So the Premier of Maricopa has mentioned that he supports the concept of provincial re-organisation, and is interested in opening talks with Fiova on the issue.

Hopefully this won't blow people's brains out as badly as the F-F merger proposal (esp. since the two partners are territorially contiguous this time, I think). Anyone got any suggestions? Or want to join me on an official negotiation team?

On the one hand: the old system whereby political parties could give seats to whoever they wanted enabled corruption and meant no democratic accountability of who got in the Cosa.

On the other hand: it allowed new citizens to get involved in national legislation right away, should they want to.

POSSIBLE COMPROMISE: reserve a certain amount of seats in the Cosa (7.5% of the Cosa, 15 out of the current 200? or in addition to the current 200?) for the Secretary of State (not the parties) to allocate to people who immigrated since the last election, maximum of 1.5% of the Cosa per person. This is not dissimilar to how other countries have reserved seats which are nominated (not elected) to bring minority or marginalised groups into the legislature. So random newbie turns up, SoS says "here are your 3 seats". If we run out of seats because more than 5 newbies show up, the SoS can redistribute the allocations. I doubt we'd get more than 15 per term.

This would allow newbies to get involved right away without having to pledge allegiance to one or another political party right off the bat. It would mean influence over legislation, and possibly over VoCs, but not disproportionately so (perhaps the allocated seats wouldn't get to vote on the VoC?) However it would need an OrgLaw amendment to IV.1 and IV.2.

Comments?

Going away with the family for Christmas, should be back on or around Independence Day. I'm reachable on Facebook or via email in case of emergency. There'd better still be a country when I come back.

The Organic Law Small Amendment #1 (Cosa Seats) Act

WHEREAS it is good for there to be some kind of flexibility in the size of the Cosa, within limits:

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Senäts and Cosa of Talossan in Ziu assembled that the Organic Law IV.1 be amended by the addition of the following underlined text:

QuoteThe Cosa is the national legislative assembly, and is composed of 200 seats apportioned among political parties based on their performance in the General Election. It may administer itself as it sees fit. The number of seats in the Cosa may be changed by law, with the provisos that any such change will not take effect until the next general election of the Cosa; and that the number of seats in the Cosa may never be less than twice the number of Senators minus one.

---

The Organic Law Small Amendment #2 (Seneschál's Rights in the Hopper) Act

WHEREAS when the Comità da Redacziun Legislatïu was set up, there were complaints that the combination of the new system with Organic Law VII.6 gave the Government too much power to bypass the system with its bills, compared to those of private MZs:

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Senäts and Cosa of Talossan in Ziu assembled that Organic Law VII.6:

QuoteThe Seneschál shall have the right at his discretion to withdraw any legislative proposal from the Hopper and instruct the Secretary of State to treat it as a properly submitted bill.

is hereby deleted entirely.

---

The Organic Law Small Amendment #3 (Dignity of the Túischac'h) Act

WHEREAS the Chair of the Senäts, the Mençéi, is an Organic position, but the Chair of the Cosa, the Túischac'h is not;

and WHEREAS there appears to be no good reason for this;

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Senäts and Cosa of Talossan in Ziu assembled that a new section of the Organic Law, to be numbered IV.12, read as follows:

QuoteThe Cosa shall elect one of its members to serve as Speaker of the Cosa (Talossan: el Túischac'h) for the upcoming term. The Speaker shall preside, direct and maintain order during Living Cosas and in the Hopper, in an unbiased fashion. Otherwise, his function will be to advise Members of the Cosa of appropriate decorum. He is considered the honourable President of the Cosâ and shall be awarded all due veneration when serving as such. In the absence of the Túischac'h from the Hopper, the Mençéi shall perform these duties.

and that El Lexhatx H.21, which has this identical text, is hereby deleted entirely.

