The Union of Free Reformists is the Party of Talossan Democracy, an ideal we place so much importance on that is in the first sentence of our party's platform.

In an era where a party which explicitly does not believe in democracy will be part of the Government, the defense of Talossan democracy is more important than ever. Therefore, as part of our rebuilding towards the 63rd Cosa, the Union of Free Reformists is opening broad debate on a Democracy Agenda.

As the last election shows, simply defending Talossa's current, flawed, democratic procedures won't seize the popular imagination. We must dare something worthy -- dare to dream of a more democratic Talossa. One where the popular will can be expressed freely and fairly; where that will can manifest in an empowered yet accountable Government, able to enact a political program, yet restrained by basic democratic rights and by the ballot box.

A situation of "elective dictatorship" is not a democratic one; nor is one of permanent institutional gridlock, where a determined minority can prevent things from happening forever. Any attempts to repower the monarchy, on the other hand, will revive trauma reactions from anyone who lived under King Robert I, the equivalent of a "Liechtenstein monarchy".

The URL therefore pledges to promote one bill for a major democratic reform on every one of the Clarks of the 62nd Cosa term, even if it manages to last all six. In the event that these bills are not adopted by the Ziu, they will form the basis for our program for the 63rd Cosa election. The "Pseudo-Real Cosa", proposed by URL-affiliate MC-elect Marcel Tafial will be the first of these.

This thread will be for elaboration and discussion on these bills as well as other democratic proposals. Non-URL members will be welcome to participate, although if necessary they will be "moderated with a blowtorch", to borrow one member's phrasing.

I suppose telling blatant lies "because we have an election to win" is the more effective approach, given that it paid off quite well, true.

Quote from: Françal I. Lux on December 07, 2025, 09:37:30 PM

Quote from: Mximo Malt on December 07, 2025, 05:52:40 PMIf we had a state religion (theoretically), I would think that the Archbishop of Abbavilla would have the right to suspend or depose the King/Queen based upon his actions, but that would seem too theocratic...

As a Buddhist myself, Christian theocracy is a big fat NO for me.

Unfortunately, your "Got What I Voted For" award is already in the mail.

Immediately after the Cosa election, the Union of Free Reformists reached out to the Progressive Alliance to seek co-operation on the formation of a new government under PA leadership. This was motivated by looking at the electoral results and realizing that without our support, the PA could only form a government by relying on the votes of either (A) an absolute monarchist who wants to rehabilitate the former King Robert I, or (B) those of a roundly-ostracized sexual harasser. Because the PA leader is someone we believed would maintain his pledge to not rely on the support of (B), we thought the first danger was much more pressing. We were right.

After initial discussions between our two party leaders, a framework was established for further negotiations on a confidence & supply arrangement, which would mitigate some of the worst-case scenarios we foresaw for a PA-led government. We had established an opening position which would have called for:

• One or more guarantees of open discussion on democratic/legislative reforms;
• An appointment of one or more URL members to senior non-cabinet posts, to prevent the experience of the previous TNC administration which kept everything tightly within their party; and
• An assurance of no politicized "investigations".

While this was going on, without warning, the PA announced this afternoon that they had entered into a formal coalition deal with the absolute-monarchist IDT. This means a government with 102 seats in the Cosa - a majority. This means, of course, that there is zero leverage to be gained from a confidence & supply deal on the part of the URL, making the whole exercise pointless, and blowing up the deal before we even got to formal negotiations. This is either an unprecedented level of bad faith, or a shocking level of ignorance of how parliamentary democracy works. We are trying to believe that it's the latter, but to not even warn us or inform us that they were shopping themselves around, is incredibly rude at a minimum.

In the wake of the election, the URL has reached out to non-party members to get feedback on what they feel went wrong with our campaign. One answer we got was: "you guys seemed too negative; no-one really thought the PA were going to damage Talossan democracy". I really wish I didn't have a second occasion in one election season to post this image.

What makes this even more precarious is the announcement of the Green Party that they don't intend to be the opposition "very hard" this time. Clearly, S:reu Tzaracomprada, who was openly sympathetic to the PA during the election campaign, thinks this is the way he can slide back into Baron Davinescu's good graces, thus reassembling the TNC coalition of years gone by. As stated above, the PA leader is someone we do not expect to renege on his pledge, and seems to be genuinely repulsed by S:reu Tzaracomparada's behavior and unrepentent attitude. But he's also determined to bring everyone possible into the tent, making the odds of this rehabilitation happening greater than we would hope.

Not even yet mentioned is the proposed rehabilitation of King Robert I, which the soon-to-be Minister of Culture is so enthusiastic about. We wonder whether the PA considered the reaction of the Talossan-speaking community to the fact that "Monarchist Max" is now their boss.

