Quote from: Eiric S. Bornatfiglheu on December 05, 2021, 06:24:08 PM
The upshot of the US Constitution... as well as the Talossan Organic Law as currently realized... is a document that makes systemic change as difficult as possible.

I'm afraid I have to agree with AD on this. While I think that passing the Compromise on the Compromise would probably at least make the King more active, I am at a loss for what other legal "systemic change" could possibly address the problem we are discussing.

QuoteEssentially, this is a feature and not a bug of American constitutional jurisprudence.  It was a system put in place by slaveholders in order to preserve the "peculiar institution."  Anyone who says otherwise is either a fool or a goddamn liar.

I don't want to start a macronational political argument here, but suffice it to say that this is a serious strawmanning of the merits of Federalism. Obviously this point is more applicable to the US than Talossa given the unfortunate state of the provinces.

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on December 05, 2021, 09:08:28 PM
other than voting in the music contest that just got done LOL

;D

RZ8: PËR

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on November 27, 2021, 02:10:15 PM
All right, I believe I just clocked up 10 points. Your choice between a Chow Mein sandwich and a pork sausage and marmalade sandwich.

Thank you for giving me an actual sandwich. That is probably why it is by far the best I've had.

Unlike the chorizo I bought for XPB's red sandwich, I accidentally bought some sausage this time that I had to cook myself. That was a little bit of a hurdle because I do not know how to cook. Luckily the instructions were clear enough that I hopefully did not give myself food poisoning.

I would like to Clark the "Compromise on the Compromise Act and Amendment"

https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=848.0

I have added the timeline to the amendment and added the statutes V suggested.

Quote from: Glüc da Dhi S.H. on November 23, 2021, 03:50:57 PM
Some thoughts:

a Convocation shall be called by the Senior Judge of the Uppermost Cort, or in their absence the next available Judge in order of seniority"

Does that mean the Senior Judge shall also chair the convocation? If so, that should probably be explicitly mentioned. If there is to be some other arrangement, that should probably be mentioned as well.

Secondly, what exactly does it mean for a convocation to get called? Perhaps it would be good to include something like:
"Whenever a convocation is called by a judge, said judge shall submit to the Secretary of State a message to all eligible electors announcing the convocation and providing instructions on how and when to register to participate. Whenever the convocation is called by the Ziu, the Túischac'h shall submit this message instead. The convocation shall commence 14 days from the moment the convocation is called. Upon receiving the message the Secretary of State shall be responsible for communicating the message to all eligible electors." (or similar)

The deadline bit seems especially important to me. Under the current proposal, what is to stop the judge calling the convocation and then have the convocation commence immediately after the composition of registered electors seems favourable to them, or alternatively, postpone commencing when the composition seems unfavourable? And even assuming good faith, how does the convocation know when to commence?

I'm not a big fan of setting such things by statute as the monarchy (and therefore the convocation) seems integral to our constitutional framework. I'm also worried we will pass this and then when the times comes nobody will know how to proceed because no statute has been passed.

What if I made the statutes part of the bill

Quote from: Viteu on November 13, 2021, 08:36:50 PM

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on November 13, 2021, 12:17:52 PM

I would rather all this be handled by statute

Fair enough. But absent some provision granting the Ziu authority to do so, I doubt any statute to regulate a Convocation would be enforceable.   Maybe that is a good thing though.

There is this:

QuoteAll other operations of the Convocation shall be decided by the Convocation or prescribed by statute.

Quote from: xpb on November 12, 2021, 11:29:17 AM
I just kicked in $25 via the contribute link at talossa.com.  I would like you to eat one "red" and one "green" sandwich.  You can put what you like on each of them just so that it's very red maybe with beets or rare beef, or green with real or fake wasabi, pickles, kale whatever.  Could even create a couple flag sandwiches I suppose.

Green sandwich:
-Spinach
-Avacado
-Pickles
-Green peppers
-Dried seaweed with wasabe
-Turkey (unfortunately not green)

Review: Pretty bad. I added too much avacado so the entire sandwich was a bit soggy, and the avacado flavor clashed with the pickles. The seaweed made my kitchen smell like the fish section of a pet shop.

Red sandwich:
-Chorizo
-Red peppers
-Sundried tomatoes
-Doritos
-Pepper hoagie spread
-Raspberry jam

Review: Pretty good actually. A quite nice balance between sweet and spicy.