The Free Democrats, Talossa's currently dominant political party, have elected Secretary of State @Txec dal Nordselva as Party President at their currently ongoing convention. Miestra Schiva was re-elected Party Secretary and Gödafrïeu Valcádac'h was elected chair of the party in Fiova Province.

This new party leadership will be in charge of choosing the Free Democrat list of candidates at the next election, including the question of whom the Free Democrats will suggest as the next Seneschál, subject to approval from the party membership in secret ballot.

The Convention is currently concluding with an open debate on the current Talossan crisis of activity/immigration, led off by the new Party President. Non-members of the Party are welcome to observe, and to contact the Party Secretary if they wish to make a guest speech.

Part of the Government's plan for the Justice portfolio in this Cosa has been to revitalise the Talossan Bar. I determined that the most efficient way to do this was to apply for the Bar myself.

The CpI set me a written examination, which I completed on the 28th of August this year. In response to a Terpelaziun in the Cosa in October, I had to report that I had had absolutely no formal response from the Cort to this examination. This situation has not changed, almost two months later.

My sources within the hallowed halls of Talossan justice have led me to believe that the answer for this is that three out of the existing four CpI Judges have not made any response to my examination (as opposed to the 2 which I had previously reported). The remaining Judge is of course not authorised to give any formal response on their own.

This, not to put too fine a point on it, stinks. Sure, Talossa is in a bit of a soporific patch at the moment. But the job of CpI Judge in Talossa is very, very low-workload as it stands.

This is my formal announcement of the fact that I intend to communicate personally with each of the absent CpI Judges to ask whether they still have any interest in being on the Cort. If not, I will happily accept their resignation on behalf of the Government. If so, I will ask them to give me an immediate date by which my application for Bar membership will be considered. If a satisfactory response is not forthcoming, from one or more Judges, it will be my sad duty as Avocat-Xheneral, to use the provisions of Organic Law VIII.8 and El Lexhatx G.11.1 et seq. to ask the Ziu to compel these Judges to retirement by means of a Notice of Reprimand.

Questions? Comments?

¡Feliceu aniversar ad ár Seneschal amat, @Txoteu Davinescu!

!Qe la moart ischà imbraif à sieux enemici!

The Free Democrats of Talossa, the leading political party of Talossa, are holding their annual decision-making and leadership election convention starting December 1, and recruitment is now open.

The convention will elect a new President and Secretary, and discuss any amendments to the Party Platform or Constitution.

All Talossans who agree with the central principle of the FreeDems - liberty and democracy for Talossa's citizens and provinces - are invited to join the Free Democrats and claim their right to vote, raise motions and stand for election at this convention. Just let me know.

https://youtu.be/8Yzv0UgstZE

El Lexhatx H.2.1 states as follows:

QuoteAny Member of the Cosă (MC) or Senator may at any time between the First and Last Clark of a Cosă Term, table in "The Ziu" board on Witt, or its equivalent, a "c (PQ)" or "Terp" in a new thread or its equivalent.

Neither El Lex, nor the bill which introduced this language (44RZ1), nor the Hopper thread on 44RZ1, gives any hint what in blue blazes a "c (PQ)" might possibly be. Could Dama Litz herself enlighten us?

Topic for discussion: "The drop-off in Talossan activity is partly due to Organic/legislative requirements that require boring and annoying red-tape navigation before anything can be done, and this applies equally to Government as well as private activity."

Honestly, I'm beginning to think that solutions to problems tend to turn into worse problems, and I raise the State Opening of the Cosa as an example. This was suggested by my party as "something fun to do"; a little ceremony which would give the King a cultural duty. And now it's just degenerating into a chore that requires messy and unpleasant organisation, and crucially the King doesn't seem to want to do it, but we have to do it because it's the law.

The proposal is that the existing Standing Orders of the General Assembly be amended to read as follows, to bring them into line with the 2021 Constitution:

Quote1. Any citizen may propose a draft of a bill or of a resolution to the General Assembly, and leave it for discussion for as long as they want, revising it as often as they want. A Bill is a proposal for a new law, or for an amendment to an existing law; a Resolution is a simple statement of the views of the General Assembly with no legal effect, a ratification of an election or the confirmation of a nomination.

