Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, MoFA on July 05, 2022, 08:14:20 AM
The big counterargument is that we sort of find ourselves out of "friendly" options when it comes to Milwaukee-neighboring teams.

Can't really go in favor of the Blackhawks, because there's no way Packers/Brewers/Bucks fans would want to support Chicago.

Can't really go in favor of the Wild, because there's no way Packers fans would want to support Minnesota.

Can't really go in favor of the Red Wings, because there's no way Packers fans would want to support Detroit and because I'm not going to vote in favor of a divisional opponent of the Bruins, lol

However, I think there is a somewhat unorthodox solution. As previously mentioned, we already have an official AHL team -- the Milwaukee/Maritiimi-Maxhestic Admirals. The Admirals have been the minor-league affiliate of the NHL's Nashville Predators since the latter team was founded in 1998. As such...what if we went with the Preds? The only caveat there is picking which province to associate them with, what with Tennessee being so far off.

I might be able to go with Nashville, the logical choice of provinces would be to go with the southernmost province but since they are already associated with one of the other professional teams, I was thinking we could go with the province that seems to get left out quite often...Cézembre Predators or perhaps go way out on the far side and use Péngöpäts Predators??? Not sure if using a territory instead of a province would be acceptable.

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on July 05, 2022, 07:11:03 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on July 04, 2022, 09:30:55 PM
RZ4-PER
RZ5-PER
RZ6-PER
RZ7-PER
RZ8-PER

Do you have a vote in the Vote of Confidence?

I didn't see it on the list but i would vote Uc (i think that is right spelling)

RZ4-PER
RZ5-PER
RZ6-PER
RZ7-PER
RZ8-PER

Quote from: Iason Taiwos on July 04, 2022, 05:31:14 PM
http://wiki.talossa.com/Law:The_Missing_Teeth_Act
Well, we do have an official hockey team (in the AHL)...

I would be okay with adding another subparagraph to add the Admirals as the official American Hockey League (AHL) team. However the bill as I wrote it specifically states NHL along with NFL, NBA and MLB as these are the top level leagues in the country surrounding our primary borders.

THE NAMING THE NATIONAL TEAMS ACT

Whereas El Lexhatx currently shows that we have National NFL, NBA and MLB teams but no NHL team and the former are named in separate sections (Section F paragraphs 25, 32 and 33 respectively). Let Section F Paragraph 25 which currently reads "25. The Green Bay Packers shall be Talossa's Official NFL Team, and it will remain so until such time as the nation is able to field its own NFL team to contest the American teams. The Ziu officially authorises loyal Talossan citizens to refer to the team, heretofore known as the "Green Bay Packers," as the "Florenciâ Packers." (23RZ40, 23RZ43)"  be changed to read


"25. Until such time as our great nation is able to field our own teams in the respective leagues the following teams will be recognized as the Talossan National Teams.

25.1 The Green Bay Packers shall be Talossa's Official NFL Team, The Ziu officially authorises loyal Talossan citizens to refer to the team, heretofore known as the "Green Bay Packers," as the "Florenciâ Packers."

25.2 The Milwaukee Brewers shall be Talossa's Official MLB Team, the Ziu officially authorises loyal Talossan citizens to refer to the team, heretofore known as the "Milwaukee Brewers" as the "Maricopa Brewers"

25.3 The Milwaukee Bucks shall be Talossa's Official NBA Team, the Ziu officially authorises loyal Talossan citizens to refer to the team, heretofore known as the "Milwaukee Bucks" as the "Benito Bucks"

25.4 The Nashville Predators shall be Talossa's Official NHL Team, the Ziu officially authorises loyal Talossan citizens to refer to the team, heretofore known as the "Nashville Predators" as the "Cézembre Predators"

25.5 The Milwaukee Admirals shall be Talossa's Official AHL Team, the Ziu officially authorises loyal Talossan citizens to refer to the team, heretofore known as the "Milwaukee Admirals" as the "Maritiimi-Maxhestic Admirals"

Also let section F paragraphs 32, 33 and 38 be stricken from El Lexhatx.

This organizes all of our recognized national teams under one paragraph making them easier to locate. The Nashville Predators were chosen because our neighbors in Wisconsin may declare war on us if we chose either Chicago or Minnesota and because one member said he could not in good conscience root for the team from Detroit and I chose Cézembre because the geographically closer provinces already have teams and sometimes it seems that Cézembre is the forgotten province.


