As long as it's Latin.

Was Korallia a former Dandelion?

...and I wanted to mark it here. What a guy.

Excellent news.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on September 22, 2026, 03:44:11 PMJudging by the debates on the Democracy Amendment in the last Cosa, there appears to be cross-party support for moving to a system where we vote for individuals as well as (even instead of) parties in the Cosa, while preserving proportionality. It is rare that you see @owenedwards and myself agreeing on something.

My personal preferences are either STV or a minimalist system where you vote for a party list + one candidate on that list. Let's get the debate going and try to get something out of this Cosa.

Fine, I'll change my mind on it...;)

I hope to see some good entries this year!

Roast duck or beef, Yorkshire puddings, roast potatoes, asparagus

Per

English, a little French, and I have Latin and Greek academically (and did have some Middle Egyptian)

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on January 15, 2026, 05:43:16 PMI just remembered that this is also the clause that the Proclamation Crisis was about - when the former King John vetoed a quite anodyne amendment just to fire a "warning shot" and emphasise that he had final say over all OrgLaw amendments - which started the process of removing that power. So there's also the sentimental value.

The Cort case is an interesting artefact.

Happy birthday, Your Majesty!

Miestra was arguing we should elect representatives who use their own judgement and are accountable for their votes, not vote for party machines on whose patronage they depend. Burke's argument was that MPs should be elected as representatives, not delegates simply repeating the will of electors. There is very much a parallel, if loose, and I'm very sympathetic to the idea.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on December 23, 2025, 12:31:32 PMThe best argument for the smaller Cosă, IMHO, is that right now not all MCs are equal to each other. A 200 seat Cosa means that right now one MC's vote can outweigh another's by 20-1. And that ain't right.

It double ain't right that these assignments are decided, after the election, by party leaders at whim. The 200 seat Cosa means no effective control by voters over who represents them in the Cosă.

The only downside I can see that two parties might end up with the same seats although one had more votes. But this is a question between whether Cosă elections are about electing legislators; or about "competition between different party brands". I, like Marcel, strongly think the former should be the case, because it ensures personal accountability, and degrades the power of party "bosses".

(Of course it also means that a party with too few votes gets no seats, but I consider that a feature, not a bug.)

Miestra Schiva to the Electors of Bristol:

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on December 22, 2025, 09:45:17 PMIt's worth looking at the Senate as well, just for curiosity, using the numbers from the four Senate races in the most recent election:

Party	% Vote (1st Rd.)	Seats	% Seats	Diff.	Sq. Diff.
PA	40.43	3	75.00	-34.57	1195.08490
URL	36.17	1	25.00	11.17	124.76890
Green	4.26	0	0.00	4.26	18.14760
Ind.	19.15	0	0.00	19.15	366.72250
				TOTAL	1704.72390
				TOTAL/2	852.36195
				GI	29.19524

As we can see, the Senate is significantly more disproportionate than even a 20-seat Cosa. This calls into question the motives and reasoning of those who may support keeping the Senate as-is, while opposing decreasing the size of the Cosa as "less representative".

I don't actually have any views on the size of the Cosa, but this insinuation doesn't follow. One could desire one house to be popularly representative and another wholly unrepresentative, or representative of a different set of bodies; therefore, one would object to the reduction in proportionality in the popular house, even as one objected to an increase in proportionality in the other house. In fact, this was the mainstream Anglophone theory into the late 20th century, pretty much!

"TST/CST"

A. IDT
B. NA
C. No
D. Yes, I would like a seat.

I had missed this. Very sad. What a lovely guy.

Due process is not a bonus privilege under the OrgLaw and its antecedents, so probably the Bill's approach to the accused's right of response should grapple with that.

Much missed.

So we're agreed that such changes may be "frequent" but are not essential to Parliamentary democracy.