2. Once they like it, they submit the draft for official publication. An officially published draft of a bill or of a resolution shall be denoted by the word PROPOSAL: at the beginning of the subject line.
       
3.1 Once officially published, citizens have 7 days to officially publish an amendment to the bill. The Bill may go directly to a FINAL VOTE if all citizens indicate that they have no amendments for the bill in question. Any amendment shall be published in the same thread as the original bill, and be denoted by the word AMENDMENT: at the beginning of the subject line.
3.2  Seven days after publication of the draft, the Túischac'h calls for a vote on the amendments in a new thread denoted by the words AMENDMENTS VOTE: at the beginning of the subject line, and last for seven days. At the end of the seven days, if for each amendment more për than contrâ votes have been recorded, it shall be passed. Otherwise, the amendment shall not be passed.

4. Once all of the amendments have been settled and applied, the Túischac'h calls for a vote on the final version of the bill, which lasts for 7 days. A final call for a vote shall be published in a new thread denoted by the words FINAL VOTE:. at the beginning of the subject line. At the end of the seven days, if more për than contrâ votes have been recorded in the case of a regular Bill or Resolution, or at least twice as many per as contra votes in the case of an amendment to this Constitution, the bill or resolution shall be passed. Otherwise, the bill or resolution shall not be passed.

5.  In any voting phase, all the votes of the citizens shall be open and public. A citizen may change his or her vote at any time up until the final voting deadline.

6. Votes of Confidence, as provided in Fiôvâ Const. § 10.2 or Fiôvâ Const. § 10.3, shall proceed in the same way as resolutions, except that there shall be no amendment phase, and shall proceed directly to a final vote (as in section 4 above) as soon as a citizen officially submits a request, in a thread denoted by the word VOC: at the beginning of the subject line, to the General Assembly. Votes of confidence shall end as soon as all citizens have cast their vote or seven days have passed, whichever comes first. Votes of confidence may contain no provisions not directly related to confidence in the official in question.

7. Elections of the Túischac'h and Secretary of State, as provided in Fiôvâ Const. § 3.1 or Fiôvâ Const. § 9.1, shall proceed in the same way as ordinary resolutions, except that there shall be no amendment phase, and proceed directly to a final vote (as in section 4 above) as soon as a citizen officially submit a candidature, in a thread denoted by the word CANDIDATURE: at the beginning of the subject line, to the General Assembly.

8. Confirmations of judicial nominations, as provided in Fiôvâ Const. § 8.1, shall proceed in the same way as ordinary resolutions, except that there shall be no amendment phase, and proceed directly to a final vote (as in section 4 above) as soon as the Cunstavál's decree of nomination, in a thread denoted by the word NOMINATION: at the beginning of the subject line, it is published. Voting on Confirmations shall end as soon as all citizens have cast their vote or seven days have passed, whichever comes first.

9. Once a bill has been passed, the Túischac'h shall submit it to the Cunstavál for promulgation as law, in accordance with Fiôvâ Const. § 7.2. A resolution does not need to be presented to the Cunstavál.

10. Any citizen may propose a question for formal answer to the Praisidïeu or to any other Minister. Such a question shall be denoted by the word QUESTION: at the beginning of the subject line. If the member of the Government so addressed is a citizen, they shall reply personally within seven days; if not, then the Praisidïeu shall transmit a reply on their behalf.

11. The Túischac'h, or one of his deputies, is responsible for enforcing these Standing Orders, and for keeping a civil and appropriate tone of debate in the General Assembly.

12. All citizens shall address their statements in the General Assembly to the Túischac'h.

So where we were?

