Wittenberg

WHEREAS Talossa is not roleplaying, and
WHEREAS therefore, operating under a "D&D Cosă" with more seats than voting citizens is untenable, and
WHEREAS political power ought not be a matter of course that is bought and paid for, but a privilege derived from sufficient popular mandate (or for our newest citizens, a courtesy extended by law),

NOW THEREFORE, be it enacted that the following provision be added to el Lexhatx as subsubsection H.4.1.1:

QuoteThe total number of party seats is twenty.

FURTHERMORE, according to LegOrg IV.2.1, this change will not take effect until the next election following the passage of a calendar year.

Uréu q'estadra så:
Marcel Tafial

Excellent work.

This proposal forms the first step in laying out the URL's broader Democracy Agenda, in response to a Government who's happier to include absolute monarchists than it is to cooperate with a much larger democratic party. It is vital for political health that it be possible to lose elections.

So this proposal would reduce the size of the Cosa from 200 to 20, but would still permit new citizens to claim seats?

Yes - up to, as the existing legislation provides, 7.5% of the Cosa rounded up - i.e. 2 extra seats in total. Enough to make thing spicy lol

I'm not a math whiz, so I might be wrong.  But this means the first two new citizens can claim seats, and those seats will be equivalent in voting power to 5% of the vote, instead of the current 0.5%... something like six votes in the most recent election, for example?  Is that right?

You can -- and should -- consider whether very large reaction memes are a great way to discuss legislation, Max.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 07:40:25 PMYou can -- and should -- consider whether very large reaction memes are a great way to discuss legislation, Max.

You have a point...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can someone please explain to me how this works. I don't see how this reduces the size of the Cosa, so maybe I'm reading it incorrectly.

-Txec R

Quote from: King Txec on Yesterday at 07:42:49 PMCan someone please explain to me how this works. I don't see how this reduces the size of the Cosa, so maybe I'm reading it incorrectly.

-Txec R

As I understand it, the total number of seats that can be assigned would be reduced to 20, and this means that the Cosa would be less representative of the vote.  So someone can vote for themselves and still not get a seat, since you'd need multiple votes to get even one seat.

Ok I think this is mostly right:

PARTY	#	%	/20	Seats
Progressive Alliance	41	43.62	8.7	9
Uniun dels Reformistaes Livereschti	31	32.98	6.59	7
Green Party	13	13.83	2.76	3
In Defensa Traditionis	7	7.45	1.49	1
Independent Green/Anarcho-Surrealist	2	2.13	0.42	0

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 07:33:07 PMSo this proposal would reduce the size of the Cosa from 200 to 20, but would still permit new citizens to claim seats?

Yes. The number of party seats in the Cosă can be changed by statute, whereas abolishing New Citizens' seats would require modifying the Organic Law. I wouldn't want to do that, anyway.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 07:44:26 PMSo someone can vote for themselves and still not get a seat, since you'd need multiple votes to get even one seat.

Yes, that is by design. Under the 200-seat Cosă, a party with only one vote would be entitled to at least 2 seats. I never really understood the point of that.

Quote from: Max Maltezos on Yesterday at 07:37:15 PM

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on Yesterday at 07:34:07 PMYes - up to, as the existing legislation provides, 7.5% of the Cosa rounded up - i.e. 2 extra seats in total. Enough to make thing spicy lol

<snip>


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you want to say something?

I'm curious as to what the advantages are of keeping the current 200-seat model as opposed to reducing it to 20?

I think probably just that it's more granular, which this bill is specifically supposed to change.  So I guess it depends on whether or not you think it's good that the Cosa more closely resembles the actual vote.

Not speaking for the entire Green Party just as an individual MC. I would be voting against this as it is currently written.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on Today at 08:41:11 AMNot speaking for the entire Green Party just as an individual MC. I would be voting against this as it is currently written.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 05:33:25 AMI think probably just that it's more granular, which this bill is specifically supposed to change.  So I guess it depends on whether or not you think it's good that the Cosa more closely resembles the actual vote.

The Cosă as it stands is more granular than the actual vote tally! I don't believe this sort of granularity for its own sake outweighs the impracticality of MCs consistently holding two digits worth of seats.

I also think that in the current setup, political power is something that can be easily bought on a whim, which cheapens it. One thing that I always appreciated about Talossa is that citizenship and titles are handed out based on commitment and merit instead of simply being for sale like in other similarly sized but no doubt more recognisable nationettes such as Sealand. Thus it seems strange to me that while citizenship and titles need to be earned, this same standard is not consistently applied to power.

I definitely think it's worth considering this change.  But I think that the fact that the Cosa is so representative is a significant good thing.  It's really a matter of weighing both factors, and deciding which is more important: respecting the democratic vote as much as possible or making political power more rarefied.

Will there be any effect on things like the party seat rules or the number of seats a person can hold?

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 09:18:30 AMI definitely think it's worth considering this change.  But I think that the fact that the Cosa is so representative is a significant good thing.  It's really a matter of weighing both factors, and deciding which is more important: respecting the democratic vote as much as possible or making political power more rarefied.

Will there be any effect on things like the party seat rules or the number of seats a person can hold?

I would think that is the reason this bill was made, Honourable Baron.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 09:18:30 AMWill there be any effect on things like the party seat rules or the number of seats a person can hold?

The formula used to determine the maximum amount of seats an MC can hold (party seats * 10 / number of votes, rounded up) remains unchanged.

To clarify, I mean the total number of seats each individual was permitted to hold.  For example, this Cosa it's 20 seats maximum per person.  Would it be 2 seats maximum per person under this new law?

EDIT: Okay, so it sounds like it would be 2 per person for an election like this one.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Today at 09:24:01 AMTo clarify, I mean the total number of seats each individual was permitted to hold.  For example, this Cosa it's 20 seats maximum per person.  Would it be 2 seats maximum per person under this new law?

EDIT: Okay, so it sounds like it would be 2 per person for an election like this one.

Yeah, as much as I would like a proper Real Cosă (and this could be easily achieved by deleting Lexh.H.4.1), I understand that we currently don't have the manpower to have 20 individual MCs — hence why this is called the Pseudo-Real Cosă Act.