Uréu q'estadra så:
Tric'hard Lenxheir (MC-TNC)
Mic'haglh Autófil, MoFA (MC-PDR)

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on June 28, 2022, 08:40:15 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on June 28, 2022, 08:20:55 AM
I fully support this! I just wish Talossa was big enough to make a true contribution to the sanctions against the criminal regime in Russia.

Thank you MC Lenxheir, would you like to be added as a co-sponsor?

Yes please!

I fully support this! I just wish Talossa was big enough to make a true contribution to the sanctions against the criminal regime in Russia.

I already sent you mom's spaghetti sauce, let me think and perhaps I can come up with another good one

As to RZ1, "The Poor, Unfortunate Souls Citizenship Act," I vote për.
As to RZ2, "The One Milestone At A Time Act," I vote për.
As to RZ3, the "Compromise on the Compromise Act and Amendment," I vote për.

I vote üc on the Vote of Confidence.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on May 31, 2022, 06:11:32 PM
So the argument is that there is a benefit to putting limits on the precise subjects about which the Ziu can make law? This is not the case in most countries I'm familiar with, outwith civil rights (which are contained for us in the Covenants).

Unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying here you are wrong. The United States Constitution especially the Bill of Rights is completely about restricting the power of the federal government.

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on May 10, 2022, 08:48:00 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 10, 2022, 07:15:57 AM
"When the King is presented with a petition to appoint a Seneschal, signed by MCs who together hold a majority of seats in the Cosâ, the person named in the petition shall become Seneschal and shall be appointed by the King."

I would suggest this emendation:

"When the King is presented with a petition to appoint a Seneschal, signed by MCs who together hold a majority of seats in the Cosâ as then constituted, the person named in the petition shall be appointed by the King to be the Seneschal."

This accounts for the new citizen seats thing or similar and eliminates possible ambiguity in that regard, as well as the dual action in the latter bit that seems to suggest that the same action is happening through different methods at the same time -- never a good idea when writing a law, since again it can make it ambiguous as to the specific time that action occurred.  I don't think either change has any practical difference in most respects.

A few things:
-Suppose a party that wins 20 seats is the first to assign their seats to MCs. If those MCs immediately petitioned the King to name a Seneschal, would that petition constitute a majority of the Cosa "as then constituted"?
-Anything that potentially allows the King to throw a wrench in the works by refusing to appoint the Seneschal would be a complete non-starter for a lot of the Free Democrats, I think. I worded it that way very intentionally.

Isn't there a time limit as to how long a party may wait to assign their alotted seats? If not I think this should be included and then the simple fix would be to require a waiting period until all seats are filled before such a petition is presented to the King

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 02, 2022, 05:23:51 PM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 02, 2022, 05:15:13 PM

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 02, 2022, 04:29:27 PM
There is a lot of rhetoric being flung around. The simple fact is the outcome is not known with certainty, no matter what one side keeps suggesting, and that is why we go through this democratic exercise. There are a lot of situations that could change the outcome. Let's keep our eyes in focus and instead of throwing verbal abuse, figure out a way to make the process work better so your exhausted Secretary of State can implement a smooth process that we can all agree on.

I probably shouldn't have asked for a seat, I am very passionate but hell, I'm a truck driver so I ain't the smartest guy in the world, not even in the top 50 here in Talossa LOL

That being said I do see a need for a fix I just don't really know how to go about crafting legislation and wording it properly. It should be a simpler process so that you don't get bombarded with work trying to keep everything straight and in my opinion if we are going to require MC's to choose two candidates it should be on some sort of a points basis (which would make more work for you) which would make it slightly more possible to win if you are not in the majority or conversely just have a straight up vote, one MC, one vote and that would remove the possibility of overturning the intent of the voters in the general election. Again, I know I'm not very smart

We do in essence have a point system, in that each MC has one vote for every seat, so for example you have 1 seat thus 1 vote. I'd be happy with removing the "two choices" required option if we only have two candidates, or we make it that every party must nominate a candidate, which increases the chances that there will be more than 2 choices.

As an aside, if you're smart enough to log into Talossa and engage with us, you are plenty smart enough to write legislation, etc. That's why we have the processes in place that we do.