We were deliberating the following, to make it possible for Talossa to sanction citizens who commit infamous crimes outside the nation:

Quote7.2.10.  Bringing Talossa into disrepute. Any Talossan citizen who has been convicted by a credible foreign court, which has been deemed to abide by Talossan values, of a crime established at trial to have involved fraud, harassment, bribery, physical or sexual violence or threats thereof, has committed the crime of bringing Talossa into disrepute to the following degrees:
7.2.10.1.        A felony if sentenced to penal servitude of more than 2 years.
7.2.10.2.        A serious misdemeanour otherwise.

And we were also deliberating improving El Lex G.6 to establish a higher hurdle before criminal cases (just felonies? felonies and serious misdemeanours) can come to trial:

Quote6. Criminal Law: In the interest of providing the accused with the rights granted to them by the Ninth Covenant of Rights and Freedoms, the following rights shall be considered to be inalienable and shall be afforded to all citizens in civilian trials:

    6.1. The Ministry of Justice, on behalf of the Crown, shall submit a charging instrument to the Clerk of the Cort identifying, in plain language, the charge to be brought against the accuse, and the factual allegations to be proven to support said charges. Nothing in this section shall limit the Ministry of Justice from relying on unpleaded allegations provided such does not prejudice the accused.

    6.2. Upon receipt of the charging instrument, the Clerk of the Cort shall refer the matter to the appropriate tribunal of the Crown as defined by law.

    6.3. The tribunal of the Crown shall test the sufficiency by making a prima facie determination that if the factual allegations contained therein were proven true beyond a reasonable doubt, then the accused would be guilty of the crime as alleged. Jeopardy shall only attach if the tribunal of the Crown accepts the charging instrument as sufficient. If the tribunal is not satisfied of such, then it shall reject the charging instrument as insufficient on its face and jeopardy shall not have attached.

    6.4. The accused must be informed of the charges against him by the Crown within seven days of said charges being accepted by the Tribunal of the Crown.

    6.5. Such notification must be submitted to the accused in writing, by either an electronic medium such as email, a typed letter, or by a handwritten letter. A copy of every such notice shall be archived in the Royal Archives by the Royal Archivist immediately after he receives a copy of said notice. If the notice is given in the form of a hand-written letter, the Royal Archivist shall make a copy of the letter in an electronic format, such that it may be added to the Royal Archives.

    6.6. The Prosecution shall have up to 90 days from the time of notification of the accused in which to prepare its case. If a case is not prepared by the Prosecution within the allotted time, then the matter shall be dismissed, unless the Prosecution can show that such delay is through the fault of the accused.

    6.7. If a case is not prepared within the 90-day limit, then the Prosecution may request up to an additional 30 days to prepare its case, which shall be granted or denied by the tribunal assigned to the case. This section takes precedence over G.1.6.

    6.8. The decision shall be based on the legitimacy of reasons given by the Prosecution in the interests of justice, equity, and efficiency.

    6.9. If a matter is dismissed for failure to prosecute, then final jeopardy shall attach unless the Prosecution is able to provide new evidence against the accused with which to build a case. A new case must meet the same statute of limitations for any offence.

    6.7. The Prosecution may withdraw a charging instrument upon good cause shown to which jeopardy shall not attach.

Last I heard, AD suggested beefing up sections 6.3 and 6.4 above. Our aim: a means to punish Talossans for infamous crimes committed outside Talossa, with sufficient safeguards to prevent malicious prosecution (for this or other criminal offences).

Please proceed.

Quote from: King John on August 04, 2021, 10:04:28 AM
The Distain said it.  "Silly and paranoid."  If she had any *actual* doubts about my existence (instead of this silliness she's trying to foist off on wavering MCs), she would have sent me a text message

When the King "disappeared without leave" in the last Cosa term, Senator Válcadác'h got the King's phone number from me so GV could do just that - perform a "welfare check". By GV's report, the King was very annoyed at being contacted by anyone from Talossa. Now he's very annoyed that we're not checking up on him all the time.

