will make it more difficult to fill the already difficult to fill role of Interior Minister, or otherwise will become another statutory requirement that everyone forgets about.

As mentioned in the last article, the voting link is https://forms.gle/df9YajNs7W8SeMj49

Volume IX is out!
And is available here

Do you want to have the next volume of La S'chinteia sent straight to your inbox a day early? Click here to subscribe!

Quote from: Açafat del Val on March 02, 2020, 10:53:06 PM
This is not just about "one dumb ruling". I will reiterate the quote from the man himself: "[T]he function of Justice is Justice, not Law. Human law is an attempt to codify Justice, but in final analysis Justice cannot fully be codified or restricted into unwavering pre-ordained channels - it is more subtle, and deeper, than that."

That is worrisome logic. That is not the sort of logic which should sit on the bench. How would you feel if you filed a suit and it was dismissed with prejudice because the judge "said so", or because the judge thought that such a decision was "natural justice", despite the law? That's what Tamoran is contending: that judges have an inherent power to ignore or subvert the law if doing so is in the "greater interest of justice", however that particular judge defines 'justice' in that particular moment.

But you are cordially invited to discuss the merits and the defense beyond the popularity or beyond your personal feelings of the individual. I wonder what you have to say about Tamoran besides "one dumb ruling" or "one of Talossa's most accomplished jurists"?

Please explain how his official actions and public statements do not, somehow, mean that he will not violate the rule of law again.

My previous statement had nothing to do my personal feelings for the Senior Justice or his overall popularity. I simply pointed out he has a long record of good service in the Judiciary that you seem to be ignoring because of one ruling (which, at least to me, seemed based on a plausible reading of the law, though a very strange one) and one passing comment that is much more likely to be a philosophic wax than a statement that will color his future rulings.

I strongly advise against removing one of the most Talossa's most accomplished jurists because of one dumb ruling.

Quote from: Miestrâ Schiva, UrN on March 01, 2020, 08:58:18 PM
A successful Vuode/MM merger would set thoughts in motion in the neighbouring province of Fiova, which is still "merger-happy".

... do you think it's worth discussing a three-way merger already?

No

As I've pointed out elsewhere, MM and Vuode are Talossa's two least populous provinces. If a merger can happen anywhere, it's going to happen here.

Some of the Witt globes are still "turned on" even when there are no unread messages.

Quote from: Glüc on February 29, 2020, 05:18:29 AM

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on February 28, 2020, 09:32:15 PM
I'd like to Clark The Non-Hereditary Monarchy Amendment

This has technically only been in the hopper for two days...

>:(

I won't make a big stink about it I guess, if that's how it has to be.

With due respect, this amendment had been Hoppered since December and has generated little discussion.

I am sympathetic to calls to delay Clarking a bill while discussion is ongoing (my opposition to Clarking the Electoral Roll stuff is what got the rest of the Government to lay off) but that isn't what happened here.

A 2/3 bar in both the Ziu and the populace is a pretty high bar, but I agree there could be a better system. However, developing such a system could take years and this is a step in the right direction.

 :P