Having seen no other feedback from other citizens of Florencia... I'd like to speak NOT as the Senator of our province, but as a member of the House of Shepherds.

I like the idea in principle, but I worry about its practicability. To what end will a new citizen become involved in Florencian politics? Most issues that may be entertained by the Shepherds would be either an exclusively national issue or an issue better handled at the national level.

That said, perhaps it could revitalize provincial interest(s). Might I suggest that the Ministry introduce new Florencian citizens to the Shepherds only after their bona fide naturalization, and then the Shepherds could merely take him/her on their wing until the next election?

I would be glad, regardless of the person's political leanings, to teach someone of the Florencian way of life and get them involved.

Pleased and honored to have been interviewed!

This publication is super appreciated, sir. I read it every time, from top to bottom, without skimming or skipping. It is an incredible public service, and I hope that you never stop.

I may be interested to start a column, all about electoral methods and electoral math and comparative law and that sort of thing. If you're interested, let me know!

I don't see a practical benefit to, nor a practical difference of, a smaller-number Cosa if we still allow members to hold more than one seat at a time. In reality, by shrinking the seats but allowing plural seat-holding, we are really just excluding smaller parties as well as overall political participation. I think that one-person parties are a GOOD thing in the context of Talossa, and that they make Talossa a greater democracy.

If we want a "real" Cosa - which I support, to be clear - then we have to get rid of plural seat-holding. One seat, one member.

If that is unpalatable, then we should stick to the current EM200 method.

The half-measure of reducing seats but allowing plural seat-holding does more harm than good.

Quote from: King John on May 31, 2020, 03:28:43 PM
To remedy this, of course, it will be suggested that the King have a set term of office, three years or five years or whatever.  At which point we should simply change the name of the office from "King" to "President", and the name of the country to The Talossan Republic, and have done with it.  I mean, why pretend?

I agree! Why pretend? A republic would be far superior to a kingdom in the first place.

I for one think that Talossa should adopt a semi-presidential constitution (think France, Mongolia, or Portugal), but I could absolutely compromise on a parliamentary republic (think Germany, India, or Ireland).

Talossa can still be unique, can still "be fun", and can still have knighthoods and orders and writs and awards and coats of arms and all those sorts of things without a king. There is no reason why a republic, i.e. a non-monarchy, can't have previously monarchical things; in fact, all modern-day republics do!

I have edited the original post concerning the schedule to reflect speaking time recognized and given to the Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic, a.k.a. Ian Plätschisch.

Having received an intention to speak only from the honourable Eiric S. Bornatfiglheu MC, seeing fit that this hearing should conduct itself in some manner rather than none, and wishing to witness due process and just scrutiny, I do now announce an impermanent schedule which may be so modified as necessary:

Commencing tomorrow on Sunday, May 31st, and until the end of Tuesday, June 2nd, the honourable Eiric S. Bornatfiglheu MC shall have exclusive time to ask questions of the nominee, S:reu Alexandreu Davinescu, who may be obligated to answer them in a timely and speedy manner.

Commencing on Wednesday, June 3rd, and until the end of Friday, June 5th, I, the Senator for Florencia, shall have the same as before mentioned.

My invitation to others, that they may request and receive time to ask questions and receive answers of the nominee with respect to his nomination to the Uppermost Cort of Talossa, remains in effect. In particular I would like to invite for speaking the Seneschal, the Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic and the Senator for Vuode, but they should affirm their desire to speak.

Thank you.

---

EDIT: Commencing on Saturday, June 6th, and until the end of Monday, June 8th, the Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic shall have the same as before mentioned for myself.

Going forward, in the interests of remaining time, I am likely to recognize speakers for smaller periods than 3 days. Accordingly I recommend that whosoever may wish still to speak have questions in mind before their speaking time, so as not to crowd out others who may wish to speak afterwards.

---

EDIT2: Commencing on Tuesday, June 9th, and until the end of Thursday, June 11th, as according to standard Talossan time, the incumbent Seneschal, the most honourable Dame Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN, shall have the same as before mentioned for myself. However, in consideration of the conflicting timezones, this time may be extended if the Seneschal makes so a request, so that a sufficient numbers of questions may be asked and a quality of answers be given.

Quote from: King John on May 26, 2020, 05:02:35 PM
I don't believe I've yet received notification of this resolution from the Governor; I don't think I can act on it *before* receiving it from him, can I?  So ... waiting eagerly.   :D

-- John R

Respectfully I submit the following:

Quote from: Breneir Itravilatx on May 15, 2020, 04:06:04 PM
Seeing that this is the official thread for the ongoing Nimlet session convened on 22 December I will make any posts in continuance of the session here.

