The short answer is yes if I have time and motivation to do it.

So my (low priority) plan of action would be:

- Get up to speed with all changes in citizenship law, and how they apply to existing Dandelions;
- Compile a list of Dandelions that have no Talossan parents and have been registered over 16 years ago (14 years + 2 years no contact)
- Attempt to determine whether E.13 applies to other existing Dandelions, ie. if they are to be considered Implinds

I think there's been a misunderstanding of what I meant and what my intentions would be.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on January 05, 2025, 02:11:12 PMUnder the old laws, Dandelions were not in danger of "striking out" of citizenship. So, if their parents "struck out", they would be left on the rolls, with no way of contacting them.

This is correct. "Trapped Dandelions", as I called them when I attempted to fix the problem many moons ago (though smashing against a veto wall), are those whose parents no longer hold Talossan citizenship, and who in virtually all instances are stuck on our rolls as people whose age is unknown, who we have no way to contact anyway, and who likely have no idea they hold Talossan citizenship.

Quote from: C. M. Siervicül on January 05, 2025, 02:16:36 PMYes, but they still start "accumulating strikes" at 14, right? I thought "trapped" meant they were stuck on the rolls indefinitely but maybe I misunderstood.

This is correct but in many instances we would have no way of knowing or verifying their age, except by safely assuming that a Dandelion that has been registered more than 16 years ago has now struck out.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, SMC EiP on January 05, 2025, 04:04:50 PMI would argue that it seems unfair for them to accumulate strikes if we have no way to contact them. That would mean they are not receiving things like GE ballots, which would make it difficult for them to avoid accumulating strikes, no?

I would certainly agree with this if we're talking about Dandelions of current citizens; but I'm referring to Dandelions of long inactive people who have likely never heard of Talossa or in any way positively agreed to being on our rolls.

Quote from: Iac Marscheir on January 05, 2025, 05:58:37 PMHowever, because it isn't a burdensome process, I don't think there's much justification for choosing to, well, stalk them in a sense and try to make contact with them without necessarily having their parents involved.

This is absolutely not what the Chancery intends to do, and not the kind of investigation I meant I would like to eventually do!

Two further notes:

- The midterm referendum was already conducted under the assumption these former citizens could not vote (including for the purpose of calculating turnout) as their status was merely not reflected in the database yet;

- The Chancery reserves its right to conduct a further investigation of the status of several "trapped" Dandelions, who are present on our rolls but that are uncontactable, as they have no parents presently holding Talossan citizenship.

Azul, with the aim of making sure our citizenship rolls are up to date, it is with regret that the Chancery issues the following.

Pursuant to Article X, Section 4 of the Organic Law, with a heavy heart the Chancery belatedly acknowledges S:r Ian Feliceu's renunciation of citizenship of January 17th 2024 and accordingly issues the present to serve as Writ of Termination.

Furthermore, the Chancery notes that the former citizens named in the July 2nd 2024 announcement following the last General Election have now been marked as inactive in the database: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=3350.0

Lastly, our eternally dear friend Ian Tamoran, TDE, has also sadly been taken off the rolls of active citizens. The Chancery will comply with the requirements of Article X, Section 5 upon migration to the new database.



Sir Lüc da Schir, UrB
Secretary of State

Can we quickly amend this to remove the Talossan translations from I.3, and take care of those in a future non-constitutional bill? Otherwise, this has my full and enthusiastic backing for speedy passage on time for the next GE!

It's usually been the first senator that got to it.

FWIW, in the next Ziu I plan on opening separate Cosă and Senate voting threads myself, with the Cosă thread moved to the Cosă board instead of the Lobby.

My feedback remains that you've done an excellent job and we should get this over the line sooner rather than later!

I absolutely love the flag proposal!

Voting on the January 2025 Clark (the 5th of the 60th Cosă) is now open.

You can find the Clark at:

www.talossa.ca/files/clark.php?cosa=60&clark=5 (webpage) or www.talossa.ca/files/clarks/January2025Clark.pdf (PDF)

You can vote here (MCs), in the equivalent Senate thread (Senators), or on the Database (both): www.talossa.ca/files/clark_vote.php

Voting is open until the 21st of the month, at 19h30 TST.

Senators are allowed to create a single thread in the Senate chamber to post all of the Senate Votes that are not cast in this thread. Any votes not posted either using the form above, the current thread or the Senate thread might be ignored and void. Please do not vote by email or private messages.

When you vote, do not indicate any conditions which may make it sound like this vote isn't final: you can always change your vote later.

Please do not vote by email: We've had problems with email votes being caught in the spam filter.




Sir Lüc da Schir, UrB
Secretary of State

The Chancery is already planning to go forwards with Option 2, to be developed entirely in house, with thanks to Backend PermSec Dan T for already setting up the required reverse proxy entries so that you'll eventually be able to access the new DB at database.talossa.com.

Neither of the two other options is in any way acceptable to me as the one who's gonna be in charge of actually using the damn thing, and the midterm referendum was a successful test run for running a national poll using a website built with Django.

Clarked The Judge Cjantscheir Retirement Act as RZ19.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on December 09, 2024, 12:37:42 AMaccording to Article VIII, Section 6 of the Organic Law

Not a CRL member, but since I don't want to Clark something with an easily fixable error, this should say Article VIII, Section 5, as it is the first paragraph of Section 5 that states:

QuoteA Judge shall remain on the Cort pü Inalt [...] until such time as the Ziu shall remove him or her from their seat

For future reference, this is a potential replacement platform I found: https://www.discourse.org/ (this was mentioned very fleetingly on Discord like a year and a half ago, so people definitely either missed it or forgot about it)

It seems to hit most requirements I have in mind: for instance, we can run it for free on our own infrastructure, it's heavily customisable, fully responsive, modern, open source, extensively documented and actively maintained.

Actually, Dan T is the official Wittmeister as part of the Backend PermSec job description, with support from me in case of any technical issue that requires knowledge of SMF and of the modifications I applied to the base install.

That said, since it's the Chancery that calls the shots on Witt, and since I've already vented a bunch of times about SMF being outdated and obtuse, people can assume it is my intention to eventually move us to a better, fresher platform, rather than upgrading this instance of SMF, sooner rather than later.

The main issue is that unlike what happened with the transition from Proboards to SMF, this time my intention would be to migrate this forum's content to the new platform, which clearly would require some work. Replacing the existing database is also a way bigger priority, and that will receive my full attention in the coming weeks and months, with the goal being to hold the next GE on the replacement system. Therefore, I don't expect to be able to get to work on ditching SMF before that's done (ie, before Clarks, GEs and citizen management are all done on the new DB, at a minimum).