Thank you so much @Moinul !!

->Bangladeshi Chicken Biryani

Chicken Biryani is one of my favorite dishes from Bangladesh. It is something you will often find at family gatherings, weddings, celebrations, or simply when people want to make a special meal at home(In Bangladesh and India). There are many different ways to make biryani, but this is a simple Bangladeshi-style version that I enjoy.

->[Ingredients]

1.For the chicken:

* 1.5 kg chicken, cut into medium-sized pieces
* 200 g plain yogurt
* 2 tablespoons ginger paste
* 2 tablespoons garlic paste
* 1 teaspoon turmeric powder
* 1.5 teaspoons red chili powder
* 1 teaspoon cumin powder
* 1 teaspoon coriander powder
* 1 teaspoon garam masala
* Salt(1 or 2 spoon)
* 2 tablespoons lemon juice
* 3 tablespoons cooking oil

2.For the rice:

* 500 g basmati(thick & Long rice)
* 2–3 potatoes, peeled and cut in half
* 2 bay leaves
* 4 cardamom pods
* 4 cloves
* 1 small cinnamon stick
* 1 teaspoon cumin seeds
* Salt
* Water for boiling

3.For the biryani:

* 3 large onions, thinly sliced
* Oil for frying
* 500ml warm milk(cow)
* A little saffron or saffron-colored food essence
* 2 tablespoons kewra water (Pandanus odorifer)
* 2 tablespoons Rose water
* 3–4 green chilies
* 2 tablespoons ghee(Clarified butter)
* Fresh coriander and mint

-->How to make it(Learnt from my mother)

First, I marinate the chicken with the yogurt, ginger, garlic, turmeric, chili powder, cumin, coriander, garam masala(mixed spices), salt, lemon juice, and a little oil. I usually leave it for at least an hour.
Next, I slice the onions very thinly and fry them until they become golden and crispy. These fried onions are called "beresta", and they add a lot of flavor to the biryani. I also lightly fry the potatoes and keep them aside.
I then fry the marinated chicken in a large pot over high heat. Once the chicken is partly fried and the oil starts coming out of the mixture, I add the fried potatoes.
While the chicken is cooking, I prepare the rice. I boil the rice with salt, bay leaves, cardamom, cloves, cinnamon, and cumin seeds. I don't cook the rice completely at this stage. It should be about 70% cooked, because it will finish cooking later with the chicken.
Now comes my favorite part: putting everything together. I place a layer of rice over the chicken, then add some fried onions, green chilies, coriander, and mint. I add another layer of rice and repeat the process.
Finally, I mix a little saffron with warm milk and pour it over the rice. I add the kewra water, rose water, and ghee, then cover the pot tightly.
The biryani is cooked on very low heat for around 20–25 minutes. This slow cooking allows the rice to absorb the flavors from the chicken and spices.
When it is ready, I gently mix the rice from the bottom upwards so that the grains stay intact.
It is best served hot, and I usually enjoy it with some salad or raita.

And there is one thing I personally like to do after eating biryani: I drink Coke! It gives me a wonderful, refreshing feeling after a hearty plate of biryani.

For me, Chicken Biryani is more than just a meal it is one of those dishes that reminds me of home and special occasions in Bangladesh. The view:-

During the last Cosă term, there has been growing cross-party support for the adoption of a voting system, which would enable voters a direct choice for their MCs, rather than leaving that choice to party functionaries who are in control of candidate lists, while preserving the current proportional allocation of seats. Such systems have become known as Personalised Proportional Representation in Talossa, or PPR for short. There have been multiple proposals for implementing PPR, each coming with advantages and disadvantages, which I want to showcase here.

1. Mixed-member Proportional (MMP)

MMP is the voting system in use in Germany and New Zealand, though there are differences in implementation.  At its most basic, voters under MMP have two votes: one for a local representative for their constituency, and one for a nation-wide party list. Voters are free to "split their vote", i.e. they can vote for a local represenative from one party and for a party list of another. The total number seats that a party receives are determined by the party list vote, and then those seats are "filled up" first by constituency winners, and the rest by party list members.

