Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on September 22, 2024, 09:47:40 PMReferring to a very basic screening as a "secret tribunal" is one of those things that, while not conclusively false or dishonest (depending on definitions), is not, as the kids say, keeping it 💯.

The lesson has been learned in Talossan politics that rhetorical hyperinflation, and picking a catchphrase and running with it (Christopher Rufo-style) is a good way to win arguments, i.e. to get your opposition to give up with a sore head. Let's compare this to the similar rhetorical move applied to 54RZ4:

QuoteWe're talking about the very human tendency to let a friendly applicant provide less proof of their identity than a grouchy applicant. If I get two social media accounts from two applicants, but I like the photos on one of them more?  Well, I will very obviously tend to judge that one more credible. That's not villainous, mustache-twirling corruption.  But it is corrupt, since it will tend to favor the person who thinks like the secret identity-confirmation tribunal.

The only way to go from this decision is to remove all Immigration Minister discretion at all, and allow prospectives to simply post their applications themselves, which would at least be consistent.

I remember when someone was saying that a particular decision of the CpI now meant that all cases would now be determined by lobbying the Judge in private. Didn't happen, but it was an exciting scenario to discuss.

I mean, it may well be that "the Government changed Immigration laws so it could exclude perfectly good citizens for reasons of corruption" might motivate a big voting bloc at the next election. Alternatively, we could be about to see a golden age where every new citizen is an informed and active one, and the voters would love that.

But all this is entirely hypothetical because right now there hasn't been an immigration application in almost two months, which is unfortunate but not something this bill is meant to deal with. Other government action will deal with that, schi Allà en volt.

Thanks for everyone's comments.

Upon discussion within the Cabinet, we have decided to change the wording slightly as so:

QuoteIf the Immigration Minister considers that this essay shows an insufficient understanding of what Talossa is or interest in Talossa and what Talossan citizenship entails, they may require the applicant to submit a rewritten essay that shows such understanding or interest before proceeding to the next stage.

I understand citizens' worries that Immigration staff with a chip on their shoulder could simply "flush" applications that they don't like the looks of. But this is the case already. El Lexh E.2. as written says that Immigration are entitled to reject applications if they don't consider the prospective to have furnished sufficient proof of identity. As we have seen with that clown who called himself a Lord and tried to immigrate a second time after being rejected a first time, this is somewhat toothless unless Immigration has the confidence to look more closely, and not the presumption that we "let everyone in and let the people decide".

The text of this amendment not only gives Immigration more confidence to actually enforce Immigration law as currently written, it gives precise instructions as to how Immigration are supposed to counsel prospectives to find out more about Talossa and to write an essay which not only demonstrates they know what Talossa is, but gives citizens vital information in order to ask intelligent questions of them in the immigration process.

Thus, I call upon the CRL being @Ian Plätschisch , @Glüc da Dhi S.H. and @þerxh Sant-Enogat , to take up this bill (text as in the first post in this thread) with a view to getting it on the next Clark.

¡Estimat.dăs citaxhiens!

60RZ9 has passed the Ziu with the requisite majorities, endorsing @Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB  as Heir Presumptive to the Throne of Talossa. I am proceeding from this point on the assumption that His Current Majesty will not exercise his royal veto.

On the basis of my Government's principle of Not Messing Around, and using my authority as Seneschal under Organic Law VII.13, I announce that the Referendum to confirm the Heir Presumptive as named in 60RZ9 will be held during the same period as the Third Clark of this Cosă, that is, 1st to 21st October Talossan Standard Time.

For reasons of propriety, this Referendum (and the attendant Clark) will be administered by Deputy Secretary of State @Sir Lüc . I should also note that, on the assumption that this referendum passes, @Sir Lüc is this Government's preferred candidate to become the next Secretary of State. I am making this announcement so the Chancery will have continuity to make long-term plans, for example, on the replacement of the Database.

Questions? Comments?

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on September 21, 2024, 11:42:21 AMAgain, there's no need for a law for this to happen. The minister can just announce the change, define the new office of a permanent secretary for the position, and ask for the appointment.

The purpose of proposing this law is for the Opposition Leader to try to force the Government to do what he wants them to do. Which is weird because he knows it won't work.

I have no strong position at all on BHAID - I've often thought that Talossa runs the risk of turning into something like the Rotary Club for which "charity" is the primary motivation. The question of PermSec or political appointment is secondary to the question of the purpose of BHAID.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on September 20, 2024, 06:54:10 PMI was appointed BHAID administrator during the 58th government

Ah-ha, yes, I've found the appointment, but The Seneschal's List was never updated.

(1) (2)
(3)

QuoteMy appointment ended after the end of that government is what you appear to be saying. You are saying that the Administrator position becomes vacant if not reappointed between governments?

That's right, same as all political appointments. That's why we invented PermSecs.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on September 19, 2024, 09:16:30 PMSo I was editing TalossaWiki to re-add Luc da Schir as the Deputy SoS when I noticed I am no longer listed as the BHAID Administrator under the Foreign Affairs ministry. Honest question. Have I been removed as administrator of the BHAID? I had assumed it was more like a civil service position and that is why I submitted the Palestinian Children's Relief Act recently. @Bentxamì Puntmasleu

The role of BHAID administrator has been listed as "vacant" since The Seneschál's List was first published in August 2020. This didn't change during the 58th or 59th Cosă governments. It is a political appointment under El Lexhatx D.2.6.6.1, not a Civil Service appointment.

Yes, this charity looks legit.

Due to popular demand, bumping this

Yeah, I was on this a few months ago

I agree with the sentiment. Am doing research on the specific charity recommended.

With the greatest of respect:

1) I actually worked with Ben Madison as Immigration Minister. He decided to keep me out, but he didn't do that through unaccountable backroom shenanigans. He did so by briefing against me with the Uppermost Cort, who had the final say. He wrote a snotty note in his newspaper saying that I could be reconsidered if I learned to toe the line, and of course I was already forming a new micronation by then, lol.

2) I could *already* be throwing half of the immigration applications in the bin and you'd know nothing about it, because you can't see the immigration mailbox. If you really think that any quality control is going to turn into unaccountable gatekeeping, then I expect you to support an automated process where any immigration application gets autoposted to Wittenberg. Which I'd actually support if we decided to reject the idea of quality hurdles.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on September 12, 2024, 09:17:26 PMI can only find studies and discussions of people valuing something more after the fact if they paid for it, versus when it's free.

That's probably a more rigorous and better way of putting it. I encourage everyone to read the hilarious article this is from:

Quotewhen something has no cost, you're not motivated to get your money's worth. New games have learning processes, and if you invest zero dollars in one, you invest the same amount of time in figuring out how to play. I know how this sounds, but it's almost as if you have to tax the player in order to get them to learn how to play your game. Ugh. I type 15 jokes about Hitler a day, and that was the most awful sentence I've ever written.

So after a few months, we changed the price from zero to three dollars (then back to free again). And here's what's nuts: When it cost more money, more people downloaded it. And everyone who downloaded it played it more.

But that's what I was getting at. If a new citizen has to make an *effort* to get in, they're more likely to cherish their Talossan citizenship and contribute to the community. So thanks for helping me clarify. And also to clarify, the "effort" I'm suggesting is one of demonstrating understanding what Talossa is and how a new citizen can contribute. I'll never forget that one citizenship who immigrated, tried to play the two major political parties off against each other, choose one, and then vaporized.

I hope you noticed that I also identified the problem of "ImmMin getting too much gatekeeping authority", which is why I included the option of an appeal to the SoS.

MinSTUFF has made a polite request, Brenéir.