Heck you folks all like to speak in that sort of pseudo-Shakespearian language with wherefore's and hereto's and I just talk plain. I think the only thing I might be good for is coming up with an idea and then getting someone to write it out using the accepted verbiage and then hoping I still understand it enough to make sure it is what I was actually trying to say LOL

Quote from: Dr. Txec Róibeard dal Nordselvă, Esq., O.SPM, SMM on May 02, 2022, 04:29:27 PM
There is a lot of rhetoric being flung around. The simple fact is the outcome is not known with certainty, no matter what one side keeps suggesting, and that is why we go through this democratic exercise. There are a lot of situations that could change the outcome. Let's keep our eyes in focus and instead of throwing verbal abuse, figure out a way to make the process work better so your exhausted Secretary of State can implement a smooth process that we can all agree on.

I probably shouldn't have asked for a seat, I am very passionate but hell, I'm a truck driver so I ain't the smartest guy in the world, not even in the top 50 here in Talossa LOL

That being said I do see a need for a fix I just don't really know how to go about crafting legislation and wording it properly. It should be a simpler process so that you don't get bombarded with work trying to keep everything straight and in my opinion if we are going to require MC's to choose two candidates it should be on some sort of a points basis (which would make more work for you) which would make it slightly more possible to win if you are not in the majority or conversely just have a straight up vote, one MC, one vote and that would remove the possibility of overturning the intent of the voters in the general election. Again, I know I'm not very smart

Quote from: Antonio Montagnha, Ed. D. on May 02, 2022, 02:03:28 PM
For those who have read The Wheel of Time, if Lord of the Rings was primarily a meditation on the nature of evil and a lament for the loss of pastoral life in the face of dehumanizing industrialization, what would you identify as the themes of the Wheel of Time?

As I said in the original post it is a classic "Good vs. Evil" story and a "Coming of Age" story. It is a story of lost innocence (not sexual innocence). The author never really puts an age on the characters but based upon the fact that the main characters in the beginning are all living at home with parents I would place them in mid to late teens. They are thrust into a world they are completely unprepared for and have to grow mentally and emotionally. Each is destined for greatness in his or her own way...spoiler alert...not everyone survives.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 02, 2022, 01:31:51 PM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 02, 2022, 12:53:56 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 02, 2022, 12:23:30 PM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 02, 2022, 11:59:19 AM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 02, 2022, 11:44:38 AM
...but what is the point?  Why not just have the party leaders officially declare that their party backs such-and-such?  Do we need the dog-and-pony show?  "Party leaders, each representing their party caucuses entire and voting their party's seats as a bloc, shall publicly indicate their support for a Talossan of their choice.  Whichsoever candidate has public declarations with a total that represents a majority shall be pronounced the winner by the Secretary of State."

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what the "ranked vote" means?

The idea behind a ranked vote is that you list your preferences in order.  If your first choice doesn't get a majority, then your vote instead is moved to count for the second choice.  And so on with your third choice.

But in this instance, party leaders nominate the only viable candidates, and no one's supposed to defect from their party choice.  So (a) there's no point to a ranked vote, since someone's always going to win on the first ballot based on whoever was chosen by party leaders, and (b) there's no point to a vote at all, since the real decision was made by party leaders when they agreed on a coalition.  The only thing this accomplishes is that it enables defections, which people were just decrying as a terrible thing that never happens (even though they were wrong about that).

How about this for an idea. To me ranked voting would be something similar to the Talossa Music thing. First choice gets 2 points and second choice gets 1 point. That would make it possible (though unlikely) for a secondary candidate to actually win. The current set up really serves no purpose. If people like this idea then they might as well just allow the majority party to name a Seneschal. I mean...what happens if only one party nominates a candidate???

Unfortunately, I think you're still thinking of this like a real vote. But it just is not. I know it seems weird, but the outcome was already decided. If the winner is not who the party leaders decided upon, then that would be a problem. So any method that might get a surprise is a bad one.

If only one party nominates a candidate, then that person is sure to win a majority. That might seem weird, but the situation is already weird. Here we are, undergoing a show vote, when again only one person can possibly win, because the outcome was decided last month. This is all just literally for show. It's not a real vote.

Based upon the rules set forth if only one candidate was available then the election would have to be thrown out completely as all votes would be invalid. The rules require each MC to select two candidates or their vote becomes invalid.