Pursuant to Article III, Section 4 of the Florencian Constitution I, Breneir Itravilatx, Governor of Florencia, do hereby place my signature for the Resolution to Amend the Florencian Constitution in Whole as duly approved by a vote of the current session of the House of Shepherds.

Pursuant to the same section of our Constitution I do also send this Resolution for consideration to our Constable.

/s/
Breneir Itravilatx

Please don't fret it at all! There was no harm caused (or intended), and I certainly did not mean to suggest otherwise.

In fact, it may have been for the better; perhaps the Senator for Maricopa would not have said anything in time without having seen your reply when he did.

I very, very, very much prefer that someone participate, even if they erred on the rules, than that someone not participate at all.

Speaking of which: Folks, if you'd like to ask Alex questions, please let me know. You don't need to be a Senator.

I wish cordially to remind the nominee and the Senator for Maricopa that their speeches were made out of turn, though without any intent to admonish. In fact, I thank them both sincerely for taking the time to speak and participate.

For the remainder of the public who may be interested in this hearing, I would like now to point out Rules 9 and Rule 15 of this Special Committee:

Quote9. Any Member of the Committee or non-Member who may wish to speak during the hearing shall make a request for it at least two (2) days in advance to the Chairman or Deputy Chairman, who shall approve, modify, or deny the request publicly.

Quote15. The Committee shall finish its business and submit its report to the Senate and the public of Talossa at least before if not sooner than Monday, June 15th, 2020/XLI.

There are approximately two weeks yet for this hearing to dispatch its business. Any citizen is welcome to speak, provided that a request is made in advance. Please know that I have waited to make a schedule, but seeing that no requests have been made to speak, there is unfortunately no schedule to publish.

On that note, I intend myself to speak and ask questions of the nominee. I will announce that intention formally at least two (2) days in advance; I am stalling my own speaking time so that others may enjoy the privilege to speak sooner.

Finally, I reiterate that if you are a Senator and wish to contact me on the matters of this hearing I request cordially that your contact be made publicly in this Committee; and, furthermore, if you are a non-Senator and wish to contact me, that you do so via PM.

Thank you so much.

I will take blame for not responding publicly. Truth be told, I had hoped that someone might have read the rules and asked formally for some speech time.

The short answers to both questions posed of me:

1. Non-Senators may speak, but the system is not quite the same; specifically, you do not need to "borrow" time from a Senator. The Special Committee will recognize any citizen, provided that a request for speaking time be made in advance. On that note, would you like to reserve some time, Eiric? If so, let me know and it shall be made.

2. There is no schedule at this time because, to date,  no one has requested any time to speak. Anyone who wishes to speak must simply request it.

Rule 9 of the Special Committee: "Any Member of the Committee or non-Member who may wish to speak during the hearing shall make a request for it at least two (2) days in advance to the Chairman or Deputy Chairman, who shall approve, modify, or deny the request publicly."

(And technically the only two times when someone has spoken so far in/to the Special Committee were direct contraventions of the rules, but c'est la vie.)

The hearing is live! If you are a Senator, please speak to me via the hearing thread on Witt (i.e., NOT private messages). Alex, if you have any questions or concerns, do not hesitate to reach out to me. On behalf of the Senate, we appreciate your willingness to undergo this hearing and appreciate your time.

May I congratulate S:reu Alexandreu Davinescu on the unique honor of being nominated to the Uppermost Cort. To be considered worthy of a functionally lifetime appointment to the highest judicial body of our nation is by itself humbling. I would like to acknowledge and compliment his contributions to the nation of Talossa over the many years, and I wish him well on his nomination.

As Deputy Mençei, I would like to see continue the importance and prestige of the Senate through the political process. As such, I believe, it is incumbent on this body to carry on the very novel but still monumentally crucial tradition of scrutiny of judicial nominees,  no less in the form of a public hearing.

This hearing by the Senate will be conducted in a similar - albeit slightly modified - manner as the previous one done just some months ago in January. For example, we will be using a Special Committee rather than a Committee of the Whole. I have enumerated below the actual rules, and I intend that the hearing will commence in earnest not later than Friday, May 22nd.

I invite cordially that fellow Members of this House make their communications here in this Committee exclusively in place of any other medium, if not to each other then at least to me.

