Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on January 26, 2021, 06:40:03 PM

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 06:21:24 PM
3) King John, in my opinion, which can be overridden by a majority of Cézembreans that would choose to remove me from office, continues to be King of Cézembre until such time as he of his own volition abdicates or passes away.

I realise that this has nothing to do with the referendum result anymore, but are the titles of King of Talossa and King of Cézembre separate or is the King of Talossa automatically King of Cézembre ex officio? Was this ever brought up somewhere? In case that King John is forced to abdicate the Talossan throne, would the Cézembrean government then recognise two Kings (???) or would that violate the pledge of eternal allegiance to the Regipäts Talossan? But then again, would not doing so violate the pledge of eternal allegiance to the King?

...sorry for these wild tangents, everyone.

My apologies as well as I should not continue to respond in this thread, even as it is tantalizing.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on January 26, 2021, 02:30:31 PM
On the subject of Cézembre:

1) when Australia was debating becoming a republic, there was debate on what would happen if individual States insisted on remaining monarchic.
2) what happens if Cézembre pledges allegiance to a different King than that chosen by the nation as a whole?
3) would the Sénéchal of Cézembre be pledging eternal allegiance to John I, even if John I were removed by Organic Law amendment without bringing in the "limited term" - i.e. if he were replaced by another Monarch for Life?

Sorry caught this comment in reverse order.

1) I will need to read up on the Australian debate.  Within the Commonwealth of Nations, Queen Elizabeth II is the head of state of 16 member states, known as the Commonwealth realms, while 33 other members are republics and 5 others have different monarchs.

2) As an example, there are at least a couple of different Popes if one refers to the the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople by that title.  Hong Kong and Taiwan have different economic models than China but are claimed by some to be one county two systems.

3) King John, in my opinion, which can be overridden by a majority of Cézembreans that would choose to remove me from office, continues to be King of Cézembre until such time as he of his own volition abdicates or passes away.

Typing on my phone while on patrol sorry for any typos.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on January 26, 2021, 03:50:33 PM

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on January 26, 2021, 02:30:31 PM
3) would the Sénéchal of Cézembre be pledging eternal allegiance to John I, even if John I were removed by Organic Law amendment without bringing in the "limited term" - i.e. if he were replaced by another Monarch for Life?

I suppose a compromise could be achieved by a post-abdication or removal Ián Lupúl being nominated as Constable/Governor-General of Cézembre.

That could be an additional title I suppose.  Ián Lupúl is already King of Cézembre.

My apologies for taking this on too much of a tangent - I will confine my futher comments on the matter to threads within Cézembre.

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 12:51:52 PM

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on January 26, 2021, 12:38:36 PM

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 12:03:16 PM
You are correct that a Head of State could be declared King or Queen (there could be an introduction into the CAG that the gender should be flexible for Kingdom or Queendom).  There was an election back in the day for King John, but only after there was an abdication.  I believe in the current thought process is that the Head of State would be elected on a periodic basis, rather than holding the title until abdication or death.

My idea for an elected Head of State without breaking too many other things was to basically automatically force the King to abdicate after a certain number of years (I believe it was five or so) and trigger a new election that way. Everything else would stay the same.

As for making the name of the country gender-dependent (Kingdom vs Queendom), I believe that this is unnecessary. Not just because no Romance language that I know of has a separate word for "queendom" so coining one in Talossan would be extra unnatural, but because theres a historical precedent for calling the Talossan monarch "King" regardless of gender.

From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/queendom

queen·​dom | \ ˈkwēndəm \
plural -s
Definition of queendom
1: the state or territory ruled by a queen
2: the position of a queen

While used in a different context, as recently as 22 January 2021 France TV has used the term Queendom https://www.france.tv/slash/queendom/

In regard to the recent Ranked Choice Constitutional Referendum among Citizens of Cézembre --

9 voted, including
Ián B. Anglatzarâ #74
Danihél Roðgarüt #84
X. Pol Briga #152
Owen Christopher Edwards #218
Dame Litz Cjantscheir #277
Ián Tamorán #284
Ián S.G. Txaglh #359
Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù #434
Amada Eleonora Merþedes #539

and 12 did not vote including:
Ián da Bitoûr #174
Glüc da Dhi #260
Ryan Hammond #370
Raducanu Vasile #306
Martì Vataldestreça #391
Moritz Iesu Preiria Fernaodescu #395
Tamás Ónodi #478
Thomas Dray #438
Roibeardet dal Riesta #465
Thor Deyaert #527
Bakou Hearthless #532
Alexandreu Mitxeu Hårleu Furxheir #549

Should there be introduction of any type of amendment in l'Etats, then I would strive to insure that there would be increased participation in any local referendum.

