Let's explore this question of "hurt". The good Baron and I will likely never agree whether Rough Music was justified in response to his Beric'ht Talossan newspaper giving a platform to religious bigotry and not withdrawing it. But if the good Baron understands that, Rough Music happened because I was personally hurt by BT, then we may be a step closer to a consensus.

In situations of heightened political conflict, where existential or principled issues are at stage, both sides get hurt. The whataboutist response here would be for me to list all the times, and all the ways, in which I have been "hurt" by how people in Talossa deal with me. To which the inevitiable responses would be:

• you weren't really hurt;
• and if you were, you deserved it for your bad behaviour.

See? It never ends unless both sides agree to stop reacting and start acting. Peace is only possible at the point where both sides are willing to forgive. And I use that word in a technical sense. It doesn't mean "pretending that what you did to me was okay". It means "realising that if I don't set aside my understandable urge to get even, the cycle doesn't end".

The beginning of a permanent solution to this in Talossa will be agreeing to a new regime of Wittenberg moderation which is respected by both sides and cleans up the discourse while protecting robust debate and free speech.

(I should add as a PS that the reference to "bullying" is a response more to the IMHO outlandish response of the TNC leader to the Coalition party's IMHO courteous request that he cut out trying to subvert the election result. The flip side to "anything goes" smears of your enemies is attempts to cast political pushback as morally impermissible. It's not the sort of thing that can be banned but it's the kind of thing that poisons the discourse.)

^^^^ Just as I said. The problem with "cleaning up Talossan discourse" is that every proposal is "whatabout"ed to death.

Just like in the United States - there is a lack of social consensus on where the line between "robust political debate" and "disinformation, personal abuse and smear tactics" lies. Achieving that will have to be the first step to cleaning up the discourse. And I think it would have to start with finding a mechanism for Wittenberg moderation in which mods couldn't be pestered out of their decisions, which is what happened with Thunderdome.

Quote from: Antonio Montagnha, Ed. D. on April 24, 2022, 10:49:08 AM
Or calling someone stupid, or going after their mental health therapy...

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on April 23, 2022, 04:46:14 PM
I'm pretty sure that there's no way to make "being a jerk" or "acting in bad faith" or "accusing people of being bullies for calling you out for being a jerk" illegal, nor should it be in a free society. I don't want to live in a society where everything that's legal is considered socially acceptable, though.

Indeed. The question then becomes: how do we pull Talossans back in line when they go over the edge of civil discourse?

The whole problem is similar to that that pertains in the United States: one side will excuse any bad behaviour if it's done by their political allies. This means that moderation of Wittenberg is totally politicised. Both sides will support the Wittenberg death penalty for the least snarky comment from their opponent ("JUST STOP BULLYING ME!!!", they'll shriek), whereas any pushback on their own slander and personal abuse will be met with pearl-clutching about freedom of speech.

My own "Thunderdome" proposal - not deleting angry and nasty posts, but moving them to a separate forum where they could be engaged with or ignored - was trialled, but failed because people refused to respect the moderator's decisions in that regard. The problem in Talossa is there are no effective sanctions on bad behaviour that both political sides will endorse - or even an agreed definition of what "bad behaviour" is.

I wonder if that can be fixed, or whether we're in a situation of "our miéida doesn't stink" - i.e. one side will never admit to going too far in their political invective, or will always argue that whatever they do is justified. And we can't have impartial moderation because there's no "referee" whom both sides will respect and trust and whose decisions they will abide by.

deleted because of cluelessness on my part

I'm pretty sure that there's no way to make "being a jerk" or "acting in bad faith" or "accusing people of being bullies for calling you out for being a jerk" illegal, nor should it be in a free society. I don't want to live in a society where everything that's legal is considered socially acceptable, though.

However, such behaviour should attract a political cost. If parties do things like this and it's universally condemned, and perhaps even their own voters tell their leaders they went too far trying to get political advantage, then maybe it won't happen again.

Which is why this shouldn't be a pile-on of FreeDems/PdR supporters. It would be great to see at least one person who voted TNC saying that this isn't acceptable behaviour from the person they voted for as Seneschal.

partly deleted due to cluelessness on my part

Utterly inappropriate to attempt to enmesh a new citizen in such screwery and hi-jinks.

It's also good that I can revive this political cartoon from way back in the day. Third-biggest party asks the biggest party to pretty plz not solicit its members to turn its back on what they were elected for? BULLYING!!!

