Quote from: xpb on February 08, 2026, 05:34:15 PMYes, as in many instances in life there are logical adjustments made.

This is not so much an adjustment as an admission that the PA Government does not take the concept of the cultural boycott of sex pests with as much seriousness as we would hope.

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP on February 08, 2026, 05:55:30 PM

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP on February 08, 2026, 05:23:08 PMThe scheduling has hit a bit of a snag since there is no time window in which everyone is available, so something needs to give.

If I were to arbitrarily schedule it for, say, Saturday, 21 February 2026, 11 AM Central, would that be okay?

@Sir Lüc @Béneditsch Ardpresteir @Baron Alexandreu Davinescu @Françal I. Lux @Mximo Malt @Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be @Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC @Breneir Tzaracomprada

That's 6 in the morning my time. Sadly unlikely.

Excuse me, your Majesty, but can the Government explain how the appointment of the Information Liaison for Asgardia conforms to this policy statement?

Also, given the absolute shambles and fiasco in Florencia, I think we need to get back to the idea of provincial reform. Like, the shambles in that province is not just due to constitutional loopholes - it could have been avoided if there were not just two (2) politically active citizens in that province, and if those two men didn't hate each other. (The URL's stand of Literally Anyone Else in the last Senäts race is proven right, again.)

This gets solved by having bigger and therefore fewer provinces. The Seneschal's fantasy that we fix this by doubling the population isn't going to happen.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on February 01, 2026, 10:01:32 PMVoting Method Reform: Sir Marcel has suggested Proportional Approval Voting before. For my part, I prefer panachage, but I'm interested in further discussion at any rate.

I'm still sticking out for the simplest version, Kosovo-style personalised party list voting - you vote for a list and a candidate on that list, and the candidates with the most votes get in. That's the closest to our current system.

But whichever way we slice if, some kind of candidate-based voting for the Cosă which preserves proportionality but reduces the power of party leaders seems an excellent Item 1 for the Democracy Agenda, which might get broad support.

Quote from: Barclamïu da Miéletz on February 04, 2026, 02:49:48 PMPoland.

Runners up: Indonesia and Monaco

Breneir won't stop when asked nicely to? Sounds familiar

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on February 01, 2026, 10:01:32 PMa more moderate position could be found where votes using the thread are only publicized after polling closes

Hey, I never thought of that, sounds like a great compromise. Actually, isn't that how it already works when you vote publicly on the database?

Quote from: xpb on January 30, 2026, 10:19:53 AMwhether the delightfully unique structure of the Kingdom should be adjusted

This is sheer conservatism with no justification. The status quo is Talossan, therefore it must be preserved.  But conversely - whatever we change it to will also be Talossan.

Both XPB and the Baron have said plainly that they think that *any* change is tantamount to a revolutionary change and thus must be resisted.  But the world didn't end when we abolished the hereditary monarchy - nor when we changed monarchs, despite XPB's strenuous efforts to argue that that would be a catastrophe.

There will continue to be "a voice" for provincial representation; just no longer a final veto.

Quote from: xpb on January 28, 2026, 11:47:16 PMThe Kingdom -- which has the addition of a quite well applied federalist structure

No it doesn't. Talossa is not federal and has never been federal. It has "devolved" government at best.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on January 27, 2026, 07:20:14 AMCould you give an example of legislation that's truly vital that we've been unable to pass thanks to the Senäts?

The most recent example was the Public Process Act Mark 1!

A few years ago, a Free Democrat Senäts majority simply refused to pass *any* TNC government legislation for a time. Regardless of the wisdom of that political tactic*, there was no talk at the time of needing to get the majority of provincial representatives onside. The talk at the time was that this was an illegitimate use of power. Are we to infer that the Senäts' power to thwart the Cosa's will is good only when the Baron considers it for good ends?

I am familiar with the "any attempt to moderate the Senäts is step 1 to abolition, and must be opposed" rhetoric, from when it was "any attempt to moderate Royal powers is step 1 to Republicanism, and must be opposed". But cxhn. Autófil's argument that the best way to depoliticize the Senäts, to make it more of a non-partisan chamber of sober second thought, is to clearly give final say to the more democratic/more political chamber of the Ziu.

