Azul,

as many of you will have noticed, our webpresence has been compromised throughout the last two weeks or so due to what our hosting provider defined as a "rather significant failure with (their) primary server". This began with me being unable to access our backend, continued with various DNS woes causing outages for some people in certain areas or using certain ISPs, and ended with a complete outage on March 1-ish.


What happened?

Due to the failure, as you may have noticed, we lost all data that was changed between Feb 16th and the ultimate outage on Mar 1st - Witt posts and PMs, Wiki articles, talossa.com content, and so on. Again, quoting from DoRoyal,

QuoteThe front end of our hosted websites remained online, allowing for front end edits to be made. The backend panel, however, including our backup processes, stopped working completely on the 16th, (meaning that) any edits that were made after the backup process and backend panel stopped working, would only be saved to the old server, and thus, were lost in the migration.

My possibly inaccurate interpretation is: we were on server A, then our data got moved to server B, but we still were interacting with server A. When server A finally went offline (or our address finally pointed to B -- remember all our DNS woes before the actual outage?), we were left with the data on B, which was by then two weeks out of date.

What happened *then*?
Mostly restoring all we could, recreating all subdomains and moving files to the correct places so our new server/control panel wouldn't complain anymore. This took the better part of yesterday for me and new MinTech Dan T. Most low maintenance subdomains were up pretty quickly, Witt was restored around noon TST yesterday, the Wiki took a bit longer and as of earlier today is now up as well.

Didn't we have backups?
Yes, Witt and Wiki are backed up weekly. However, due to the same frontend-backend misconfiguration issue, the backups were also unable to pick up any fresh data after the 16th.

Anything else missing?
We may have lost some Witt attachments and Wiki files. This may be related to why all avatars were reset, incidentally. I tried restoring all I could and there's more backups coming that were done by our host, I'm told. Regardless, if you had a CoA, it still can be linked to from heraldry.talossa.com , or from the wiki.

What do I (the reader) need to do?
DM me if there's anything wrong or broken, and if you had a talossa.com email address, especially an official or mission-critical one, that needs restoring.

Anything else you (Lüc) need to do before we're 100% back up and running?
Yes, some customizations are missing, such as the favicons (no biggie) and Tapatalk integration. Also, as mentioned, email redirects need to be restored. All shall be done later today. That said, you are safe to use all of our services. Even if we can restore additional missing content, we should be able to plug it back in without disrupting fresh data coming in from today onwards.



Thank you to everyone who helped restoring service in some way or the other. This was in the middle of a government transition no less, so for some of them it wasn't even their job anymore. Thank you to Txec and Miestră for interfacing with DoRoyal, Dan T for helping with the actual recovery job, and Breneir for the public-facing updates.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 14, 2023, 06:33:10 AM

Quote from: Lüc on February 14, 2023, 04:25:09 AM(I went ahead and created discussion threads for all other bills - I assumed this was the proper procedure, but maybe I'm wrong)

You can do it however you wish!  If you want everyone to post bills in separate threads, that's 100% your prerogative.  Previously, people could just post the bill or a link to the bill in the main thread, also.  Please feel completely free to edit my "instructions" post to reflect your own preferences, or let me know and I can also just delete it.

Yeah, I was just confused because seemingly there were both standalone threads *and* discussions in the main thread. I expect we'll discuss this later in the term, but I have no qualms with the current way of doing things.

Right, having dealt with those issues, I see no further problems with this amendment.

WHEREAS there is a large legal loophole that would permit virtually any crime, including very serious crimes such as threats of sexual assault, theft, bribery, or anything else, and

WHEREAS the problem lies with the fact that we're offering unlimited and unqualified sanctuary under terms which clearly reference the medieval Christian practice of offering church protection from secular law, thereby allowing anyone to claim the right of sanctuary if accused of crimes, and

WHEREAS it's hard to find any other way to interpret this bit of the law so that it makes sense, and so therefore this reading probably is going to be a valid one, or at the very least would be an incredible complication that might make it impossible to prosecute someone, and

WHEREAS no one has yet taken advantage of it, but there's no reason to think that will last forever,

THEREFORE the tenth section of Title A of el Lexhatx, which currently reads

Quote10. The Ziu hereby recognizes the historic right of churches and other religious organizations to offer sanctuary to individuals in dire need.

is hereby stricken in its entirety.

FURTHERMORE, the words "Except as provided in A.17," shall be struck from section 16.

