A few supplementary comments to this.

The "critical cooperation" approach taken by the Union of Free Reformists is nothign new. We began this Cosă term by offering a cooperation deal to the incoming Progressive Alliance minority government. Although this was rejected at the time - rather haughtily! - the political climate eventually shifted, to great success. It may be tactical rather than strategic to say so, but the Union is in the business of enacting reforms, not opposition for opposition's sake.

Assuming the current proposal to amend the electoral system - to enable voters to directly choose Members of the Cosă for the first time ever - comes through, that will be a huge win for the Union, that has come about through (critical) cooperation with the Progressive Alliance. Another is maintaining the cultural boycott of a sex pest universally condemned by the Ziu.

The address by the Party President above clearly sets out the differences between us and the Progressive Alliance leading up to the election. The Democracy Agenda goes far beyond the Cosă reform agreed to by the parties - for example, we call for Senäts reform as well, something the existing Government are strongly opposed to. We hope to offer a clear choice to voters as to whom they want to lead the next government. By the way, although "grand coalitions" are not bad things in themselves, this is not one. It is a cordon sanitaire. And it's not uncommon for fascists and other repulsive entities excluded by a cordon sanitaire to start going on about "uniparties", claiming to be the only real opposition etc. It does not change the fact that the repulsive entity is, indeed, repulsive.

Finally, lectures are unwelcome on the subject of immigration from the man personally responsible for four people withdrawing from Talossa - three renunciations (one of which reversed), and one withdrawal from activity. The last of those renunciations was of course in solidarity with the sex pest - although since the sex pest was apparently "in the ear" of this citizen leading up to the decision, he can be credited with that one too.

Brenéir Tzaracompradă, will you please go now.

This looks like good work. Only quibble here is:

Quote2. Each party shall receive a percentage of party seats as equal as possible to its percentage of the popular vote, but each party shall receive a whole number of seats, and in turn, the Secretary of State shall assign these seats to a numerically-ordered list of candidates nominated by that party. The Secretary of State shall assign seats by assigning a seat to the first person on a party's list. If the party won more than one seat, then the Secretary of State will assign a seat to the next person on their list, and so on until the end of the party's list. The Secretary of State will then return to the top of the list, and continue in the same manner until all of the party's seats have been assigned.

The party list being ranked is a pretty important detail. Consequent amendment to El Lexh 2.3 also:

Quote2.3 The ballot must also include, for each party contesting the election, a 50-word (or less) statement of the general aims and views of the party, and a list in numerical order of citizens to whom the party intends to award Cosa seats. If a party does not submit a candidate list to the Secretary of State before the election, the party leader is assigned all seats won, and seats which cannot be held by the Party Leader are forfeited.

I *think*, given this wording, it would be possible for a future Cosă to bring in an open-list system (although not a fully candidate-based system) by statute. The very simplest form would be to add an additional question to each ballot for each voter to choose one (or more) preferred candidates (either restricted to their preferred party, or otherwise), and for the Secretary of State to reorder each party's list to rank candidates in order of their personal vote. But, @Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP , do you think this would authorise SPAV to be brought in by statute as well?

Finally, is there any appetite for adding something to El Lexh 2.3.2 which states that a party's internal processes for naming their candidates must allow and reflect the democratic input of members, and members have standing to sue in default of this?

Quote from: Barclamïu da Miéletz on Yesterday at 07:53:06 AM

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Yesterday at 01:00:09 AMHowever, there was one citizen who was waiting on their ID from a previous round

Can said citizen update their photo? Asking for them.

The citizen in question is free to submit an updated photo if they would like, yes. :P

Quote from: Moinul Moin on Yesterday at 10:47:13 AMCan any citizen request for ID card now?

Citizens are welcome to fill out the application and take the Civics Test whenever they would like. However, in order to keep things moving on the current batch of ID cards, applications received after the deadline will simply make up part of the next group of IDs.

Ah, see, had you been at the March Informal Session you would have been present for the Baron stating that he intended to re-appoint several Permanent Secretaries on the way out the door. Not "paranoia-based" when it's based on explicit statement of intention.

That being said, in many parliamentary democracies, caretaker status does in fact restrict certain government decisions, and rightfully so. With no legislature in session, the question of whether a caretaker government truly retains its mandate is unresolved until the electoral results are known. With the status of that mandate in question, it is inappropriate for the Government to make major policy decisions, including creation of Permanent Secretary offices within its ministries.

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on Yesterday at 08:57:19 PM

Quote from: Françal I. Lux on Yesterday at 08:45:18 PMWhere can I get the latest numbers on these?

Should be able to find this information in the new database here: https://database.talossa.com/citizenship

Appreciate it!

Quote from: Françal I. Lux on Yesterday at 08:45:18 PMWhere can I get the latest numbers on these?

Should be able to find this information in the new database here: https://database.talossa.com/citizenship

Where can I get the latest numbers on these?

I see it, thanks. I was looking in the mail app itself.

- Txec R

Quote from: King Txec on Yesterday at 03:50:45 PM

Quote from: Danihel Txechescu on Yesterday at 02:58:10 PMI believe you have to go to https://auth.talossa.com/ and enter those credentials there. In there, you can go to Settings -> Change your password.

I've gone to settings and preferences and clicked on every option and no where is there an option to change a password.

There's no Preferences there. The link is: https://auth.talossa.com/

Once logged in, in the cog, top and right, there's a button at the bottom that says: "Change password" in the "User details" section.

Quote from: Danihel Txechescu on Yesterday at 02:58:10 PMI believe you have to go to https://auth.talossa.com/ and enter those credentials there. In there, you can go to Settings -> Change your password.

I've gone to settings and preferences and clicked on every option and no where is there an option to change a password.

-Txec R