Any other Citizen of Talossa may speak here without qualification, provided that they first seek and receive confirmation of that privilege from myself or the Mençei. For this purpose, a PM is preferred.

---

---

Rules of this Special Committee:

1. The Members of the Committee shall be exclusively the duly elected and seated Members of the Senate of the Kingdom of Talossa. None else shall have equal privileges.

2. The business of the Committee shall not preclude the Senate from conducting its normal business.

3. The Mençei shall be the Chairman of the Committee, and the Deputy Mençei the Deputy Chairman, who shall have plenary and conclusive powers upon and during all its business.

4. The sole purpose of the Committee is to realize a public hearing of the nomination of S:reu Alexandreu Davinescu to the Uppermost Cort of the Kingdom of Talossa, and its powers shall extend not beyond the scope or the bona fide interests thereof.

5. The sole goal of the hearing of the Committee is to scrutinize the qualifications of the nominee and ascertain his ability or fitness to service as a Puisne Justice of the Uppermost Cort. The Committee shall report its findings on those matters to both the entire Senate and the public of Talossa at large.

6. The Committee may elect in its ultimate report whether to endorse for or to endorse against the nomination, but it shall be not requisite or binding. The Committee shall be adjourned sine die upon the deliverance of its report to the Mençei or Deputy Mençei.

7. A Quorum shall be unnecessary, but the power to make finals decisions with respect to the Committee or its business shall be reserved to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman.

8. The Chairman or Deputy Chairman shall publish and maintain a schedule for the hearing, which shall control the sequence, time, and privileges of speeches. The schedule shall be impermanent and respond accordingly to ongoing circumstances.

9. Any Member of the Committee or non-Member who may wish to speak during the hearing shall make a request for it at least two (2) days in advance to the Chairman or Deputy Chairman, who shall approve, modify, or deny the request publicly.

10. Members of the Committee shall have precedence in all manners over non-Members with regard to the sequence, time, and privileges of their speeches. Each Member shall have no less than one equal opportunity to speak with regard to other Members.

11. Speeches shall be germane, and shall be inquisitive of and directed to the nominee. Questions shall be asked of the nominee and answers provided by him, and the dialogue between the nominee and the speaker shall remain courteous.

12. A Member of the Committee may invite guests to use up some or all of a scheduled speech, but sufficient notice thereof shall be given in advance to the Chairman or Deputy Chairman. Guest speakers shall respect this privilege, which may be denied by the Chairman or Deputy Chairman in whichever manner they find proper.

13. The Committee shall begin its business immediately, but the first scheduled speech of the hearing shall occur not sooner than Friday, May 22nd, 2020/XLI.

14. The first speech of the hearing shall be reserved to the nominee himself, unless he reject this privilege knowingly and willfully, so that he may make his own introduction. The Chairman or Deputy Chairman may invite that the nominee make the final speech.

15. The Committee shall finish its business and submit its report to the Senate and the public of Talossa at least before if not sooner than Monday, June 15th, 2020/XLI.

Thank you ever for your service and keeping the public knowledgeable.

Seeing that this Resolution has earned the constitutionally requisite number of votes, and therefore has passed this House of Shepherds, I do now notify my esteemed colleagues that the Governor of our great Province, the honorable Breneir Itravilatx, is obliged by Section 4 of Article III of the Constitution of Florencia — which reads in part...

QuoteWhen the passage of a resolution by the Nimlet is secured, the Governor (or, in the case of a resolution appointing a Governor, the sponsor of the resolution) shall sign its instrument and shall deliver it, with his own comments and recommendation, to the Constable for approval or veto.

— to present the instrument of this Resolution immediately to the Constable, His Majesty King John, for His approval or veto.

Seeing also that 15 days have passed since the deadline for this Resolution, and believing that that is or was sufficient time for the Governor to have delivered the instrument as according to law, I do now also notify my esteemed colleagues of my intent to file suit with the Uppermost Cort of Talossa seeking a Writ of Mandamus to compel action of the Governor, or of some other competent authority, so that the instrument may be duly delivered, and only if the Governor does not make the delivery within the next 24 hours.

/s/
Açafat del Val
Member of this House of Shepherds, and
Senator for the Province of Florencia

QuoteThe day is not far when the present government will try to turn this country into a Republic. Reunison destroyed the Constitutional fabric of the Nation.

Perhaps having a Republic is a good thing (if you can keep it)!