FURTHERMORE, the Scribe is directed to renumber Title A in a sensible fashion.

Uréu q'estadra så:
Baron Alexandreu Davinescu (MC-TNC)

WHEREAS the Bureau of Corporations was in fact used by two corporations, but it never did its job, and that's not really their fault, and

WHEREAS it's actually good to have a place to officially incorporate both private and public entities, and "please put us on this public list" is a very minimal burden on the government, and

WHEREAS the Register of Talossan Enterprises does not appear to exist and has never even been promoted and I doubt that more than two or three people know it hypothetically exists, so it had its shot over the last two years and hasn't made it,

THEREFORE the ninth subsection of the eighth subsection of the second section of Title D of el Lexhatx, which currently reads as follows:

Quote2.8.9 The Finance Minister shall create a Register of Talossan Enterprises, available to all Talossan citizens. Any Talossan who produces goods and services, whether commercially or as a hobby, may provide a description, no longer than 100 words, of their enterprise together with their contact details, for the purposes of advertisement and information. An enterprise shall be removed from the register at the request of the registrant; or by a determination by the Finance Minister that the enterprise is no longer active, or not of a character with which the Kingdom of Talossa wishes to be associated. Such determinations shall be subject to judicial review.

shall be replaced by the following subsections:

Quote2.8.9 The Finance Minister is empowered to create the Bureau of Corporations, which body shall be responsible for the registration of all Talossan businesses, the enforcement of applicable business laws, and such further tasks as may seem fit by the Ziu.
2.8.9.1 The Bureau of Corporations shall issue business licenses in a timely fashion to all those corporations and businesses that apply for one. Application is voluntary and free.
2.8.9.2 An application for a business license must include the following information:
2.8.9.2.1 The name under which the corporation will do business in Talossa.
2.8.9.2.2 The name of the citizen that owns the business and who has applied for registration.
2.8.9.2.3 The type of business.
2.8.9.2.4 The status of the business, either profit or non-profit.
2.8.9.2.5 The name and location of the business outside of Talossa, if desired.
2.8.9.2.6 The articles of incorporation for the business, if applicable.
2.8.9.3 Official articles of incorporation may be included by a corporation when applying for a license. Registered articles shall be considered binding and may be enforced through civil suits. Registration of such articles is voluntary and free. A registered corporation need not be registered in any other country. Registered articles shall be a matter of public record, and may be amended according to terms laid out within the articles.  Sample articles may be offered at the Bureau's discretion.
2.8.9.4. All business licenses shall be issued by the Bureau in a standardized format, including all of the above information, and assigning each business its own official number. This number shall be composed of three digits to indicate the year of registration combined with three digits to indicate the order a business was registered, beginning with 001. For example, a business, registered in 2012/XXXIII, that was the seventh business registered in Talossa, would have the number 033007. Changes to this numbering scheme may be made at the discretion of the Bureau, but are discouraged. Business licenses shall be a matter of public record, and will be made available by the Bureau on request.  It is encouraged for the Bureau to provide a fancy certificate to any registered business.

Uréu q'estadra så:
Baron Alexandreu Davinescu (MC-TNC)

This still says "Miestrâ Schivâ" and I'm guessing we didn't choose to switch to the Talossan versions of the names of the original framers after all. (Also, since it was pointed out Cresti is an UrN - so is GV, lest we forget.)

Is the Symbols of the Ziu Act final, or is there an external opinion still pending?

(I went ahead and created discussion threads for all other bills - I assumed this was the proper procedure, but maybe I'm wrong)

WHEREAS one of the many things that makes Talossa impressive and unusual among its fellow small countries is the continuity and antiquity of our government, and

WHEREAS it's good to visibly preserve that antiquity for others to see, and

WHEREAS the 2017 revisions to the Organic Law were comprehensive and excellent, and their organizer merits more credit than he gave himself,

THEREFORE it is resolved by the King, Cosa, and Senäts in Ziu assembled that the Scribe shall change the displayed title of the Organic Law to reflect its legal origin date of 1997, and