The King is obviously checking up on Talossa and can become active when anything affects him personally. The question of to what extent he's "delegating" those royal functions in which he's not interested to the unelected and unaccountable "Baron" is an open one....

Quote from: King John on August 04, 2021, 10:04:28 AM
Sure, I've accepted some help preparing various posts.

... or perhaps not that open. When one person prepares a document for another person to sign, we may wonder who, exactly, is speaking to us.

This is what the current Talossan monarchy means - the whole nation hinges on what one grumpy gentleman feels like doing on any given day, or what his "trusted advisor" is given licence to do for him.

I am very grateful by the implied licence given for, not only the Government, but for the whole country to contact His Majesty directly as and when necessary or helpful. But so much of the animus between the Monarchy and the current political majority could be put aside if His Majesty could answer two questions:

• Why did you go "absent without warning" during the 55th Cosa?
• Why did you appoint as Regent the person you knew would infuriate the political majority the most?

I believe I know the answer to both those questions: "sheer spite at the political majority, a Royal-sized political tantrum"; and that is why I believe the King's time is at an end. I really doubt that, should I have rung the Woolley household in the last year or so and asked those questions, I would have gotten a courteous and satisfying answer.

Quote from: El Lexhatx H.1.1Following each General Election there shall be an official "State Opening of the Ziu". At the start of the State Opening, the new Seneschal shall be sworn to the office publicly. The Sovereign shall then deliver a speech outlining the Government's legislative agenda and program for the term. The contents of this speech shall be communicated to the Sovereign by the incoming Seneschal prior to the ceremony. The Seneschal may announce Cabinet Ministers during the ceremony. A rebuttal by the Leader of the Opposition shall follow, which may be followed by a further rebuttal by the leader of the third largest party. When practical, the State Opening may include an official Living Cosă (and 'Living Senats') in which food and drink shall be featured and as many Talossans as possible shall be invited to attend. The event shall be organized and conducted by the Speakers of both Houses of the Ziu, working in coordination and cooperation with each other.

I know that the new Seneschál has drafted up a Speech from the Throne and is sending it to the King, so we've got that part sorted out. What we need to organise from here is:

- a date/time/setup for a live video conference featuring the Seneschal, the King and the Leader of the Opposition;
- an Opposition Leader, lol.

As to the latter:

Quote from: El Lexhatx H.23. Members of the Cosâ who (in a given session of the Cosa) have voted NON on the most recent Vote of Confidence, or intend to do so on the next Vote of Confidence, shall be known as El Contrapharti Fieir da Sieu Maxhestà, or "His Majesty's Loyal Opposition" in English, or in short "El Contrapharti / The Opposition". Unless and until the members of the Opposition decide otherwise by majority vote, the "Leader of the Opposition" shall be the leader of the party with the most Cosa seats assigned to MCs who voted NON on the last Vote of Confidence.

... but the problem is we haven't had a VoC yet; unless you count the Seneschál election. The party tallies for votes against the current Seneschál on the VoC were:

NPW 11
Tafial 5
KLüP 11
DIEN 14
Balançéu 17

So, if we take that as the equivalent of a VoC, then X. Pôl Briga is the Leader of the Opposition and gets to do a rebuttal at the Speech from the Throne? And M. Tresplet is the "third party" leader who can also make a speech if desired? Do we need to modify the law on the Leader of the Opposition to cover this case in future?

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on July 25, 2021, 05:40:39 AM
I hate misspelled names. I hate them so much that I wrote a blog post about it, albeit in Talossan... anyway, the rampant misspellings that float around on here are the bane of my existence, especially considering that the correct spellings are not recorded in one place. The Database, the Wiki, Talossa.Net and of course Witt all have different flavours of misspelled names, making it impossible for laypeople to figure out which one is actually correct!