Quote from: Viteu on November 12, 2021, 11:01:40 PM
(1) I agree with Miestra that this should replace Org.II.4 and, accordingly, strike "Whenever the is no king, the CpI shall serve as Council of Regency"  as redundant (it would remain in Org.II.3). 2) I agree with Miestra that Ziu should be to call an early Convocation, and I like that the threshold for early convocation is slightly higher and has a cooling off period.  It's a good balance.  Without it, a King could go completely unhinged in year 4 without recourse for three years, which we all know is a very long time in Talossa. 

​I have added a provision that the Ziu can call a convocation at any time following the same procedure as amending the Organic Law. I have also deleted Org II.4.

Quote(3) OMG STOP USING CpI. This it the first time the CpI is even mentioned in the Org Law.  Use "Uppermost Cort" to make it consistent with the other sections, or use Cort pü Inalt and change "Uppermost Cort" in the other sections.  But "CpI" is not defined or even found in the Org Law.

(4) Elector sounds better than member.

Changed.

Quote(5) If there really is concern about the CpI sabotaging the Convocation to stay in power, I would add something akin to this:

"A sitting Judge simultaneously serving in the Council of Regency and the Convocation shall enjoy the rights and privileges of their peers but shall be disqualified from casting a vote for King in the Convocation."

Purpose: If a CpI Judge really wants to vote, they have to resign the Cort, ergo the Regency, to do so.

I'm not really concerned about this

Quote
(6) I'm also of the mind that overly complex rules and procedures will be problematic.  I'd wager such would also doom the Compromise on the Compromise to failure given that so many people have thoughts.  But there ought to be some parameters for setting how the Convocation conducts business and vote counting (especially in light of the secret ballot) as well as restricting the Ziu's influence.

Here are some draft provisions to consider:

"The Convocation may, as it deems necessary, adopt a rule, procedure, or protocol to conduct operation provided a majority of Electors supports any such rule, procedure, or protocol, or change thereto.  Any rule, procedure, or protocol adopted by a Convocation will not a subsequent Convocation." 

Purpose: This enables a Convocation to set its bylaws and prevents imputation of the bylaws of one to another.

"Before any vote for King is cast, the Conclave shall choose an Elector to serve as Herald in a manner it deems appropriate.  Within 96 hours of a vote for King ending, the Herald, the Secretary of State, and the Council of Regency shall, separately and independently of the other, count such votes, and the Herald, the Secretary of State, and the Council of Regency shall, separately and independently of the other, report one result to the Convocation.   After 96 hours, the vote for King is verified based on the vote count of the majority of timely reported results."

Purpose: Someone has to count votes within a reasonable time, but we cannot be at the mercy of never ending deadlines.  I felt four days was a good time to count votes and report it to the Convocation.  I used the EC as a blueprint and figured the SoS and Council of Regency were good bodies to report a vote count.  But I felt that Convocation should also have someone counting votes, hence the "Herald." Regarding the Council of Regency, this presumes no. 5 in my suggestions is adopted, so the CoR cannot vote anyway.  To ensure there it's not four against two, I tried to make it so the CoR get to report a single result (i.e. the CoR will speak with one voice, not four).  In any event, only a report received within 96 hours may be counted, and each of the three counts must be separate and independent.  Meaning, they are completely independent.  The counter will have verified the vote came from a properly sat Elector and then just mark their vote.  The report should be the total number of votes for a candidate. Presumably the numbers will be the same.   

"The Ziu may enact legislation to impose civil and criminal sanctions upon any person guilty of dispensing to another an Elector's vote absent the express permission of that Elector or absent law providing such.  The Ziu may also enact legislation for the investigation of any suspected malfeasance referred to it by the Convocation, and, if warranted, the enforcement of a violation of any law resulting such investigation may reveal."