There have been proposals to implement MMP since 2014, most commonly in form of 8 constituency seats (one per province), with the remaining 12 for list candidates. Due to voters' ability to split their votes and the possibility of strongly localised support for parties, it is possible that a party may end up with more constituency winners than total seats. These are called "overhang seats". In New Zealand, overhang seats are added to Parliament without compensation, meaning that parliament size increases and proportionality is damaged. As of September 2026, New Zealand Parliament has 120 regular seats and 3 overhangs. In Germany, in the case of theoretical overhang seats, candidates enter the Cosă by the margin at which they won, meaning that overhang seats won by the narrowest margins are ignored. Parliament size thus stays proportional and at its canonical size, but some constituencies are left without a local representative ("orphaned"). As of September 2026, 23 out of 299 constituencies (7.7%) are orphaned, mainly in urban areas.

1.1. Advantages

MMP has been used in Germany since 1949, and in New Zealand since 1996, so it is a system that has been proven to work for high-stakes elections long term. The introduction of a constituency vote gives voters a direct choice as to who would represent each province without caveats and without strict adherence to any one party.

1.2. Disadvantages

MMP would require a drawing up of constituencies for the purposes of Cosă elections. While it seems straightforward enough to make every province their own constituency, considering the stark differences in province populations, doing so could disproportionately favour smaller provinces at the expense of bigger ones.

The stark differences in province activity is another hurdle to implementing MMP. It is not unimaginable that at least some constituencies would have candidates running unopposed, which in a sense is undemocratic, would also hurt the proportionality of the final results.

2. Open-list Proportional ("Kosovo system")

Open-list Proportional voting is used in dozens of countries worldwide on various levels of government (including in Kosovo, hence the colloquial Talossan name), and is perhaps the method most similar to what is already in use currently. At its most basic, voters vote for a party list, and then for a single candidate on that list that they like the most. Voters cannot split their vote. Seats are distributed by party vote, and assigned to party list members by the number of candidate votes they received. Ties are broken by party list order.

2.1. Advantages

The "Kosovo system" is by far the easiest to implement, as it is the closest to the pre-existing closed-list proportional system. The ability to pick the order in which list candidats enter the Cosă makes sure that only candidates that are popular with the electorate become MCs, rather than candidates who are most loyal to their party and thus would be listed at the top of their party list.

2.2. Disadvantages

While voters may reorder party lists by voting for their preferred candidate within one such list, they ultimately still have to choose between pre-packaged slates of candiates and may only choose one such slate, which means the actual extent of personalisation is limited. For example, voters who prefer some candiates of one slate and some of another slate have no means of expressing this preference.

3. Single Transferable Vote (STV)

STV is a voting system used for elections to the Irish Dáil and the Australian Senate, and makes use of ranked ballots. Voters rank candidates from highest to lowest preference, with 1 being the highest rank. In the tabulation, candidates with the lowest number of 1st rank preferences are eliminated, and their votes are then distributed to their next highest preference if any. Candidates who have reached the quota (the number of votes needed to guarantee a seat) are elected, and votes exceeding the quota are likewise redistributed to their next highest preference. This continues until all seats are filled, or failing that, if the number of non-eliminated candidates is the same as the number of seats left open.

While it is technically possible for all seats to be elected at once using nation-wide STV, this would make voting and tabulation exceedingly difficult. In practice, countries using STV are divided into constituencies, which then each elect a small number of representatives, usually between 3 and 7.

3.1. Advantages

STV has been in use in Ireland since 1922, and in Australia since 1949, which, like with MMP before, proves that it has been proven to work high-stakes elections long term. STV lets voters make a direct statement on which candidates they prefer most, and enables them to freely vote for candidates they like across party boundaries.

3.2. Disadvantages

Again like with MMP, the necessity of constituencies is potentially questionable. Additionally, if each province was its own constituency, they would each only elect 2 to 3 MCs. Such small constituencies are known to result in problematic, unproportional results, so to guarantee proportionality, constituencies would need to cover at least two provinces and elect between 5 and 6 MCs. As such, the exact form of STV constituencies would need to be deliberted and determined beforehand, and potentially changed as populations change per province.

