Just checking in -- I see that BenArd has posted a very kind statement.  Is there a schedule posted somewhere?

ESB, the rules say that you can.  Any senator may grant you a portion of their time.  Maybe message your senator asking for the opportunity -- I don't think anyone was turned away the first time they did this.

Senator dal Val, I put up my opening statement.  Please send me a PM if/when I get any questions, if you have a chance.  Don't want to miss any or cause anyone to lose their time, but I don't check Witt every day anymore (since these days, there's only a post or two a day).

Azul.  I would like to thank the senators for their time and commend them for their duty, since holding these new hearings is an interesting and fun thing to do -- and that makes them good for the country, even beyond their value as hearings.

I'm not sure what might be considered qualifications for this office, but Dama Litz and the Royal Talossan Bar bestowed a Bachelor's in Talossan Law on me in 2012.  I have been a practicing lawyer for something like ten years now, having represented clients in a dozen or so cases, including several that went through to trial.

Beyond that, I have some accomplishments.  I organized the creation of our national legal code, el Lexhatx.  I have held positions in both government and the royal civil service, including the Seneschalsqab.  I have been involved with many cultural endeavors, such as writing much of the wiki and organizing the modern timeline of Talossan history.  In addition, I created and edited the newspaper Beric'ht Talossan for a couple of years, setting a tiresome number of records (biggest organization, first corporation, etc) but also never missing a single biweekly deadline.  There's more, but it's boring and braggy to just list things like this.

Recently, the Seneschal asked me if I would be willing to serve on the Cort.  I am.

If you have any questions, I will try to answer them.

Sure.  I have a brief opening statement.

I don't know that you can force people to be interested in anything, no matter the good intentions.  I know that's been tried a lot, and it's never succeeded.  Every time there's been legit provincial activity -- here or in Fiova or wherever -- it's come from people just being interested in it on its own merits.  I'm trying to imagine the person who might enter the country because they're interested in the places with activity, and being told that they aren't allowed to get involved in those places until after four, five, six, or seven months.

Is it possible you could stop leaving the same notes repeatedly on the Digest of Laws?  It's insane to keep noting every month that the database is the primary source, or keep noting who the monarch is.  That's not actually useful information for anyone looking at the laws, and it makes it harder to look through the actual laws, and it makes the page way longer (and it's already a long page) for no reason, and you're just making more work for yourself.  I did it myself but had to roll it back, since I'm legally not allowed.  It's entirely your call what to do, but I just don't understand this.

Here is an edit with that stuff removed, to save you the trouble if you decide to go with my recommendation.  There's just the information that people come to the page for, neatly organized and presented: http://wiki.talossa.com/index.php?title=Digest_of_Laws&oldid=27246

If you want to be recognized for your work, maybe I could write a bill and get someone to sponsor it that will do the job?  Give you some special award or something?  The Wonderful Award for GV as Thanks for Amazing Dedication from a Great Talossan?  You certainly have done a ton and deserve it.

Take care of yourself, my friend.

I can be reached via PM here on Witt.

7 years means 114 of 187 total citizens would be the committee.  6 makes it a 122-person committee instead.  I love the idea of a committee composed of 61% (or 65%) of the whole.

I agree to be nominated.

For the hearing, you can do it pretty much however you want.  I'm indifferent.  I can't commit to being able to post more than once a day in reply to questions, though, I think.

Quote from: Açafat del Val on April 20, 2020, 09:47:49 AM

Quote from: Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on April 19, 2020, 10:22:11 PM
You also accidentally removed the power of prorogation from the king, and also accidentally forgot to mention that significant shift in the checks and balances of our system.

The removal of the power of prorogation was not accidental; it was intentional. I see that the only vehicle for a Warrant of Prorogation is to delay a Clark in order to form a government or the like. Under this bill, that would be a needlessly redundant mechanism, because there would be already an automatic month of recess for exactly this purpose.

Why else should the King want to prorogue the Ziu anyways? Or should the King have a unilateral ability to prorogue the Ziu at any time for any reason? If so, we might have a different definition of 'democratic parliamentary monarchy'.

As for the "shift in checks and balances"... What would this bill cause which is not already a reality? Name a time in any parliamentary or semi-presidential system when the head of state did NOT appoint a prime minister who would control the majority of the lower house. In other words, having the Seneschal elected directly by the Cosa is practicably no different than having the Seneschal appointed by the King; it's the same result.

On the other hand, are you proposing that the King have the option to appoint a Seneschal who would not command the confidence of the Cosa? If so, we might have again a different definition of 'democratic parliamentary monarchy'.

A lot of these questions you're asking would have been better asked before you wrote the bill.  C'est la vie, though.  I'll let you get back to it.

You also accidentally removed the power of prorogation from the king, and also accidentally forgot to mention that significant shift in the checks and balances of our system.

Quote from: Açafat del Val on April 19, 2020, 09:26:28 PM

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on April 19, 2020, 09:02:16 PM
Before I comment on the content of the bill, I will point out that it amends a version of the OrgLaw that is no longer in force.

But I spent more than several hours cross-referencing > http://wiki.talossa.com/Law:Organic_Law < in order to make this bill :-(

Where is the current version, then? Nevermind... I guess that I didn't use my own eyeballs... http://wiki.talossa.com/2017_Organic_Law

Okay, well, back the drawing board.

I was unable to convince the Scribe to update the existing OrgLaw page, and he made a new one instead.

He last posted in February, so it's not a great option, but there's almost no possibilities.  Another option might be trying to coax Owen Edwards to register, although he's even less active.

Gluc, sorry to butt in, but just FYI it looks like your problem is that there's only a handful of Cezembreans on this Witt.  As far as I can see, you have:

• Moritz with zero posts.
• Xpb, Litz with one post apiece.
• Ian A with two.
• Ian T with nine, but now seemingly retiring a bit.
• Amada with eleven, but unable to help.

Seems like Ian A might be your best bet?