Apologies. It was just pointed out to me that under the new OrgLaw, a vote on the VoC is no longer strictly required...

Didn't know about that (or more likely, knew about it at some point, but forgot).

Quote from: Iason Taiwos on March 17, 2020, 05:05:39 PM
I vote per on all

I guess all could technically be interpreted to include the VoC, although that question really is an üc/non one, so I'm not 100% sure about this one. It would help if you could clarify your vote on the VoC.

Quote from: Þon Txoteu É. Davinescu on March 16, 2020, 06:17:45 PM
    RZ14 - PER
    RZ15 - PER
    RZ16 - PER
    RZ17 - PER

I can't (yet) enter this vote as it does not (yet) contain a VoC

With provincial activity down and not likely to recover anytime soon, the Chancery is likely to keep conducting most senatorial elections.

Also, `just recently I made a decision that cost a senator (the senator of my own province no less) her seat. Of course I would argue I did not have a real choice because I was just following the law, but it is clear that interpretations of the law can differ and others would have come to a different conclusions.

I have been very wary of even expressing a public opinion on senatorial races. What constitutes an "obvious" conflict of interest might be rather subjective. Personally I don't think the Secretary of State should also be a senator.

I do agree with the other changes proposed in this act and the other amendment.

Don't have time to look up all the precedent and laws now, but to my mind Lüc is right, meaning status changes can happen during the clark and the record only becomes permanent at the end of the clark. I would assume that is how mpf acted and how I would have acted had it come up. So if that's true (and from Lüc's post I gather it is) then either option is fine (just not both).

Quote from: Eðo Grischun on March 01, 2020, 06:22:12 PM
I have just cast my votes on the 3rd Clark via the DB, and now I, Éovart Grischun MC, hereby resign my Cosa seats and from the 54th Cosa.

Some confusion about what exactly the intention is here.
I'm guessing it's not to have your MC votes count, then resign and then also vote as a Senator and have other MC's appointed who vote using the PNP seats as well, cause that probably shouldn't be possible.

I'd say either you are not an MC this clark (in which case your MC votes don't count) or you are, but then your resignation (and the corresponding MC/Senate appointments) only take effect once the clark ends.

Here you go: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=158.0

Will include the full list soon-ish.

Post your re-assignments here...

Note: the database is still doing that thing where it lists the wrong province for senators in provinces alphabetically following provinces with vacant senate seats. Best ignore that for now...

The March 2020 Clark is now here.

www.talossa.ca/files/clark.php?cosa=54&clark=3

Or here: www.talossa.ca/files/print_clark.php (this is the printer friendly version)


In PDF Form (which was made from the print_clark.php page):

www.talossa.ca/files/clarks/March2020Clark.pdf

or can vote online here: www.talossa.ca/files/clark_vote.php

Or in this thread, until the 21st of the month, at 19h30 TST.

Senators or Cosa members are allowed to create a single thread in the Senate/Cosa chamber to post all of the Senate/Cosa Votes that are not cast in this thread. If MZs want to create separate voting threads on the Cosa or Senate board on old witt votes there will also be counted. Any votes not posted either using the form above, the current thread, or any of the Senate/Cosa threads on either witt might be ignored and void. Please do not vote by email or private messages.

When you vote, do not indicate any conditions which may make it sound like this vote isn't final: you can always change your vote later.

Please do not vote by email: We've had problems with email votes being caught in the spam filter.

All Cosa Members and Senators will be emailed today.



Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State

Quote from: Miestrâ Schiva, UrN on February 16, 2020, 04:16:58 PM
Agreed.

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on February 21, 2020, 04:00:46 PM

I agree that if any of this happened it would not be great,

So any thoughts on amending this proposal to minimise these risks?

One possible alternative could be to have the general electorate vote on candidates one at the time where the first candidate is the person who is closest to being a citizen for 30 years. (wanted to say 59 but that may be a bit long)

Or we could institute some kind of electoral college where the members are selected separately over a longer period.

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on February 21, 2020, 04:02:21 PM
Are all of the proposals for more complex election processes more along the lines of "woah dude, what if we..." or should I actually incorporate them into the amendment.

I kept the election process the same in order to avoid making a huge omnibus change.

This is gonna be a huge change regardless.

I would seriously consider actually incorporating some of the ideas that have been raised here and some others that have not yet been raised as well.

Really disappointing that we're going for possibly the worst option when a lot of the alternatives haven't really been thought out.

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...

@Amada Merþedes

Thankfully nobody noticed the original post said 27th of June...