The axis of all Talossan politics has therefore turned against the Union of Free Reformists. We are very aware that some Progressive Alliance members are motivated mainly by undisguised hatred of members of the URL, stemming back more than a decade in some cases. There is now a great danger that we are at the beginning of a new "RUMP" era, where a broad conservative coalition monopolizes power over multiple Cosa terms, assimilating everyone who can be assimilated and excluding the rest, both politically and socially. Certainly, all the old faces of the RUMP era are coming back.

In 1999, the entire Talossan Liberal Party renounced their citizenship when they came to the conclusion that there was zero chance of winning democratic reforms under Robert I. The question is whether something similar is about to happen, or whether the Union of Free Reformists are prepared to set themselves to a possibly lonely, multi-year mission of strenuous Opposition and fervent promotion of our Democracy Agenda. For my part, I will remain, but I can't say I blame those who wish to flee persecution before it arrives at their doorstep.

In the more immediate term, at least, it is good to have cleared the air regarding the path forward that the nation will take. The Union of Free Reformists will form the official Opposition, with myself as Opposition Leader and a Shadow Cabinet to keep the government as close to honest as possible. Our Democracy Agenda, which we will outline in more detail in the coming weeks, will form the centerpiece of our activity over the next eight months. Given the performance from the last time the PA held in office -- then of course known as the TNC, but the faces remain the same -- we expect this government to be cliquish, insular, and hostile to feedback from non-party members. We will seek to expose this, and offer the country a more professional alternative.

¡Vivadra Talossa democrätic!

It's already been acknowledged via PM, so the Chancery may be aware, but the URL's fee has been paid.

Re: Talossaware, the website portion will need to be a collaboration between whoever ends up being Minister of Propaganda (which is responsible for the contents of the national website) and the Director of STUFF (myself).

Congrats Andrïeu, and welcome!

Quote from: Xherált Ups Cantoûr on December 01, 2025, 09:05:09 PMWhen was was E.7 edited, Specifically E.7.5 and E.7.6? When I originally became a citizen I was a citizen of the BELACOSTĂ PROVINCE, now that I have regained my citizenship I was reading through El Lexhatx and noticed that where I live (Pennsylvania) is in VUODE PROVINCE. Am I still a citizen of Belacostă or, as the law seems to have been amended at some point and I am regaining my citizenship, am I now a citizen of Vuode?

Unless I am mistaken, you should still be a citizen of Belacostă, as you are simply resuming inactive citizenship as opposed to re-immigrating.

However, I believe you retain the option to request that you be reassigned to Vuode as that is now the provincial catchment area in which you live.

Quote7.3. No Talossan citizen may transfer his provincial citizenship to a different province, except by physically moving into that province or into the zone corresponding to that province. A citizens living inside or outside of Talossa, who moves permanently into an outside zone corresponding to a different province will be (re)assigned by the SoS to the province corresponding to the new geographic zone in accordance with the following provisions:
    7.3.1 The provisions in this section do not apply unless the citizen explicitly consents to being reassigned. Whenever any Talossan wants to move his provincial assignment to the province in whose assigned area he actually lives, he may do so by notifying the Chancery. The move will be officially recognised once the Chancery has validated the request.
    7.3.2 The Secretary of State will be responsible for the various moves and assignments which result from this title. These moves and assignments will take effect on their official announcement by the Secretary of State.
    7.3.3 Any citizen who happens to find himself living in the catchment area of a different province, subsequent to the creation of a new province or the alteration of catchment area boundaries, will be allowed to choose between remaining a citizen of his current province or becoming a citizen of the province whose catchment area he now lives in. The provisions of article E.7.3.2. apply to this rule as if the citizen is assigned to the wrong province.

(emphasis mine)

My understanding is that you can choose to use this at any time, now or in the future. I'll let @Sir Lüc weigh in though, he's the one who has to process the move.

These are still tentative pending certification by the Electoral Commission

Provincial Council Election
Three points are received for a first-place vote; two points for a second place vote; one point for a third-place vote. The three highest point totals win, with ties to be broken by most first-place votes (and most second-place if necessary). Under the Belacostan Constitution and Title E of the Belacostan Unified Statute, votes with less than three named citizens are counted, but the "vacant" places are counted as the highest priority. In other words, if you vote only for yourself, your ballot will count as a vacant first- and second-place vote, and a third-place vote for yourself.

