When I first wrote the original Public Process Act back in August, I wanted to end the Government's power to reject immigration applications in secret.  I believed that it probably wasn't being abused, but I found it incredible that the government held that capability at all.  Unfortunately, my bill was rejected.  I started a new draft, amended it based on bipartisan feedback so that it had real teeth, and started to campaign on the issue.  We stood on principle, and we didn't back down.

This month, we won that hard-fought battle.  After the election of a reformist government, including a plurality of the Cosa and every contested Senate election, the new bipartisan Public Process Act Redux passed unanimously!

This victory doesn't belong to the Progressive Alliance or to me, but instead to an electorate that reacted overwhelmingly to reject the status quo.  This victory belongs to you, the people of Talossa who insisted on this reform.

The status quo is a comfortable and familiar place, and we're often inclined to simply trust our leaders.  It is a credit to our citizens that they insisted on this reform, turning out to the polls in huge numbers that rival some of our highest turnout.  They demanded change, and the entire Ziu deserves credit for giving it to them.

Demand transparency and demand positivity... and let's keep these reforms going!

Quote from: Heinrich Elisa on Yesterday at 06:15:48 PM

Quote from: Françal I. Lux on Yesterday at 02:31:41 PMI speak English, Tagalog and Hokkien fluently. I also studied Esperanto but that was awhile ago lol

tagalog interest me

It's a really cool but under appreciated language. A lot harder than many other Austronesian languages, but I will always love how melodic it is.

I'd just like to bump this again: do you have any interest in journalism -- something you thought might be fun, but were afraid to try?  This is the opportunity for you!

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Yesterday at 12:47:44 AM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on January 17, 2026, 04:48:21 PMI note that this bill would make the first sentence of the modified clause a lie.  "The Senäts shall have equal powers with the Cosa in respect of all proposed laws" will no longer be true.  There will only be two categories of bills for which the Senäts will be equal to the Cosa.  That might be something you want to fix.

Under your interpretation, the first sentence of the modified clause is already a lie -- the clause goes on to describe a class of bills in which the Senäts is already unequal to the Cosă. I'm interested in hearing what others think about the wording, though.

Those are exceptions to the general principle of equality, but now we'd be moving to a new principle where the Senäts is subordinate to the Cosa.  I think it could cause problems if we simultaneously say that two entities are equal in power, but also one of them is subordinate to the other when it comes to their core function.  It makes more sense to be honest about the new arrangement, especially when we think about corts interpreting this down the road.

Could you give an example of legislation that's truly vital that we've been unable to pass thanks to the Senäts?

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Yesterday at 12:47:44 AMThere are a few reasons:
- One, it does not allow truly vital legislation to be hung up forever on the Senäts. Since, of course, bills addressing a given issue can only be considered once per term, this allows the Senäts to effectively kick the can down the road on any issue they wish to obstruct the government on.

An identical bill can't be attempted in the same term, but a given issue can be considered every single Clark.  Indeed, that'd be good procedure: if your bill on an important issue fails, compromise enough to get a different version passed the next month -- or campaign on it and get sufficient power to pass it.

If half the country's provincial representatives don't want to pass something, then it probably shouldn't pass until it's in a form they can tolerate, or until an election has shown the will of the electorate.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Yesterday at 12:47:44 AM- The more overarching, "philosophical" reason is that Talossa is not a federal nation. I know we've compared our constitutional structure to Australia before -- and in fact I believe @Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC has stated that similarities are intentional -- but the reality is that we are more like Spain than Australia: a unitary state, divided into provinces that may legislate on certain areas on their own. A "strong" upper house (or at least one as strong as the Senäts) is incompatible with the concept of responsible government in a unitary state.

I don't find the aesthetic argument very persuasive.  We shouldn't change something that serves an important purpose just so we can mimic other countries, unless there's good practical reasoning to do so.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Yesterday at 12:47:44 AM- This change will also likely lead to a "de-politicization" of Senäts elections, which is healthy if we're trying to make Talossa a more tolerable place for people to spend their time.