If Carlüs makes a Wiki account and lets me know what it is, I'll grant it full Citizen rights

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on April 20, 2022, 05:58:14 PM
The evidence keeps piling up for a change to our systems! Shouldn't be such a hassle for you to do that.

This is going to be a priority for the incoming Government, as I like to think I've repeated countless time.

I wish more of you old Republicans were still around and active.  :(

So, ten years ago today, we did the deal.

Honestly, there are so few people still around (by which I mean active) who did the deal. Of the Republican side, only GV and myself, it seems. Many of the people who were so active in the Republic accepted the intellectual case for Reunision - that the Republic was becoming increasingly irrelevant as new citizens opted for the Royalist cultural experience - but have not been able to find it within themselves to participate. One told me "I'll become active again once Talossa is a Republic again". Maybe one day we'll deliver that.

The notorious Armenian mystic and rogue G. I. Gurdjieff argued that the most effective road to spiritual development was "to bear the manifestations of others who displease you". That is, the more the people around you get on your last nerve and provoke negative reactions from within you, the better for your soul, as it were.

If this is the case, Reunision is a massive spiritual success! And on both sides!

To paraphrase the notorious Dorset mystic and rogue guitarist R. Fripp, when we are Talossan, all Talossans are our friends. Even the ones we don't know. Especially the ones we don't like, or who don't like us. A bigger Talossan experience is a better experience.

I'll be blunt and perhaps reveal a few secrets here. Over the years, a few Talossans in my political camp - and interestingly, it's those who joined after Reunision - have come to me after what we consider another gesture of contempt by the King, or another provocation by conservative politicos, and said: "Hútsch-o. We don't need this. Let's start a new micronation, inhabited only by people who don't make our fists itch."

And I say: yeah, I've done that. Twice. And both times we found out that the logic of "purging people who annoy you" is very difficult to break out of. Really long-time Talossans will know that after 2000, when King Robert I had purged all his political opponents, he turned on his own party to create more, and worse, political opponents. Partisanship is a helluva drug.

Mystics and psychologists know that "shadow conflicts" occur when A and B look at each other, and both see something in the other which reminds them of something they don't like when they look in the mirror. If a political opponent of mine appears - for example - to be absolutely cynical in telling any lie to gain power, to glorify in needless personal attacks and trolling, or to be allowing personal resentments to override their good judgements, then I might benefit from turning around and wondering whether that is precisely how they see me. And if so, whether it's a fair cop.

I've often wondered whether most of the nastiest Talossan political debates couldn't be summed up in the notorious Two Spidermen meme, or my personal favourite from Futurama:



But whether we believe in the idea that Talossa is an opportunity for (painful! and annoying!) spiritual growth or not, it is clearly something worth fighting for. "Talossan patriotism is summed up in three words: Talossa must continue" - KR1. We may debate among ourselves about what exactly about Talossa must continue. I will never cease to believe that monarchical power corrupts and a life-term monarchy is either a way for an unaccountable jerk to ruin other people's fun, or a waste of time whereby an absentee grants his powers to sycophants. But even with all the monarchist capering and grovelling I find "cringe", Talossa is worth fighting for.

Because it was worth fighting for in 2004 when Talossa was much worse than it is now. It was a full-blown cult, or multi-person emotionally abusive relationship if you prefer. It is said that the Higher Reality chooses incredibly unlikely instruments to make something worthy happen in this world. That's KR1 right there. Maybe it's every one of us, too.

In conclusion, please rise for the Anthem of the Talossan Republic. I think every patriotic Talossan can appreciate this.

Talossa, Be Free!

by Dieter N. Vercaria

Talossa, be free
in your peculiarity!
You may not command mountains,
you may not rule the sea;
but in the hearts of your people
you're a great small country.

Talossa, be free
you beacon of liberty!
You defeated a tyrant,
fought for democracy.
So in the hearts of your people
you're a brave small country.

No criticism implied, it wasn't your job. But as it was said up this thread, I've been kind of otherwise engaged Talossa-wise recently and giving a speech is all I could commit to. Anyway, I somehow get the feeling I'm not the King's favourite person, so I assumed someone who was closer to him (eg whoever got him to sign the recent PD) would also mention this. So it's a failure of collective action.

I've given this to the Seneschal for his urgent attention.

Did *you* reach out to the King? It wasn't me brimming with enthusiasm about this commemoration. I just volunteered to give a speech.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on April 10, 2022, 05:17:06 PM
So can someone get in touch with the King to see if he's up for making a Reunision Day Speech?

We never got an answer to this, huh

"Corbies" is the Scots language term for those birds, as reflected in a particularly creepy folk song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDvCO2rSCa0