HAHAHAHA it's not as easy as that

You also have to pay $10!

BUMP. GV "liked" this post, does that mean he likes both the suggested reforms?

Quote from: Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù on April 09, 2021, 03:35:45 PM
So you want the republic back again?

I and (the majority of) the other Free Democrats want the Historic Compromise, as contained in 55RZ21 - a King, up for re-election every 7 years. The LCC seem to have thrown their former leader, Senator Plätschisch, overboard because of his support for that. But a compromise is the only way to put an end to these arguments for a significant number of years.

If you really want these arguments to stop (for most people - of course there will remain die-hard Republicans and die-hard Monarchists, both minorities), let's all support the compromise.

Quote from: GV on April 09, 2021, 05:24:58 AM
"You are needed at [name] Orthodox Church here in Auckland.  And you will have company.  Ián Anglatzarâ and Kane Gruber are here, too.  Surprise.", Jacinda smiled.

... I live very near the local Hagia Trias Greek Orthodox Church, I go to their bakesales. There's a Serbian and Russian church within cycling distance and I think an Antiochian and an Assyrian one on the outskirts of town.

But this fanfic is demented and you should be ashamed of yourself.  ;D

Quote from: Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù on April 09, 2021, 08:55:38 AM
From my perspective my facts are correct. We have had a drop off activity from long term citizens of talossa. Disenfranchisement is often cited as the reason.

No it's not. Because no-one has been disenfranchised.

QuoteThat currently active majority is mostly republicans because more monarchist and conservatives have been driven away by aggressive retoric.

No they haven't, because there has been no aggressive rhetoric, and the proof of this is you can't name any. Certain monarchists are less active because they don't want to live in a country where they're not in control, as V rightfully said. Others, such as the Regent and Sir Cresti, have continued to contribute, and I really appreciate that.

Trying to spin firm but courteous political opposition as aggression, victimisation or "bullying" is a deplorable move which we see all the time in US/UK conservative politics, and it has no place here.

Quote from: Viteu on April 09, 2021, 11:46:42 AM
as the opposition to the one-party state grew and forced the RUMP from power, the rhetoric overtly changed to, "if another party gets in power; I'm going inactive/renouncing etc." This was certainly what happened with Mick (an avowed monarchist I still respect). Hooly jumped ship because his power waned and then he did some shady stuff and did not want to answer for it before Talossan courts. Others have disappeared because they no longer have the power the hardcore monarchist once had.

Can I just, in this context, point out that one of the people referred to above actively threatened that, if anything but Status Quo won the recent referendum, he would renounce. Thankfully, he didn't carry through on his threat, but that really is the mentality to which we refer - cut your nose off to spite your face, then accuse the opposing part of having slashed you.

Quote from: Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù on April 08, 2021, 04:42:28 PM
Long term citizens have felt so ostracised, belittled, silenced and canceled for their veiws

Oh dear God. This is just the kind of discourse we don't need in Talossa.

Quote from: Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù on April 08, 2021, 03:26:18 PM
Now we have a government that claims to be acting in our interests, yet is tearing apart our nation, both emotionally and practically... I am very much done with the protracted arguments driving this nation aprt

With respect, Txosuè, this is the argument you've made about Talossa all the time I've know you - that it is Free Democrat politics that are "tearing the country apart", while the opposition to such policies is blameless and entirely justified. That one side is responsible when the other side gets mean. It's never been true; and right now, Talossa has been less argumentative and more polite in the last Cosă term than in most of our lifetimes.

As long as I've been involved, Talossan conservatives have claimed that Republican or reform-monarchist ideas are hurtful and upsetting and should not be allowed. But now those who want change are a clear majority. The compromise reached with the former LCC leader would put the constitutional argument to bed for a Talossan generation. Anyone who really wants the arguments to stop - as opposed to "our side to win and people who disturb me to be excluded from Talossa" - will support it.

Quote from: Breneir Itravilatx on April 08, 2021, 07:42:36 AM
@Ian Plätschisch, I am disappointed to see this news of your resigning as LCC party leader.
I too sincerely hope this is not indicative of a shift in the party's stance on the Talossa Shall Choose its King amendment which I also support.

Woah, an LCC MC was blindsided by this news? That is really not a good sign, and it raises the question: who, exactly, were the "conservatives" who have been hassling Senator Plätschisch about his support for the Compromise to the point that he felt the need to resign?

I urge the incoming LCC leader to confirm before the election begins whether they will support, oppose or allow a free vote on the Historic Compromise*, so that voters know what they're voting for. Otherwise, it will take support for the FreeDems (or the Peculiarists, I assume) to make sure this happens; or pro- and anti-compromise wings of the LCC will have to split.

* Assuming that the Regent vetoes, because you know he's going to

On behalf of the Free Democrats:

- I totally understand the strain that being a party leader imposes on the personality, which is why I am stepping aside from my own party's leadership, and I wish Senator Plätschisch a less taxing schedule from now on.

- I comment Senator Plätschisch for all his good work as opposition leader - as when he was a member of the Government and Seneschál before that, and I must confess that I'm worried about who his successor will be. Reading between the lines of this statement suggests that the Senator is being pushed aside by LCC members who want to reject the Historic Compromise contained in 55RZ21; which will of course mean that only a FreeDem (or Peculiarist, I suppose) vote in the upcoming election will preserve that compromise, saving us from being plunged again into the eternal and boring Republic v. John Woolley debate.

To forestall the perennial argument that a real Ziu would restrict participation, I ran the numbers on what the last election would have produced in a 20-seat MMP real Ziu, and the answer is: FreeDems 10, LCC 7, Peculiarists 3.

The actual representation in the current Ziu is: FreeDems 10, LCC 5, Peculiarists 3, others 2.

The quick answer is, a MMP real Ziu would make no significant difference; the longer answer is, it would create incentives for the Opposition to unite around a bigger party. You see, the real problem with the 200-seat Cosa is, while of course more people can theoretically become MCs, it gives an inbuilt advantage in doing this to the biggest/governing parties. The party list system weakens but does not remove this disadvantage, which I campaigned against in Opposition and still do because it is just plain unfair.

Quote from: Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on April 04, 2021, 07:31:14 PM
Well, I don't want to railroad the decision.

Neither did I. I've got a reputation of being a dictator-like bitch-puppy so I prefer not to hassle my Government too much, so it's good when citizens hold us to account.

There are two ways we can go about that:

a) the Cabinet organises it;
b) you organise it and we PD funding to reimburse you.

Cabinet discussions are ongoing, around half the Cabinet being on leave for various reasons

The Minister of Culture got a new job recently and has been on leave.