FURTHERMORE that the Scribe shall alter the Preamble, which currently reads

QuoteWE, JOHN I, by the grace of God, King of Talossa, etc., etc., etc., conscious of the role conferred upon Talossa by history, ever mindful of our inexplicable and inextricable connection somehow to Berbers, moved by the tenacity of the Talossan people throughout the many trials of the past twenty years, with renewed patriotism and the resolute will to craft a state based on justice, law, and freedom, for the peace, order, and good government of all Talossans, aware of the need for a new governing document that may serve Talossa for decades to come; and owing a debt of gratitude to Matthias Muth, John Eiffler, Evan Gallagher, Sean Hert, John Jahn, Dan Lorentz, Geoff Toumayan, Marc-André Dowd, Nathan Freeburg, and Ken Oplinger, who developed the founding principles of modern Talossan governance, and to Viteu Marcianüs, Ian Plätschisch, Gödafrïeu Válcadác'h, Dame Miestrâ Schivâ, Txoteu Davinescu, Sir Cresti Matawois Siervicül, and Eovart Grischun, who ensured the preparation of this document; do ordain and establish, by and through the consent of the Talossan People, as the supreme law of our Realm, this 2017 Organic Law

to instead read

QuoteWE, JOHN I, by the grace of God, King of Talossa, etc., etc., etc., conscious of the role conferred upon Talossa by history, ever mindful of our inexplicable and inextricable connection somehow to Berbers, moved by the tenacity of the Talossan people throughout the many trials of the past twenty years, with renewed patriotism and the resolute will to craft a state based on justice, law, and freedom, for the peace, order, and good government of all Talossans, aware of the need for a new governing document that may serve Talossa for decades to come; and owing a debt of gratitude to Matthias Muth, John Eiffler, Evan Gallagher, Sean Hert, John Jahn, Dan Lorentz, Geoff Toumayan, Marc-André Dowd, Nathan Freeburg, and Ken Oplinger, who developed the founding principles of modern Talossan governance, and to Ian Plätschisch, Viteu Marcianüs, Sir Gödafrïeu Válcadác'h, Dama Miestră Schivă, Txoteu Davinescu, Sir Cresti Mataiwos Siervicül, and Éovart Grischun, who ensured the preparation of this document; do ordain and establish, by and through the consent of the Talossan People, as the supreme law of our Realm, this 2017 revision of the 1997 Organic Law

Uréu q'estadra så:
Baron Alexandreu Davinescu (MC-TNC)

That sounds fine to me.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 10, 2023, 04:50:05 PMMy only concern with making them sub-boards of The Chat Room (I think) is the Chat Room is not a publicly viewable board.

That's also fair. It's good we keep having a place where people can speak their mind on personal life stuff in private.

I kinda agree with Breneir, and I'd do one better - I'd probably lean towards making those boards a subboard of the Chat Room instead, since that's where similar cultural efforts are conducted (TMT20, TCAT and so on.)

I fully agree with reverting the provinces to subboards, which incidentally is how it used to be on PB until about ten years ago.

I agree on moving the CRL under the Hopper and I'm not sure why that wasn't the case from the beginning.

I don't necessarily agree with moving Senate and Cosa under the Lobby, and incidentally I would prefer if all Terps were presented in the Lobby, and Cosa voting took place in the Cosa board.

And lastly, I do agree that the front page is getting too bloated, wayyyy beyond what I planned for when I created it. (An argument for another place, perhaps)

Is this meant to repeal subsections 13.1-3 as well? Perhaps this should be spelled out more clearly.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 09, 2023, 12:49:55 PMI can't remember if there was any debate over putting in Talossan-language names for everyone, but that also seems fine to me

I'm referring to GV's policy of redacting archived materials before they are released for public consumption, wherever names in their original languages are stated. Not stating my agreement or disagreement with that in this occasion, especially because if one agreed this would be just one of many places affected, but I thought I'd bring it up preemptively to state my proposal was not meant to be in that vein.

Grült meirci M:sr Secretár d'Estat, es graschciăs per voastră confiençu din me, þonoreschti colegas.

A few things:

- "Cresti Mataiwos Siervicül"
- "Dama Miestrâ Schivâ" could be turned into "Dama Miestră Schivă", as per SIGN's provisional standard and her current display name
- Pedantic, but  Grisch's first name would be "Éovart" - every other name has the correct diacritics, as far as I can tell

- Potential snag - if we reverted the year to 1997, should we also revert the name at the top to Robert, or is it fine because John is proclaiming the OrgLaw "as amended throughout the years"? (If so, some of the language in the rest of the preamble doesn't make too much sense though.)

- Is there any appetite for converting the names of the original framers to their Talossan versions? Like sure, Sean Hert never went by anything else AFAIK, but JJ and Dan definitely did, among others. (This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the Archives-championed issue of privacy for former citizens, btw, though others are free to make that argument separately)