I hope this continues. I had great fun formalizing my two recipes for the last book.

-Txec R

Don't forget about this :)

Updates made to activity tracker.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on October 10, 2026, 11:51:59 AM8.9.4 Should the Royal Archivist position be vacant or the Royal Archivist be unavailable the Scribe of Abbavilla or Deputy Scribe of Abbavilla shall be empowered to effectuate the transmittal or release.

Yes, that is correct. The primary change is in 8.9.4 and accounts for a vacancy in the Royal Archivist position.

Quote from: Sir Lüc on Today at 08:26:08 AMI also strongly suggest that the ridiculous and self-aggrandizing post-nominal "vote" be stricken off the face of the Earth.

I think that such vote without a formalised structure to base said around, I would agree that these votes are likely to now be unbinding. I would allow for external postnominals to be granted if it had been achieved, and maybe with a thesis submital, exam or such, talossan verients could be added?

Quote from: Sir Lüc on Today at 08:26:08 AMIf I may return to the main topic, I strongly suggest the Society add to its bylaws some provisions dealing with lapsing membership for non-contributing members. Especially since many of those non-contributing members did not produce a single piece of scholarly work when joining the Royal Society, let alone since then. Quoting the Seneschal in 2020(!):

QuoteAnyway, from what I can see, very few of the members of the Royal Society have been measuring up to the requirements of their positions.  Fellows and Senior Fellows (including the President) are expected to deliver annual lectures to the Society that pertain to their scholarly interest.  I can name perhaps one or two Fellows who have done this in any reasonable form.  Fellows are also expected to produce a twice-yearly symposium, but I am not aware of one.

I also strongly suggest that the ridiculous and self-aggrandising post-nominal "vote" be stricken off the face of the Earth.

This is the first I've heard of symposia; however, it's an excellent idea.

as to bylaws, it has been increasingly difficult to confirm membership status; it was partly why I changed the barrier of entry for submitting academic work and/or a lecture. many members may have lapsed due to inactivity, which would be  useful to know whos have had there 3 stikes.

Quote from: King Txec on Yesterday at 03:30:47 PMAzul Madam President,

I would like to see incorporated in the proposed Charter who the decision-makers are (unless I missed that). Also, we could outline which officers we want such as President, Scribe, etc. Just my initial thoughts.

-Txec R

I thank you for the suggestion. This is more of a formalisation document where one didn't exist; however, I'm happy to adapt it over time, starting with an amendment formalising decision-making roles.

Thank you for notifying us of your resignation. We acknowledge your decision to withdraw from the Royal Society for the Advancement of Knowledge.

We are sorry that you feel the Society has failed to meet the standards you expect of an academic institution. However, we do not accept that the decision was simply a matter of politics or that the academic merits of the submission were disregarded.

The Society's responsibility extends beyond assessing academic work. It must also consider its institutional purpose, standards of conduct, and the responsibilities associated with membership.

In this context, we considered 61RZ13, *Sense of the Ziu: A First Step Towards Decency*, which explicitly addresses persistent and unapologetic harassment and calls for firm consequences where such behaviour occurs. While the resolution does not establish an automatic bar to membership of the Society, it forms part of the wider institutional context in which questions of conduct and accountability must be considered.

We recognise that the academic quality of a submission and an applicant's eligibility for membership are separate matters. Acknowledging the merits of someone's work does not oblige the Society to admit them.

We respect your decision to resign and thank you for your previous involvement with the Society. We remain committed to the advancement of knowledge, scholarly integrity, and the consistent application of our standards.

Thank you for submitting your essay for consideration by the Royal Society for the Advancement of Knowledge of Talossa.

After consideration, we regret to inform you that your application for membership has not been accepted.

While we acknowledge the work and academic merit demonstrated in your submission, acceptance of an essay does not in itself guarantee membership of the Society. The application has been considered in the wider context of the Society's membership standards, and the decision is not to proceed with your application at this time.

Thank you for your interest in the Society.

Quote from: King Txec on Today at 11:05:02 AM

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on October 10, 2026, 07:03:38 PM@Sir Lüc

Might you be willing to clarify for King Txec and Miestra as you have added the title to my profile,  I think? That is why I stated I am the Opposition Leader. I think it has to do with the current No votes. Crement voted for the government, ahem, which is certainly not matching with my vote (mentioning that obvious fact for those desperate to tie us politically at the hip.)

Thanks. One issue with reading the latest posts is we don't see the sidebar which lists each person's position.

-Txec R

Yes, sorry, this went unannounced but I remarked elsewhere I had only marked Crement Itravilatx as "provisional LOTO" prior to the Clark beginning because of his standing as the leader of the largest party not in Government. Once he and Garth Spencer both voted Üc, Tzaracomprada became "official LOTO" by virtue of holding 7 "Non" seats vs Muhammad Yasir's 3 "Non" seats.