Why would it do this?

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Yesterday at 12:47:44 AM- I know you personally have expressed several points of opposition to unicameralism before, chief among those being a safeguard on excessive Organic amendments. Please note that the requirement of the Senäts' consent is not affected in cases of Organic amendment.

This is an important point... subordinating the Senäts to the Cosa does seem like a prelude to getting rid of the Senäts itself.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Today at 12:27:42 AMMy first thought here was some kind of megaphone as a charge, but actually -- and by happy accident aligning with the arms of the incumbent -- what about a trumpet or horn?

I believe our own badge already features two horns.  Not sure if that's a significant problem, but my first instinct is that we might want to see if we can think of alternatives.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Today at 12:27:42 AMI actually have two concepts for this one drawn up some time ago:

Love it.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Today at 12:27:42 AMMy question here is what would we replace it with? Not opposed to replacing something insensitive in the slightest, but if we're going to change something, let's make it a good one so people don't have second thoughts down the line. (First thought was some interlocking rings, a stylized chain of sorts? Shared culture is ultimately what binds any group like Talossa together, after all.

I don't have a lot to pitch, but some ideas that come to mind: counterchanging the language flag, a lyre, or theatre masks.

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Today at 12:27:42 AMAdding an item to the list (sorry not sorry) to merge in this discussion and point out that I do have a few other SVGs (Seneschal, Finance, Foreign) I've made to tie everything together with the ARD's recommended shades of green and red. Haven't done the entire Cabinet yet though.

Great!  Put them on the wiki or attach them here, and let's get them updated.

-SVA

Quote from: Mic'haglh Autófil, O.Be on Today at 12:42:41 AMAssuming Sir Judge Plätschisch (it is "Sir Judge", yes?) still needs assistance with this matter, I would be happy to provide it if he finds me agreeable.

- Foxmouth

Judge Sir Ian is the correct form.

-Txec R/REH

Quote from: Heinrich Elisa on Yesterday at 06:50:26 PMwhy?? haha

Because I've had it at school for four years and still don't know anything (+ it's hard).
I mean I don't study for it at all.

Assuming Sir Judge Plätschisch (it is "Sir Judge", yes?) still needs assistance with this matter, I would be happy to provide it if he finds me agreeable.

- Foxmouth

Native English speaker, took several years of French in high school (still got it to an extent, even if I'm very rusty) and minored in Russian Language & Culture in undergrad.

Other than that, some dabbling in conlangs such as Talossan (of course), Esperanto, and Finnish. Recently begun trying to pick up basic Catalan as well.

• For this one I would have suggested something with a quill, but since it would use the quartered gules/vert background found in Civil Service positions, it would be too similar to the Scribery (which uses...a quill).
  
  
• I'm not opposed to retaining the bridge emblem for the Directorate of STUFF, though we may choose to again update the background to the quartered Civil Service version. Open to what others think here.
  
  
• My first thought here was some kind of megaphone as a charge, but actually -- and by happy accident aligning with the arms of the incumbent -- what about a trumpet or horn?
  
  
• I actually have two concepts for this one drawn up some time ago:
  
  
       
  
  The first is, depending on how you choose to look at it, a form, document, or a bookshelf. The latter is clearly documents.
  
  
• My question here is what would we replace it with? Not opposed to replacing something insensitive in the slightest, but if we're going to change something, let's make it a good one so people don't have second thoughts down the line. (First thought was some interlocking rings, a stylized chain of sorts? Shared culture is ultimately what binds any group like Talossa together, after all.
  
  
• Adding an item to the list (sorry not sorry) to merge in this discussion and point out that I do have a few other SVGs (Seneschal, Finance, Foreign) I've made to tie everything together with the ARD's recommended shades of green and red. Haven't done the entire Cabinet yet though.

- Foxmouth