I've made the change.

The reason I made that change is because, if people could change their vote, we could never be certain what the outcome would be until the very end. I would like to be able to close votes sooner when the outcome is fully determined (given no one changes their vote, and vote changing is quite rare) but there are still a few Assemblypersons who have not voted and are unlikely to.

I suppose we could still allow vote changing so long as the vote ends if there comes a point at which the outcome is fully determined given no one changes again.

CBLA.D.4, which currently reads:

QuoteD.4. Any member of the Assembly of Maritiimi-Maxhestic may put a bill up to a vote of the Assembly by publicly providing the text of the bill accompanied by a notice that voting on the bill has begun.

D.4.1. Voting on a bill lasts for two weeks after the notice is given or until all Assemblypersons have voted, whichever comes first.

D.4.2. Assemblypersons may change their vote on a bill until the voting period expires.

shall be amended to read:

QuoteD.4. Any member of the Assembly of Maritiimi-Maxhestic may put a bill up to a vote of the Assembly by publicly providing the text of the bill accompanied by a notice that voting on the bill has begun.

D.4.1. Voting on a bill lasts for two weeks after the notice is given or until the outcome of the vote becomes mathematically certain assuming all votes are final, whichever comes first. Assemblypersons may change their vote on a bill until the vote closes. This procedure shall also be used to elect provincial officials.

D.4.2. The current Convocation of the Assembly dissolves immediately upon the closing of the Assembly Call for the subsequent Convocation, at which point that Convocation is seated. When a Convocation is dissolved, any votes in progress are voided.

CBLA.C.2, which currently reads:

QuoteC.2. Senate elections for Maritiimi-Maxhestic shall be held simultaneously to national elections.

C.2.1. During the week preceding the election, the Maximally Magnificent Majordomo shall call for those wishing to run for Senate to make public both their candidacy and a 50-word statement.

C.2.2. At the start of the election, the Maximally Magnificent Majordomo shall open the voting, and voters shall rank the candidates in preference order. The rules of Instant Runoff Voting shall be used to determine the winner.

C.2.3. Ties at any iteration shall be broken by the Grand General Secretary.

Is amended to read:

QuoteC.2. Senate elections for Maritiimi-Maxhestic shall be held simultaneously to national elections.

C.2.1. No later than one week before the beginning of the election, the Maximally Magnificent Majordomo shall certify to the Provincial Assembly that he or she is capable of conducting the election per the provisions below. If this certification does not occur, then it will be automatically held that the province is not in a state of electoral readiness, and the Chancery is requested to conduct the election. In this case, the Grand General Secretary shall notify the Chancery to this effect, and C.2.2 and C.2.3 are ignored.

C.2.2. During the week preceding the election, the Maximally Magnificent Majordomo shall call for those wishing to run for Senate to make public both their candidacy and a 50-word statement. Neither the Grand General Secretary nor the Maximally Magnificent Majordomo shall run for Senate.

C.2.3. At the start of the election, the Maximally Magnificent Majordomo shall open the voting, which shall be via private ballot. Voters shall rank the candidates in preference order. The rules of Instant Runoff Voting shall be used to determine the winner.

C.2.4. Ties at any iteration shall be broken by the Grand General Secretary.

Quote from: Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on August 24, 2020, 12:54:57 PM
In times past, it was my practice as GGS to begin each new convocation by suggesting that we request the SoS run our election in the forthcoming election, just in case.  Is that still viable?  Right now I don't think we even have an M3, since Cresti resigned.

Currently I don't think that would be allowed under MM law. I'm planning to introduce a big reform package soon though.

This vote ended a few days ago. Alexandreu Davinescu is elected GGS of MM.

One of your first acts should be to certify to the Secretary of State how you break the tie in the Senate election.

Quote from: Breneir Itravilatx on August 24, 2020, 12:17:41 PM

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on August 24, 2020, 09:45:28 AM
Has S:reu Yasir met the requirements currently outlined in law or not? I cannot grant him citizenship unless he has and I will need some form of proof please.

Thanks,
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă,
Secretary of State

This is my question too now.

Under current law, citizenship petitions must specify the non-Wittenberg medium on which the petitioner has communicated with the prospective.

I'm sure there are ways, but I'm not sure coming up with them is a good use of my time given I doubt there's anything I could say that would make the coalition change its mind on this. I've made my peace with the fact the act of going to be repealed.

Quote from: Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on August 20, 2020, 05:59:32 PM
I listened to it... Very interesting! Is the service hard to set up? When I produced a podcast for 6 months, it was an annoying amount of work.

It was quite easy, just like making an account anywhere else. I can record from my computer or from my phone by downloading the app, and arranging and editing the audio is very intuitive and is all done on Anchor's website. It gets pushed to Spotify (and possibly other platforms) automatically.

You can now listen to this podcast on Spotify!

Fair enough, but it can't be that I'm the only one with who has based their understanding of broosking on that article. It's been around for years, it's public knowledge that it is there, and no one had complained before now that the definition there is partisan.

It's podcast time.

Episode 1

Quote from: Eðo Grischun on August 15, 2020, 05:02:17 PM
You seem to have a very,  very different definition of broosking than the rest of us then.  No political party recruitment happening or implied in anything I suggested above.

To quote directly from the wiki page about it:

Quote
To speak to a prospective citizen about Talossan politics before he or she is granted citizenship, especially in a way that would tend to colour the prospective citizen's opinion about one party or another, is considered to be broosking and is strongly frowned-upon.

To speak to a prospective citizen in a way that would make them tend to support a bill that is explicitly mentioned in a coalition agreement that favors the party involved clearly meets this criterion.

I assign the LCC seats to Breneir Itravilatx

If you are interested in representing the League of Centre Conservatives in the Assembly of Benito, please let me know.