In the run-up to the 57th Cosa Budget, MinTech has been looking at the domain names we currently hold, apart from of course talossa.com:

kingdomoftalossa.com
kingdomoftalossa.org
kingdomoftalossa.net
talossa.net
talossan.com

The first three redirect straight back to the main website. The Government has already signalled our interest in closing down the barely-used talossa.net social networking site. The last domain name leads to an out-of-date website on the national language which confuses a lot of people - does anyone remember who actually runs it? I have a sinking feeling it might be former citizen Sevastáin Pinátsch.

The Cabinet's draft decision is that these domain names are no longer worth holding onto, in light of the above - but it seems good to get public consultation on the issue.

As a point of order here, while it is true that Terpelaziuns as defined in El Lexhatx H.2 only apply to members of the Government, El Lexhatx C.2.1 suggests that the Secretary of State can be called to account by the Túischac'h and Mençéi as representatives of the Ziu. And of course anyone is entitled to ask any questions of anyone, "informally" outwith the Ziu.

Administration of Wittenberg is part of the responsibility of the Chancery, so I think I'll have to defer to the SoS on this issue.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 01, 2022, 10:26:53 PM
It means that the Finance Minister is not required to create this Bureau; it is optional and within their discretion.

Then honestly we don't need this law at all, we just need a policy paper. MinFin could create this Bureau tomorrow, should he have the time and energy to do so, with no law required. And if he doesn't want to, this law won't make him.

QuoteThe law is full of such suggestions.  I think like the first few provisions in the title covering the Government have like three suggestions alone!

Does it? Well, thank you for giving me a place to start the Justice Ministry's project of removing kipple from El Lexhatx.

Seriously: the purpose of this Committee is to raise technical issues rather than discuss policy, so I think I've said my piece here. I'd love to hear the Mençéi's opinion.

Quote2.8.9 The Finance Minister is empowered to create the Bureau of Corporations, which body shall be responsible for the registration of all Talossan businesses, the enforcement of applicable business laws, and such further tasks as may seem fit by the Ziu.

"Empowered to"? Does that mean they have an option as to whether to do so or not? Why not "shall create", if this is supposed to bind the Government?

QuoteSample articles may be offered at the Bureau's discretion.

Putting a "may" clause in a law makes no sense. If there is no law against "providing sample articles", then logically the Ministry of Finance "may" do that.

QuoteThis number shall be composed of three digits to indicate the year of registration combined with three digits to indicate the order a business was registered, beginning with 001.

You might emphasise "Talossan year" here?

QuoteChanges to this numbering scheme may be made at the discretion of the Bureau, but are discouraged.

QuoteIt is encouraged for the Bureau to provide a fancy certificate to any registered business.

Statements of "discouragement" or "encouragement" have no place in positive law. Either you are compelling the Ministry of Finance to do something, or it should not be in the bill.

Generally this bill suffers from being an attempt to set Government policy from opposition. The Ziu may very well compel the Government to do things, or to not do things; but laws have no place in attempting to offer suggestions.

Ha ha, shows what I know about anything

RZ1: per
RZ2: contra (as long as the current boycott of TNC bills holds)
RZ3: per

VOC: üc

... continued elsewhere

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 01, 2022, 04:27:18 PM
an attack on me was a centerpiece for your last major party address, calling me the "worst person in the world"

... for those following at home, he's referring to this speech referencing this famous meme. I would assume that most people would read that and see "light-hearted trolling of a political opponent while recognizing that they have a point on some issues". I would have actually considered it quite respectful, a back-handed compliment if you will. But this appears to be another case of "Sir Trotxa and the Killer Rabbit", if anyone remembers that sorry history. One person's friendly trolling is perceived as a grievous attack on the personal honour of the other, to be stewed over, to be used as a justification for retaliation somewhere down the line.

And none of this answers the question of what I ever did to Breneir!

