I'm a little dubious about this rationale. As far as I can tell, you guys are legally just one registered party. Whatever the internal structure you guys have agreed on outside of the law, I don't think there's any legal mechanism to announce that you guys get multiple different referendum statements based on that.

I love a lot about the new version.  And while I recognize that it's easy to criticize from the sidelines when it doesn't add onto your work, my two bence are that:

(a) I agree that the squirrels should be taller, maybe by 25%.

(b) I agree that the original script looks nicer.

(c) Ideally, you might also bend the greenery around the lesser seal a bit more and drop it so that it's not partially occluded by the same.

On the subject of personal bugaboos, how would we feel about switching from the Heraldic Royal Crown of Spain at this point?  (Full disclosure: This isn't my first pitch on the matter.)

-Dean

Looking over the laws currently, I notice both that it is my duty to swear in and to dissolve the provincial legislature, but also simultaneously that those things happen entirely without me through a different mechanism. It also appears that I'm supposed to swear in legislators, but it doesn't seem like that's happened.

It is my suggestion that the laws be amended to remove this redundancy and make it clear that my role is mostly ceremonial. I believe that is already the best interpretation of the contradiction, from looking at the legislative history, but it seems like something useful to do.

Your Majesty, Mic'haglh's new version (no longer visible above) was good, and we mostly just ran into problems agreeing on the depiction of the squirrel.  The one you have above was deemed too meek-looking.  Maybe he could reupload the ones he provided before, so we could restart that discussion?  @Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be ?

I asked this question a while ago, but never got an answer: does anyone else in the country know how to program in Django?

I am grateful for the trust of the Crown and I will do my best.

Azul. I have been appointed to this position. I will endeavor to serve to the best of my ability. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns right off the bat.

I'll have some time to work on this, this week. I'm going to spend at least a little time putting in some things for engagement. Links back to this forum, ways for people to comment, and so on. Then I'll get to work on the next lesson. As said before, it's going to be focused on translating into English this time. After two of those lessons, I expect we'll be ready for more production.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 10, 2025, 08:31:33 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 10, 2025, 07:54:42 PMThe sanction must extend exclusively to Wittenberg, by my reading, and could not (since you're a legislator) include suspension or banning from the "necessary infrastructure to allow the Ziu to fulfill its functions, including proposing, debating, and considering bills and the posing of Terpelaziuns."  So until the Cosa is dissolved, you probably couldn't be legally barred from the Government boards, since that'd probably be inorganic. 

I would actually go further. I don't think he can be banned from any boards which are necessary to exercise his rights as a citizen, without those rights being officially curtailed by a Cort judgement - because that would be giving Witt moderators effective power of banishment. So even once the Cosa is dissolved, I don't think he could be banned from the Corts boards, or probably the Immigration forum. (Florencia province board would be up to the discretion of its local moderators IMHO - as would the Corts boards, come to think of it.) But the main Wittenberg, the Chat Room, other boards which are not necessary to access to exercise his rights under Organic and Statute Law - definitely yes.

There's precedent for people being banned from the Corts board as well, and they were able to send in their petitions via email.  The Cort ordered them unbanned from Witt for the proceedings alone, and they were directed to post nowhere else on Witt under penalty of sanctions for contempt.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 10, 2025, 07:39:00 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 10, 2025, 06:20:00 PMYeah, fair enough. I don't think it's really ambiguous what he's doing. In situations like this, I always worry about creating a bad precedent, but it would be intolerable to just look the other way because it was inconvenient. I would certainly support action, since he already had a warning.

I agree with this. I was unambiguous. If you believe I am wrong then you are obligated to act now. Please be clear in defining the wrong-doing for the purposes of future precedent. I am happy to accept any lawful sanction deemed appropriate for what is deemed unlawful and inappropriate behavior.

Well, it's persistent, unwanted flirting, as I said.  And Title J is the legal authorization for the enforcement of Wittenberg.  There's nothing "unlawful," since persistent and unwanted flirting isn't a crime, but rather a clear violation of the legally-described "minimum level of acceptable behavior."

The sanction must extend exclusively to Wittenberg, by my reading, and could not (since you're a legislator) include suspension or banning from the "necessary infrastructure to allow the Ziu to fulfill its functions, including proposing, debating, and considering bills and the posing of Terpelaziuns."  So until the Cosa is dissolved, you probably couldn't be legally barred from the Government boards, since that'd probably be inorganic. 

Hypothetically, the Secretary of State could ban you from every other board, though.  And when the Cosa is dissolved, you could just be banned from Wittenberg.  That seems like it would be overkill for a first penalty.  I'd suggest a short suspension, personally, but this is at the discretion of the Chancery.

Yeah, fair enough. I don't think it's really ambiguous what he's doing. In situations like this, I always worry about creating a bad precedent, but it would be intolerable to just look the other way because it was inconvenient. I would certainly support action, since he already had a warning.

Yeah, it's a good topic to discuss -- I'm not exactly sure what to do, since he's not using offensive language specifically.  Breneir's engaged in what might be called covert sexual harassment: https://www.fishertaubenfeld.com/blog/2024/02/what-is-covert-sexual-harassment/  "Persistent, unwanted flirting" is gross, but hard to pin down.

No, I'm pretty sure he was applauding Ian's willingness to call out you being inappropriate and creepy again.

The existing law is pretty clear. Org.VII.9 says, "Except where otherwise provided in this Organic Law, when determining the outcome of a vote in either house of the Ziu, 'austanéu' votes will not be counted."

And more specifically in the next section:

"Except where otherwise provided in this Organic Law any bill which receives more 'për' votes than 'contrâ' votes in the Cosa and the Senäts is considered to have been adopted by the Ziu, and all other bills are considered to have been rejected. Any bill adopted by the Ziu is sent at once to the King for his assent."

For the reason Miestra says, this existing law seems the best approach.

I have spent almost the entire sum on a new toaster, after our previous toaster broke.  This new toaster is the most patriotic appliance in the Kingdom.