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on January 26, 2021, 12:38:36 PM

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 12:03:16 PM
You are correct that a Head of State could be declared King or Queen (there could be an introduction into the CAG that the gender should be flexible for Kingdom or Queendom).  There was an election back in the day for King John, but only after there was an abdication.  I believe in the current thought process is that the Head of State would be elected on a periodic basis, rather than holding the title until abdication or death.

My idea for an elected Head of State without breaking too many other things was to basically automatically force the King to abdicate after a certain number of years (I believe it was five or so) and trigger a new election that way. Everything else would stay the same.

As for making the name of the country gender-dependent (Kingdom vs Queendom), I believe that this is unnecessary. Not just because no Romance language that I know of has a separate word for "queendom" so coining one in Talossan would be extra unnatural, but because theres a historical precedent for calling the Talossan monarch "King" regardless of gender.

From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/queendom

queen·​dom | \ ˈkwēndəm \
plural -s
Definition of queendom
1: the state or territory ruled by a queen
2: the position of a queen

As related to the CAG: Chapter I - The State

Regipäts https://oversteir.talossa.com/?ui=eng&src=tzl&phrase=Regip%C3%A4ts# Kingdom
vs
Republică https://oversteir.talossa.com/?ui=eng&src=tzl&phrase=Republic%C4%83# Republic

https://oversteir.talossa.com/?ui=eng&src=eng&phrase=Queendom# not yet defined

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on January 26, 2021, 11:08:31 AM

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 10:57:46 AM
Both of those are certainly valid opinions, but do little to modify my stance which I have stated more clearly in Potential for a constitutional amendment referendum to the citizens of Cézembre.  It is entirely possible my opinion will also be repudiated at the local level, but until such time as I am replaced, I shall continue to support the Monarchy as my elected powers provide.

Whats interesting here is that, since its not specified anywhere in the Cézembrean constitution who the King is, or that the King must hold that office for life in order to be legitimate, there would be no need to change the Cézembrean constitution if the future elected Head of State retains the title of King and the country continues to call itself the Kingdom of Talossa, assuming the referendum results actually lead to any changes to the Organic Law of course.

I cant help but feel like youre being overly hasty here.

You are correct that a Head of State could be declared King or Queen (there could be an introduction into the CAG that the gender should be flexible for Kingdom or Queendom).  There was an election back in the day for King John, but only after there was an abdication.  I believe in the current thought process is that the Head of State would be elected on a periodic basis, rather than holding the title until abdication or death.

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on January 26, 2021, 10:37:59 AM

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 08:35:58 AM
The tiresome legerdemain of the referendum was predictable.  A simple vote on "Do You Want A King" Per/Non would result in a King.

http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~unger/articles/irv.html

Let's not be sore losers. I highly doubt anyone was so confused by the ballot that they didn't vote, and (as demonstrated above) this referendum was not subject to any of the criticisms in the article you cited.

and

Quote from: Eiric S. Bornatfiglheu on January 26, 2021, 09:49:48 AM

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 08:35:58 AM
The tiresome legerdemain of the referendum was predictable.  A simple vote on "Do You Want A King" Per/Non would result in a King.

http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~unger/articles/irv.html

Honestly, I'm not so sure that it would.  There are a lot of Peculiarists with a Republican stripe, and if they'd coalesced around an elected head of state, then the results could've been a larger margin for elected head of state.

Both of those are certainly valid opinions, but do little to modify my stance which I have stated more clearly in Potential for a constitutional amendment referendum to the citizens of Cézembre.  It is entirely possible my opinion will also be repudiated at the local level, but until such time as I am replaced, I shall continue to support the Monarchy as my elected powers provide.