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 01, 2022, 04:16:33 PM

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 01, 2022, 03:35:43 PM
a) Your continual insistence on misnaming our party is what they call a "microaggression", please stop it.

You have referred to me with mocking names for years.  "Baron of Beef," "Baron von Tollbooth," etc etc.  How about you stop with the aggression and I stop with the microaggression?

Thanks for the confirmation that you're doing it on purpose to needle us. Yes, me mocking your noble title is on purpose, to needle you, because I think the process by which you got it was rotten. So I suppose we'll both carry now that's established.

Quote

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 01, 2022, 03:35:43 PM
b) Why would we want to draw attention away from the boycott?

Because we refused to immediately cave to your demands and now you look foolish,

... you really thought that this had to be resolved within 24 hours for it to be effective? Well, obviously we have a different strategic outlook.

Quotewe just spent eight months where your party kept loudly declaring that of course the Seneschal was around and active and closely watching everything,

Senator Davinescu was held politically accountable for his inactivity. It lost the Free Democrats votes. Because of our electoral laws, we were not in a position to replace the Seneschal without triggering an early election (and I hope we get a chance to change that), so I'm not sure what you think publicly throwing him under the bus would have done. Because Senator Davinescu was politically accountable. The King is not, and you have devoted your entire Talossan life to ensuring he never will be.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 01, 2022, 03:35:43 PMyour one message, unnoticed and seemingly asked without any followup, wasn't answered quickly enough.

Of course! Because Breneir was going to come up with the monarchy reform proposal that was promised without prodding! Eventually! There was no way the TNC were just going to ditch the whole issue and hope no-one noticed!  ;D

Given the complete silence of the King, the Túischac'h and the Leader of the Opposition for over a week... is there room to suggest that the TNC and their pet King are carrying out a "ceremonial blockade"?

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on May 22, 2022, 09:50:40 PM
Tagging @King John @Baron Alexandreu Davinescu (Túischac'h) and @Breneir Tzaracomprada (Leader of the Opposition) to see if you would be available for a state opening of the Cosa

BTW, perhaps a note on the terms of the legislative boycott. I'm personally happy to work on drafts of TNC legislation in the Hopper (although I suppose the TNC are entitled to tell me to ir mhe façar hútschar , given the circumstances), because I don't anticipate the boycott will last forever, and I hope to be able to vote for good TNC-sponsored legislation sometime this term.

The Senator from Florencia has been uncompromisingly nasty to me, personally, since he flounced from the previous coalition. He didn't even dignify the former Seneschal's apology with a response. The TNC election campaign was unremittingly negative and personalised, again against me personally. The working environment has been toxic for a long time - but y'all didn't mind as long as the toxicity was only going one way.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 01, 2022, 11:18:46 AM
it's understandable that the FDT would want to change the subject at this point from their legislative blockade. 

a) Your continual insistence on misnaming our party is what they call a "microaggression", please stop it.

b) Why would we want to draw attention away from the boycott? If we weren't happy with it; if we thought it were damaging to us; we wouldn't be doing it. Obviously your party are under the impression that it's going to make us look bad, rather than your party's reaction looking hysterical and foolish; we shall all see.

c) None of you will actually defend the King's level of activity - just like none of you will actually explain what kind of  "monarchy reform" you have in mind. Just the same response to both - "whataboutism"* and venomous contempt. And for the same reason - you can't defend the King. You don't want any reform.

d) If the King were your political opponent - rather than the guy who gives you personally noble titles, Regencies, and shoots down constitutional amendments you disapprove of - you wouldn't tolerate this for a second.

* A: "The King's not active enough."
B: "What about the former Seneschál?"
A: "There's a reason he's the former Seneschál. Let's make him a former King."

I don't believe there is a list of things in the US Constitution that the Congress is only allowed to legislate on - only a list of things it can't legislate on. This list in the Talossan constitution was copied from the Australian (or perhaps Canadian) constitution, which are federal systems and was meant to reserve certain issues to the provinces/state. It makes no sense in Talossa.