...we Dared Something Worthy. 

And in that, We Who Left were provoked.

Had Mad King Ben in March 2004 never publicly accused on Wittenberg (Witt X) another Talossan citizen of domestic violence, the "Split" would never have happened, the Wittenberg of that time would never have been "commandeered" in-spirit, and the Talossan domain-names would have continued to be held in trust for the nation in toto without issue.

- GV, one of the eleven Founding Parents of the 2004-2012 Republic of Talossa

I don't know you, but any time a good citizen leaves, it is a sad thing, indeed.  May the future see your return to the Regipäts! - GV

Congrats!

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP on Yesterday at 08:45:40 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 11:08:17 AMI do think that you're going to probably have to leave party leaders in control of submitting a list, subject to their internal processes, since I don't know how else you'd do it.

Aside from legislation mandating that parties follow democratic procedures and allowing legal redress if not, switching to a candidate-based voting system instead of one that strictly hinges on parties would also solve this problem. The power to set up and submit lists is much less serious if voters are free to defy those lists as they please.

My two bence is that such a change would be preferable to Miestra's suggestion, as it appears to get two birds with one stone. (A phrase we do not seem to have a Tolassan equivalent for, if you'll forgive the aside.)

Good evening S:reu Secretar,

Under Lexh.H.2.1.6. the Freedom of Conscience Act is now able to be Clarked, despite attempts from certain CRL members to delay it indefinitely. Please do so (and thank you).

And since fate has been kind, I had two weekends in a row where a repair project went smoothly. Several weeks ago, my girlfriend plugged in her vacuum and immediately tripped the circuit for the entire second floor. After a little investigation, we figured out the power cord was fraying internally -- the two wires were contacting inside the cord, so plugging it in would immediately short out the circuit.

Well this week a new cord came in, so you can imagine what I've been up to. This repair job went pretty quickly -- if you don't count the hour spent on a trip to Lowe's for wire nuts.... Disassembling the vacuum was fairly easy. Disconnect the belt from the motor, take the "body" off the "base", then undo the screws that hold the front and back halves of the body together. Inside -- under where the waste container sits -- is staggeringly simple. A switch, a set of wires, and a motor that powers both the impeller for suction and the belt for the beater brush.


The old power cord came out easily. The new one went in...easily enough. I was expecting two blade connectors. Nope, only one; the neutral wire had a crimp-on connector. Not having any of those -- and not having the wire nuts I thought I did -- it was time for a quick trip to the hardware store with everything sitting disassembled in my dining room. (What I have seen some DIY'ers refer to tongue-in-cheek as every job's "halftime".)

Thankfully, once I was back with the right size wire nuts, everything went back together smoothly. A quick test showed that the house's circuit breakers were happy, suction was good, nothing was rattling, etc.

Last year, we had some mullings about a possible Talossan "Tinkers' Union" -- a place for people to talk about their various projects. Well -- here it is!

Introducing what I am tentatively calling el Verbånd Talossan Cufabrichind -- the Talossan Tinkering Society. (I'd also considered el Verbånd Talossan d'Impreschtsch, the Talossan Society of the Toolbox. We can workshop the name, no pun intended.)

What this is: a sort of megathread for whatever projects you might be working on to maintain, repair, and improve...whatever! Be it automotive, electrical, plumbing, woodworking, appliances, electronics, knick-knacks, show your fellow Talossans what you're working on. Whether you want to show progress, get suggestions, or just give a summary of a successful (or maybe not-so-successful) project, this is the place to do it.

---

I guess it's only fair I go first! As those of you who have seen me over our Zoom meetings (or on my Mad Chicken review from 2024) may be aware, based on the browline glasses and whatnot, I have a soft-spot for mid-century things. Old electro-mechanical stuff that's built to last, the aesthetics of the Jet/Atomic/early Space Age, etc. So it's probably no surprise that I bought a fountain pen recently. This is a Parker 45, and much like Talossa itself, it hails from Wisconsin! Parker, now headquartered in France, is originally from Janesville, a city in southern Wisconsin, near the Illinois border, about a 1.5-hour drive from the GTA. The 45 was introduced by Parker in 1960; mine dates from somewhere in the 1970s based on several characteristics.

Purchased for cheap on eBay, last weekend I disassembled it, gave it a bit of a soaking in some distilled water with a light bit of dish soap, and let it dry overnight. The next day I disassembled it further; several pieces around the pen's nib were stuck together by caked-on ink from a previous user and needed the first soak just to unscrew properly. Then I gave the parts another soaking, and let dry a second night.

The 45 comes with a "converter" (the internal refillable ink reservoir), but it also accepts Parker's long-running cartridge design, and that's what I've used here. I seem to still have a few mild issues with ink flow, but that may be due to a bit of soap residue affecting the ink -- or maybe there's still some old red ink in there somewhere. When this cartridge runs out I intend to buy a little bottle of pen flush and give it a good internal rinse to see if it can't be improved further.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 02:10:46 PMMaybe we still need seat limits, just higher ones?  Tweak the formula instead.

The current formula for the seat limit is (10 * Cosă size) / turnout, rounded up. If we are to abolish the one-third off-lister allowance, I suppose the equivalent exchange would be to increase the seat limit by one third, i.e. (40 * Cosă size) / (3 * turnout). How much of an increase do you have in mind?

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 11:08:17 AMI do think that you're going to probably have to leave party leaders in control of submitting a list, subject to their internal processes, since I don't know how else you'd do it.

Aside from legislation mandating that parties follow democratic procedures and allowing legal redress if not, switching to a candidate-based voting system instead of one that strictly hinges on parties would also solve this problem. The power to set up and submit lists is much less serious if voters are free to defy those lists as they please.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on Yesterday at 05:02:52 PMI don't believe that AD is only raising quibbles about reforms to defend his partisan advantage out of a system where people vote for a "blank cheque" for a logo. But if the Point is: "The current system makes the Cosa unaccountable to voters" and the Counterpoint is: "yeah, but it benefits my party", I beg the Baron to realize how his opponents might react to that. It is a simple psephological fact that conservative parties benefit from low-cognitive-effort, leader-focused systems.

It is a basic tenet of democracy that the outcome of the vote should reflect the will of the people as much as possible.  And I started this conversation because I'm interested in trying to find a solution that works well for that factor as well as others: reducing the arbitrary power of party leaders, working to ensure that voters know ahead-of-time who will be representing them, and making all the current features of our system flourish.  You will have to go elsewhere to pick a fight, I'm afraid.