Citizen	1st Vote	2nd Vote	3rd Vote	Total Pts
@Sir Lüc	1	5	1	14
@Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be	3	0	0	9
@Iason Taiwos	0	1	4	6
@paolo.mellere (Pôl dal Cräpscaßada)	1	1	0	5
@Leonardo Miguel Carvalho Marques	1	0	1	4
@e.iwuagwu (Emeka Iwuagwu)	1	0	0	3
@Massimiliano Sartorello	0	1	0	2
@Istefan Perþonest	0	1	0	2
@Erschéveþ da Schir	0	0	1	1
@Pol dal Timă Lupulescu	0	0	1	1
David Robert Levis	0	0	1	1

The following citizens have claimed a seat in the Provincial Assembly for the 61st Cosa:

@Istefan Perþonest
@Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be
@paolo.mellere (Pôl dal Cräpscaßada)
@Sir Lüc
@Francesco Manzella
@Leonardo Miguel Carvalho Marques

To everyone who cast their vote for the Union of Free Reformists in this election, to everyone who expressed confidence in me as your preferred candidate for the next Seneschal, I'd like to extend both my personal thanks, and the thanks of the entire party. Your confidence in me is, as I have said before, truly humbling. Your support for our pro-democracy, pro-honesty, pro-accountability agenda in this election gives me hope for the future of Talossa.

Obviously, we don't yet know what this term will bring as far as government makeup, etc., but you can bet that no matter what happens, we'll be right there to keep people honest and keep moving the country in the right direction.

Yours in Liberty, Democracy, and Progress,

Mic'haglh

Vivadra Talossa Democrätic!

Congratulations to all, and a happy anniversary to His Majesty!

Welcome back!

Sort of surprising how perfectly symmetrical things are, but I guess that makes sense if multiple teams were auto-drafted (mine was and obviously the computer-managed team was, that's at least two)

Unfortunately this weekend is quite busy for me

"Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs."

These words -- "Build bridges, not walls" -- adorn the arms of His Majesty the King. Earlier this year, he mentioned to me that he wanted to help put them into action a little better to serve Talossa and encourage a more positive environment. In light of this fact, and in light of the fact that I've had a few citizens ask me who it is I can see myself working with in the next term, I see no reason not to lay out a few of my possible bridge-building intentions now.

Acknowledging that no party is anywhere near likely to get a majority -- as I mentioned at Coffee With the King on Saturday, it's almost a mathematical impossibility with five parties on the ballot -- coalition government is pretty much a given, so I may as well start with the groups I would be open to leading the URL in cooperation with in the next term.

• The PA: This probably surprises some of you given the fact that neither party is particularly keen on each other, but frankly, there is a good chance of a grand coalition being the outcome of this election. That can happen in democracy -- our German-Talossan citizens would know! There are, of course, some things I would expect out of such a partnership: respectful dialogue in private; no throwing people under the bus in public. Keeping our business honest, avoiding mischaracterization. Maintaining a decentralized model of Cabinet organization; many hands make light work! Respecting the continued neutrality of the justice system and the civil service. Agreement to pursue minor bipartisan reforms -- something along the lines of pro-democratic electoral reform, perhaps -- but also agreement not to bite off more than we can chew. Anything more specific than that, of course, will depend on what we know two weeks from tonight.
  
• Independent Green / Anarcho-Surrealist: Admittedly, there's not much I can say about @Garth Spencer 's platform, but I like his commitment to "keeping Talossa weird", so to speak. I think his lone campaign mailer thus far shows that he's an open-minded fellow that can find something positive in everyone else's platforms, and I respect that. Hard to put down any guidelines for cooperation at this point though, so we'll just see where the chips fall, I guess.

There are, of course, a few groups I can't see the URL agreeing to work with on points of principle:

• Green Party: I mean, this one is obvious. We've already pledged not to work with the Greens, and that's a promise we're going to keep. 'Nuff said there.
  
• In Defensa Traditionis: Don't get me wrong, I'm always happy to see new citizens getting involved in politics. Talossa's democracy is one of it's strongest suits -- which is exactly why we need to keep it that way. As Talossa's principled, pro-democracy party, the URL is simply too far from IDT ideologically to envision any possibility of cooperation, though I wish S:reu Maltezos well on his Glheþ-related pursuits and look forward to seeing him around the Cosa.

The contempt you have for the intelligence of voters is astounding.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on November 17, 2025, 05:36:30 PMSo are we confirming that "work with anyone" means anyone except the Sex Pest?

Don't even need to ask about Green Party voters, the contradiction is even more obvious. "Work with anyone" and "refuse to work with the Green Party" are mutually exclusive promises, which means one of the two overrides the other.

Not sure I've ever seen anyone break a campaign promise before the election ends, but there's a first time for everything I suppose.

Sad to see the Progressive Alliance is withdrawing from this agreement! Their more recent pledge to "work with anyone" appears to be taking precedence over their previous, more principled stand.

The pursuit of power at any cost is not a good look on them.

Quote1. Manager-less Team 1 4-1-0

Undefeated

Quote from: ProspectiveCitizenAndrew on November 15, 2025, 08:59:57 PMI am a vexillologist, and I would like to join the Royal Academy of Vexillology.

So! Once you are a citizen, I would recommend joining the College of Arms; from there, if you'd like to focus on the RAV, I'd be happy to have you join!