(* For the historical record, I warned party leadership of the time not to start a fight unless they were prepared to finish it.)

KR1 for a time bore the title "Head of the Unorthodox Church", which was never a real thing. I'm sure you know for the greater part of his reign he was a Latter-Day Saint.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on January 28, 2026, 11:38:36 AMwe certainly plan on consulting you when the time comes to ensure that everything is done to the highest standard.  But I don't think it's particularly fair for us to treat you like the language servant, with every stage of el glheþ Talossan use by anyone shoved onto your plate.

Supplementary question, estimat Mençéi! In another situation where an elected leadership were pushing work away from a qualified civil servant, without informing him, towards one of their political allies with fewer qualifications, would the Government consider that good practice?

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on January 26, 2026, 12:47:44 AMI know we've compared our constitutional structure to Australia before -- and in fact I believe @Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC has stated that similarities are intentional

The main force in writing the 1997 Organic Law was E. Gallagher, who was (and still is) an Australian lawyer, and that's why large sections look just like the Australian constitution.

I would also point out that, in being able to vote down the Budget and thus collapse a Government, Australia's Senate is stupidly overpowered by global Upper House standards - almost as much so as the US Senate, where the less democratic House is *more* powerful because that's what passed for cutting-edge political thought in 1787.

The underlying theme of this bill is that Talossa is *not* a federal country, the provinces post-date the Kingdom, and thus the more democratically elected House should have final say.

Quote from: Ethan Smith on January 25, 2026, 11:41:08 AM

Quote from: Barclamïu da Miéletz on January 25, 2026, 11:01:46 AM

Quote from: Ethan Smith on January 25, 2026, 10:47:09 AMMy current favorite state capitol building is Pennsylvania! The building is gorgeous!

The building of the Austrian parliament though...

I guess I have to go to Australia now!

Quote from: Mximo Malt on January 24, 2026, 07:08:40 PMÉu fostadréu tir zirat acest avant...


86 47.

Aßei vala aßei.

Acest isch toct.

MM

Quand q'eu sint à pünt d'acurd, c'è non tréi basat es schovan

Ubuntu Studio - this operating system kills fascist

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on January 23, 2026, 08:00:12 AMIt's crazy that Jodie Foster was twelve when she was in Taxi Driver.

Fans be scary

I am of the opinion that a target immigration rate makes as much sense as a target fertility rate would in a larger country. It is a disturbing misdirection of resources which doesn't deal with *why* we want immigration.

The Seneschal has talked in the past about maintaining levels of activity - fine, but new citizens <> active citizens. Given this, surely citizen activity is what we should be targeting. Of course, that's harder to quantify in a number. But targeting something because it's easier to quantify, even though it's not the right target, is like the old story of a drunk looking for his keys under a streetlight because it's easier to see, even though he dropped them somewhere else. I have suggested in the past that the Seneschal has a fascination with metrics out of keeping with their actual relevance.

I am also of the opinion that Campbell's Law applies to Talossan immigration stats. Any policy which aims to "up the immigration rate" will render the immigration rate even less of an indicator of the actual health of Talossan society.

I am also of the opinion that the Seneschal's artificial carve-up of the immigration stats of my last Government because "it doesn't count because of external factors" is deeply politically dishonest. The Seneschal cannot be shaken from his belief that immigration rates are a function of Government policy; that if immigration is low it's because the Government doesn't care about immigration, and that when he's in power, he can make immigration flick up with his policy choices. But this is simply proven wrong, if he has to falsify the immigration stats from the previous government, to eliminate the impact of something out of the Government's control (without doing the same to all previous governments).

Quote from: Ethan Smith on January 18, 2026, 01:28:24 PMI have a question for someone who is willing to help me out, how active must I be on here?

If you mean "how active must I be as a prospective to get sponsored in", the answer is "active enough that people remember you exist"

If "how active must I be as a citizen", you can drop off the planet as long as you remember to vote every year or so