I have observed that there was proposed, recently voted, and if ratified, a fundamental change to the Organic Law of the Kingdom of Talossa (if it can even still be called that).

However, that legislation is in direct conflict with our CAG and Constitution as the person having their status redefined is The King, His Majesty Regeu Ian, of the House of Lupul ("King John"). by the Grace of God, King of Talossa and of all its Realms and Regions, King of Cézembre, Sovereign Lord and Protector of Pengöpäts and the New Falklands, Defender of the Faith, Leader of the Armed Forces, Viceroy of Hoxha and Vicar of Atatürk.

From the CAG: Chapter I - The State
Article 1. The Sovereign Province of Cézembre is an autonomous and self-governing member of the federal Talossan nation and pledges eternal allegiance to His Royal Majesty, and the Regipäts Talossan.

As Sénéchal, I PROCLAIM for Cézembre continue to recognize as King, His Majesty Regeu Ian, of the House of Lupul ("King John") as the head of state for Cézembre and to follow the CAG, and El Regipäts Talossan Organic Law that was in place at the time of my election. Should there be a new Sénéchal elected, they would have the opportunity to chart their own course.  I seek counter-signature by @C. M. Siervicül &/or @King John via @Sir Alexandreu Davinescu

from the CAG: Chapter III- Le Sénéchal
Article 11. Le Sénéchal shall be the elected leader of Cézembre. Le Sénéchal shall have the power to issue proclamations which have the force of law. These proclamations may be appealed or amended as regular laws. These proclamations may not act as acts of attainders or any activity prohibited by the Organic Law (with regards to Prime Dictats). These proclamations must be counter-signed by the Governor-General (or the King, in case of, by lack of appointment or by long-term absence, a Governor-General).

As noted, there are remedies, should this proclamation be counter-signed, for l'Etats and the citizens of Cézembre.  While I evince that the King shall still be recognized, opinions may differ.  A change to the Constitution of the Sovereign Province of Cézembre requires:

From the CAG: Chapter VIII- Amendments
Article 21. This Constitution may be altered by a resolution of two third or more of l'Etats, which must be passed into approval by a referendum of the people, attaining the majority of those who vote, and proclaimed by the Governor-General.

Since I shall not propose a resolution to amend, it may be proposed by the other current sitting members of l'Etats which currently include @Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù, and @Ián Tamorán, @Ián S.G. Txaglh, or future members of l'Etats.  Since I shall not vote to amend, it shall take a vote of all remaining members of l'Etats to forward such as a referendum to the persons (currently 21) that I can determine as of the most recent Census are citizens.  In such a case, due to the importance of this possible fundamental change, I would seek a proclamation that a vote would continue until such time that every citizen would vote Per, Non, or Austaneu.

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on January 26, 2021, 09:00:02 AM

Quote from: xpb on January 26, 2021, 08:35:58 AM
The tiresome legerdemain of the referendum was predictable.  A simple vote on "Do You Want A King" Per/Non would result in a King.

http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~unger/articles/irv.html

1) Why was this only brought up after the results were announced?
2) How can you say that for certain? Wouldnt that depend on how the role of the King would be defined?

1. I sent my opinions via private messages to elected officials.  I was not selected to the governing body that proposed the legislation.
2. I cannot say for certain, it is only my opinion that the referendum set out to clone options rather than having a clear per/non choice.  One potential purpose of that is to obfuscate by stringing out the options simultaneously, rather than having binary decisions for various powers.

The tiresome legerdemain of the referendum was predictable.  A simple vote on "Do You Want A King" Per/Non would result in a King.

http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~unger/articles/irv.html

@King John
via
@Sir Alexandreu Davinescu

For your consideration

An Act to secure Homesteads on the Isle of Cézembre, which has been affirmed within l'Etats, is attached

Discussion within l'Etats may be found at https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=668.0

I have been noodling around on the TalossaNet site and really appreciate the Ministry of Stuff efforts for this.

Question - is there a setting or parameter in regard to the Groups that would have the feed come up first when clicking on them?  I think that would be better than the current default of just bringing up the members of the group on first touch.