In that case, it sounds like we need a programme to make sure the correct spellings are used on the Database, the Wiki and talossa.net. This sounds like something the Ladintsch Naziunal, @the Secretary of State and @the Minister of STUFF should be getting their heads together on, ASAP.

The Coalition Agreement states: "Any further fundamental Organic Law reforms, including the question of a unicameral Ziu or a "Real Cosa", will be referred to a Standing Committee of the Ziu representing all elected parties."

This is that Committee, and I hope to see all 8 (!) parties represented in the Ziu commenting here. The goal of this Committee is that we don't want to run the Ziu aground on struggles over future OrgLaw reforms, so let's try to come to a consensus on fixes before writing up a bill and Clarking it.

Without further ado, here are some suggestions I want to raise:

• That old chestnut, the Real Cosa. Organic Law IV.1 to be changed to: "The Cosa is the national legislative assembly, and is composed of seats apportioned among political parties based on their performance in the General Election. The number of these seats shall be set by law, except that it shall be no fewer than twice the number of Senators, minus one. It may administer itself as it sees fit."
• Write the Túischac'h into the OrgLaw. The Mençéi is an Organic post, why not the President of the Cosa?
• Possible further fixes to the Seneschál election. My top two questions: do we want to make it possible to abstain? Do we want to continue to require MCs to name two preferences?

The floor is now open for further vague suggestions.

It is proper to let the people of Talossa know what will be happening with 55RZ21, the Talossa Shall Choose Its King Act (aka the Historic Compromise), adopted by the requisite margin in the last Cosa but vetoed, ¡qët 'n supriça!, by the King who doesn't want to get unchosen.

The recent election of the Cosa gave 120 seats to parties committed to supporting the bill - not the 2/3 majority required. Therefore, for the bill to have any chance in the new Cosa, some kind of "Compromise on the Compromise" was necessary.

First of all, the Free Democrats exercised their mandate to form a Government. This was a different task than pushing forward the Constitutional issue (for example, MC M. Tresplet pledged his support and help with a FreeDems government while being 100% opposed to changes to the monarchy). Our first choice of partners was the League of Centre Conservatives (LCC), who - while having differences with us on precisely what kind of monarchy reform is necessary - were clearly the most enthusiastic of the other parties for the hard work of government, and with whom we had a pretty good relationship on a personal level.

We were also approached, without solicitation, by the leader of the Talossan National Congress (TNC), volunteering his services as part of a new Government. We accepted this happily, although it was not necessary for a Cosa majority, because a broader-based government would be more stable and have more resources.

The new three-party Government then discussed where to move on monarchy reform (for which we would still require at least the other two pro-55RZ21 parties to consent, i.e. the Peculiarists and the Tafialistàes).  The preferred option was to find some kind of fresh bill which could get the necessary 3/4 margin to start from scratch but still override the royal veto.

To this end, the LCC (chief proponents of the Compromise on the Compromise) engaged in talks with the "King Lüc Party". Certainly, the pro-compromise parties could have totally gotten behind King Lüc I. But the course of these discussions revealed that - a) the KLüP was not prepared to actually put their flagship policy into action at this time; (b) after a week or two of delays, we found out that no-one had actually asked Lüc da Schir, who actually does not want to be King of Talossa. So that went nowhere, and the KLüP's voters might wonder what they actually voted for.

The next step would have been to create some kind of sequencing. The plan was that the LCC would support 55RZ21 now, long enough to elect a new King, and then the Ziu would enact the LCC's preferred compromise - of a mechanism of triggering Votes of Confidence in the monarch, rather than regular 7-year renewals of the mandate. In theory, this got support from the other pro-Compromise parties. But the TNC leader insisted in Cabinet that he couldn't agree to this without seeing details of the "revised compromise" bill in advance. The LCC pointed to their current proposal in the Hopper (which the FreeDems don't support in its current form, but is at least a basis for beginning discussions). The TNC did not reply to this.