The use of ranked ballots has produced some controversy in the past, so before STV can be enacted, one would have to make sure that voters are well enough informed as to how they work.

4. Sequential Proportional Approval Voting (SPAV)

SPAV is a form of Approval Voting, modified to allow for proportional representation. Voters are given the choice of approve or disapprove any number of candidates on the ballot. All approvals are worth the same. In tabulation, the candidate with the highest number of approvals is elected, and all ballots that approved of this winning candidate are multiplied by some weight in  subsequent rounds (e.g., ballots with 1 winner are worth 1/2, ballots with 2 winners are worth 3, ballots with 3 winners are worth 1/4, etc). This continues until all seats are filled.

4.1. Advantages

SPAV, like STV, allows voters to directly express which candidates they like and which they dislike, and gives voters the ability to "compose their own party lists", since all candidates they approve of would function as one list in the tabulation. The fact that choices are limited to "approve" and "disapprove", rather than having to rank candidates in order, should make this system easier to understand for voters.

4.2. Disadvantages

SPAV is not used for any high-stakes election (it was last used in Sweden from 1909 until 1921), making this system the least thoroughly tested and thus the most "experimental" of the four presented here. Though there has been a lot of research into proportional approval voting methods in academic literature, nations may be wary of implementing such a system without knowing beforehand that it would be effective.

5. Conclusion

PPR is not one system, but a diverse set of methods that all aim to achieve the same goal through very different means. It should then not surprise anyone, that among those who have campaigned in the past for the adoption of PPR for Cosă elections, each person has their own personal favourite (MMP is historically preferred among reformers, the "Kosovo system" is prefered by S:reu Autófil, STV is preferred by M:çă Schivă, and SPAV is my personal favourite). By writing this overview of where we stand right now, my hope is to encourage a national debate on the merits of each system, so that we can decide collectively which path to take as a nation.

Though strictly speaking a distinct and separate issue, the topic of voting reform has historically been combined and conflated with the topic of Senäts reform or abolition. I may write a separate post on one particular way of preserving the Senäts at a later time.

The number of adult citizens of Talossa is now 136. I also notice Zacrïeu had last visited Witt on August 11. Shame he decided not to stick around since he seemed to be into the language.

Azul.

With much regret the Chancery, having noted that the citizens noted below have failed to vote or respond to a national census within the last two years, issues the present to serve as Writ of Termination for the same citizens, pursuant to Article X Section 5 of the Organic Law.

• Korallia Furxhéir (#103)
• Zacrïeu Sverdeu @Zacrïeu Sverdeu  (#565)
• Juan Garcia @Juan José García  (#571)

Sir Lüc da Schir
Secretar d'Estat / Secretary of State

We did lose three or four iirc (fewer than the usual 8-10 in recent years, fwiw), but certification dragged on for so long that I forgot to make the post. Will do so now.

I am hoping the answer is zero but I wanted to check. @Sir Lüc Did we lose any citizens to strikeouts after the last election? I figured it was something that needed to wait until after certification.

Mick

-Txec R

WHEREAS it has been more than a fortnight since @Hoder Alston first posted on Wittenberg, following his introduction to the citizens of the Kingdom by officers of the Immigration Ministry, and

WHEREAS he has, in that time, demonstrated an active, genuine, and continuing interest in Talossan life, language and culture, and

WHEREAS he desires citizenship in the Kingdom of Talossa (The Best Thing Money Can't Buy™), and

WHEREAS by all indications it appears that he would be a loyal and dedicated citizen, and a credit to this nation if he obtains the grant of citizenship he requests,

THEREFORE I, Barclamïu da Miéletz, a citizen of good standing of the province of Cézembre and of the Kingdom of Talossa, do hereby petition the Chancery @Sir Lüc to issue a grant of citizenship to Prospective Citizen Hoder Alston, as specified by law.

there was a problem with burgermeister@talossa.com email and I now have fixed that with Danhiel.

I do see some funds that are trying to be sent from Canadian banks for which I do not have access.  Currently Zelle, PayPal and Venmo are ways to send funds to the Kingdom, or a paper check is possible.