My votes for the July 2022 Clark

Për on RZ4, "The Let's Make This Official Act"

Për on RZ5, "The 57th Cosa Budget"

Contrâ on RZ6, "The Let's Make This Official Compromise Bill" - I would vote Për on a bill to recognize June 1st, but this one directly and simultaneously modifies RZ4 (unless RZ6 is somehow recognized as "later") when RZ6 should be stand alone with that singular issue.

Për on RZ7, "The Unsanctified Act"

Për on RZ8, "Legal Repair Act"

On the Vote of Confidence, I vote non as there appear to be undemocratic forces at work in the current body.

I believe Talossan standard or summer time corresponds to Central Time and Cézembre time is UTC+1 similar to Central European time
As per A10 https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=607.msg5402#msg5402

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on June 30, 2022, 05:02:27 PM

Quote from: xpb on June 30, 2022, 04:13:03 PM

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 30, 2022, 03:32:34 PM
The issue is that the King has not endorsed the PD. We cannot release funds unless the King endorses the PD.

So one issue is release of existing funds to pay, which needs authorization.  Another according to PDR Ltd. https://publicdomainregistry.com/renew/ is that the registrar provided notice on or about 3 June and it is now 30 June.

XPB, I followed the link and it took me to their general site. I am assuming I need to use the search bar to see the specific website information. Does the site indicate who was the recipient of notice on 3 June?

The whois entry for each of the domains has the name, phone, and email address for the administrator via https://www.whois.com/whois/talossa.com

Not sure about the hosting details

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 30, 2022, 03:32:34 PM
The issue is that the King has not endorsed the PD. We cannot release funds unless the King endorses the PD.

So one issue is release of existing funds to pay, which needs authorization.  Another according to PDR Ltd. https://publicdomainregistry.com/renew/ is that the registrar provided notice on or about 3 June and it is now 30 June. 

If the domain expires it can be revived for an additional fee, but that will cause a pause in the domain use.  Thus should the Kingdom via the Administrative contact not be in the position to make payment, I would be happy to bridge that timeframe with an alternative source of funding until such time as the authorization is received such that there will not be such a disruption.

I have sent a PM, text message, and email to @ Istefan Perþonest  regarding this issue

Is this tied to the request for a Burgermeister?
https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=1519.0

Is there a lack of funds, or a fund release issue, or is the issue procedural?

Talossa.net and Kingdomoftalossa.com and Kingdomoftalossa.net all expire Sunday
Expires On:2022-07-03
Updated On:2020-11-08
Status:clientTransferProhibited
Name Servers:ns3.deroyalservers.com
ns4.deroyalservers.com

Perhaps they are tied to the hosting service details.

I see
talossa.com
Updated 1 second ago
Domain Information
Domain:talossa.com
Registrar:PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com
Registered On:1997-05-27
Expires On:2023-05-26
Updated On:2021-07-22
Status:clientTransferProhibited
Name Servers:ns3.deroyalservers.com
ns4.deroyalservers.com

I vote as follows on the June Clark of the 57th Cosa

Për on RZ1 The Poor, Unfortunate Souls Citizenship Act
Për on RZ2 The One Milestone At A Time Act
Contrâ on RZ3 Compromise on the Compromise Act and Amendment
Non on the Vote of Confidence

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 02, 2022, 11:19:22 PM

Quote from: xpb on June 02, 2022, 10:54:17 PM
It is all well and good for anyone to propose changes that a supermajority can agree to in the way the Kingdom functions.  It is another matter to propose changes that would in the opinion of some to be an improvement, while that in the opinion of others is a radical change from one form of government to another entirely. 

And yet, in the face of a stable opposition where one party polled at a level greater than any other single party (at 39% of the whole), a coalition of other parties seeks to achieve changes that the current law of the land does not support based upon that opposition.  Ad hominem attacks seek to deflect away from this core concept.

... I've read this post over and over again and I can't actually work out what it means.

Can the author - a TNC MC - say what he thinks would be a good monarchy reform? "None" is an acceptable answer, and indeed the one I'm expecting.

I believe there are some good technical elements to reform of how a convocation would be conducted, however, that would need to happen only at a time of the demise, abdication, or removal from the throne of the monarch, not as a scheduled event.

When the King has "reigned for at least seven years since the previous Convocation" remains a fundamental change from monarchy to a republican form of government, as the word King in that case is changed in meaning to be equivalent with President or Chief Executive or similar.

Take a moment today to pause and reflect on the supreme sacrifice and ultimate victory that was in part achieved by the landings in Normandy, just a bit east of our province in the area of Brittany.  Operation Overlord went into action 77 years ago on June 6, 1944.

It is all well and good for anyone to propose changes that a supermajority can agree to in the way the Kingdom functions.  It is another matter to propose changes that would in the opinion of some to be an improvement, while that in the opinion of others is a radical change from one form of government to another entirely. 

And yet, in the face of a stable opposition where one party polled at a level greater than any other single party (at 39% of the whole), a coalition of other parties seeks to achieve changes that the current law of the land does not support based upon that opposition.  Ad hominem attacks seek to deflect away from this core concept.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on June 02, 2022, 09:52:24 PM
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.

What is the platform that Talossa.net leverages?  If the government does not wish to do system administration on that, perhaps I could learn if that is the issue.  I'm assuming the government just wants to redirect talossa.net back to the main website and not abandon the URL?

The summer session of l'Etats will cover 21 June to 21 September.  Legislative activity will begin in RAK discussion with items being brought forth as the opportunities present themselves.

A motion may be entertained to award one of the 8 vacant seats to each new citizen of Cézembre this session among those who immigrate, such as is now done in the Cosa across the entire realm.  Of note that since the previous election the population of Cézembre has declined from 21 to 19.

Using the etats calculator derived from CAG Article 9.
After elections to l'Etats, each party will receive 20 numbers, which will be produced by dividing the number of votes the party received by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20. The 20 highest numbers will be referred to as high quotients. In case the 20th highest number has the same value as the 21th highest number all numbers with the same value will not be considered high quotients. This will result in vacant seats in the assembly. Each party will receive a number of seats, equal to the number of high quotients it received.

Thus in theory Briga would have 13 seats and Rôibeardescù 6 seats with 1 left vacant, but because this election was held with just named candidates rather than parties, and that one citizen can only hold 6 seats maximum as per CAG Article 7
Legislative power in the Sovereign Province of Cézembre is invested in l'Etats de Cézembre. l'Etats shall consist of no more and no less than twenty (20) seats. Seats in l'Etats de Cézembre can only be assigned to citizens of Cézembre. Citizens may hold more than one seat, but no more than six. One seat cannot be divided among nor assigned to more than one citizen.

Therefore Briga will hold 6 seats and Rôibeardescù 6 seats with 8 left vacant.