The next thing we learned was that the holder of the TNC's Cosa seats had broken Point 1 of the coalition agreement by not voting for Txoteu Davinescù to become Seneschál. Our Seneschál-candidate sent a message to the TNC leader about this, saying in part: "I need to hear from you directly by noon TST tomorrow or I will be forced to remove your party from the coalition". The TNC leader's response to this was to... quit the coalition, on the justification that the Seneschál-candidate had "threatened" him - and to not respond to any further communications from either FreeDems or LCC leaders after that.

While cxhn. Davinescu could certainly have phrased his please-explain letter in a less confrontational way, bear in mind that he is brand new to the highest echelons of Talossan politics and is still learning the proper modes of communication. Senator Itravilatx could be certainly excused for taking offence, but cxhn. Davinescù has subsequently apologised, both privately and publicly, for his hard tone - to no avail. You could see this as a huge overreaction from the TNC leader; or, alternatively, as an escape hatch from a situation of government which was harder than he had anticipated.

Senator Itravilatx's  withdrawal has not only required a last-minute Cabinet reshuffle, but ended the negotiations that were underway to get 55RZ21 through (and the King replaced) in return for a "reform of the reform" later. As to the first, the Government, now comprised of two parties, welcomes Francal I. Lux MC on board to take up the Cabinet posts abandoned by the TNC.

Meanwhile, if the TNC no longer wnt to talk, there is no point in further negotiations on "cunning plans" to get monarchy reform through. Our last, best hope is now that the LCC will at least abstain on this bill, if they cannot in good conscience support it - and that the TNC will stick to their pre-election pledge to support it.

The Free Democrats will thus go straight to reintroducing 55RZ21 on the First Clark. In the event that it fails to get the 2/3 of the Cosa necessary, we will revert to our manifesto position - "to enact the result of the Ranked Choice referendum, i.e. an elected Head of State", through some yet-to-be determined means, at a time when the electoral calculus is better.

It gives me great pleasure to announce that the Praisidïeu of Fiova have elected @C. Carlüs Xheraltescù as Capitán (chair of the Praisidïeu, ceremonial leader of Fiova). ¡Qe la moart vient ischpiramint à sieux enemící!

Things that are already crimes under indigenous Talossan portions of El Lex A:

• "knowingly accept or hold citizenship in a blacklisted micronation" (A.9.3); "anyone holding an office mentioned in A.9.5. to provide false information about his/her micronational involvement." (A.9.7); "or the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the Minister of Interior to seek, accept, or hold citizenship in a micronation (A.9.8)
• "makes any fraudulent or dishonest claims or statements on his or her application for citizenship"; (A.16.1); "uses another person's identity or uses an identity that creates the impression of another person to post or convey messages via email or on any public forum in the Kingdom of Talossa." (A.16.2); "creates, for purposes of claiming citizenship or with the intent to deceive or mislead other Talossans, more than one identity for use in the Kingdom of Talossa, excepting name-changes that replace an earlier name previously held by the same person." (A.16.3)
• running a bogus "official Talossan" website, which is sedition or treason!!! (A.20)
• unauthorised use of "any official seal" (A.22)

In addition, certain things which are criminalised in Wisconsin are given increased penalties in Talossa, namely: "unlawful use of computerized communication systems"; "harassment"; "attempted computer crimes". But wow, that is a very small list.

What strikes me is that A.16,20,22 all seem to come under the headings of "perjury or counterfeiting", which are some of the things which I was assured we needed Wisconsin law to deal with. Harassment (at least the definition thereof) and bribery would of course need local definitions. A small list of additional offenses that need defining were suggested by a Talossan off-Witt:

Quote"treason, embezzlement, perverting the course of justice, identity theft, theft of property belonging to the state, computer hacking with intent"

To some degree these are covered above (ID theft and computer hacking), but that's somewhere to start. Perhaps in some places, if all these are in the Wisconsin code right now, we can "copy and paste" the definitions if they're simple enough.