Purpose: The integrity of the Convocation and the vote must be protected, but within reason.  The Organic Law should not have criminal conduct. The Ziu should have very limited influence on the Convocation, but the Convocation should not be able to control the Ziu.  So I figured a balance.  In reverse order: The Convocation can refer a suspected malfeasance, whatever that means, to the Ziu.  But the Ziu must have already enacted legislation agreeing to that referral.  This is to cover concerns that really are connected and inseparable from the Convocation, and neither the Ziu nor Convocation can force how the other acts.  The Ziu can enact broad legislation that accepts all referrals for investigation, or it can limit it to specific conduct. The Convocation can select which conduct to investigate, but doesn't have the authority to investigate itself.  Of course, the Organic right to due process and the Organic protection against ex post facto laws means that the Ziu's acceptance and potential liability must exist at the time of the suspected conduct.  Finally, because of the CpI's involvement in the CoR, I wanted to leave open how such conduct might be prosecuted (i.e. a special court, maybe the Common Cort  only, etc.). 

There is an exemption--If the Ziu enacts a law imposing some type of liability on someone who reveals the contents of an Elector's vote, it does not need the Convocation to grant authority for an investigation and possible legal action to follow.  The conduct is actually not tied into the Convocation per se because a Herald or SoS or person on the CoR from a Convocation 10 years ago does not get to decide that the vote is no longer secret.  And also, I felt it necessary to protect the secrecy of the vote. 

Just my 2¢. (I started writing this in response to the concern about the CpI, and then I just kept going.)

I would rather all this be handled by statute

Azul all,

The Kingdom's treasuries could, as usual, stand to be replenished. We are aiming to raise $200, and our ability to raise this amount will influence our decision to proceed on various projects, such as John Eiffler commemorative stamps.

For every $1 you donate to the Kingdom or spend on coins or stamps, you will receive one Patriot Point. Let me know in this thread or in a private message, and I will update the table below to reflect your contribution. At the end of the program, the top contributors will receive various honors to be determined later.

To make this program even more enticing, every time you earn 10 Patriot Points, I will eat a sandwich with ingredients of your choice (as long as they aren't too weird) and post pictures of the experience here. For context: https://talossa.proboards.com/thread/12906/prime-ministry-52pd2-websites-day

Contributors:
1. Sir X Pol Briga - 25
2. Miestră Schivă - 10
2. Ian Plätschisch - 10

My political views have not changed, just my assessment of where I can best implement them.

The LCC is not doing anything. This is not necessarily bad as perhaps it has simply run its course (I wish Txosue the best if he wants to continue running it, but I have not heard from him in a while). If the conservatives are going to rally around something now, it can't be a party closely associated with me, because I just don't agree with them enough (I hope they rally around Dien to be honest). I suppose the LCC could rebrand as an explicitly moderate party, but...

On the major issue of the elective Monarchy, I agree with the FreeDems since they are supporting my "Compromise on the Compromise." The best way to ensure they continue to support it, and don't decide they want something more extreme later, is to join them. This seems much more effective than trying to keep the LCC viable.

So I will be seeking membership in the Free Demoracts, which is definitely not something I ever expected to write.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on August 24, 2021, 05:14:25 PM
Well, I suppose this once more becomes a live issue.

My position is that it must never be more complicated or difficult to get rid of the King through this Convocation procedure than it would to simply delete OrgLaw II.3 through the regular amendment mechanism. That is, a 3/4 majority in the Cosa, 5 Senators, and a simple majority in referendum. Because otherwise, what's the point? The current OrgLaw II.4 will never be invoked because it's harder - requiring a successful case in the CpI and a 2/3 referendum victory.

That is to say, I now support this measure in principle - i.e. as a thing we should do right now - but the thing is that if a King starts acting the goat in the midst of a seven year "term", a sufficiently riled-up legislature will just delete this new OrgLaw II.3 and choose a new King / declare a Republic, making this reform otiose.

I should also point out that this proposal has a similar problem to 55RZ21, in that it instantly puts John W. out of a job, so he's more likely to veto it.

Can I recommend the following amendment:

1) that this amendment replace OrgLaw II.4, rather than OrgLaw II.3;
2) add a provision that 2/3 of the Cosa and 2/3 of the Senäts will be authorised to call one of these convocations at any time, with the same rules (inc. six-month cooling-off period).

I forgot about this comment until you just brought it up again in the CRL. My response is that I like having a (very difficult) way to remove the King immediately, in case something extreme happens that warrants it.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on November 07, 2021, 02:19:12 PM
Just clarifying that this is the text we're looking at?

Yes

I would like to submit the Compromise on the Compromise for the Committee's consideration