Quote from: Iason Taiwos on Yesterday at 05:48:57 PMI recently purchased what I initially thought was a set of walkie talkies. I live kind of out in the sticks, and cell phone service is spotty (and frequently goes out altogether.) My wife has health issues, so I thought a set of walkie talkies would be a way for us to get ahold of each other when the phones crap out. God forbid she has a health emergency when the phones are down and I'm away from home.
Well, what I got are actually a set of portable Ham radios. In the USA, you have to take a test and get a license to be able to talk on the Ham bands. They are not walkie talkies. If you talk on them without a license, you have broken the law, and could possibly have the FCC come down on you. (There's no laws against just listening to anything on the Ham bands.)
My wife wasn't happy about this. "So you just bought a couple of radios we can't use without getting a license?!" Sadly, yes. But, this is Admiral Taiwos! I am a rebel, a maverick! So, I broke the law and used the Ham radio as a walkie talkie. Talked to my wife for under a minute while she was in the house and I was on the porch feeding one of the neighborhood's stray cats. (The radio worked fine.)
Then, on a whim, I clicked the "talk" button and said "Hail to the King! Long Live Talossa!"
I doubt anyone heard me besides my wife. I've been doing research on Ham radio ever since I got these things. Apparently there are only seven licensed Ham radio operators in my area, and I doubt any of them happened to be tuning in to me when I shouted my Pro-Talossa slogan.
Nonetheless...could this be considered Talossan pirate radio? Has the Admiral become a pirate of the airwaves? Has anything remotely Talossan ever been broadcasted over radio waves?
I may try to get a legit Ham license.
I could get one of those FM radio transmitters and start a Talossan radio station, but the only people who might pick it up are whoever happens to drive past my trailer.

Sounds fantastic, I am still interested in helping with the Talossan Naval Relief Corps, Admiral.

I recently purchased what I initially thought was a set of walkie talkies. I live kind of out in the sticks, and cell phone service is spotty (and frequently goes out altogether.) My wife has health issues, so I thought a set of walkie talkies would be a way for us to get ahold of each other when the phones crap out. God forbid she has a health emergency when the phones are down and I'm away from home.
Well, what I got are actually a set of portable Ham radios. In the USA, you have to take a test and get a license to be able to talk on the Ham bands. They are not walkie talkies. If you talk on them without a license, you have broken the law, and could possibly have the FCC come down on you. (There's no laws against just listening to anything on the Ham bands.)
My wife wasn't happy about this. "So you just bought a couple of radios we can't use without getting a license?!" Sadly, yes. But, this is Admiral Taiwos! I am a rebel, a maverick! So, I broke the law and used the Ham radio as a walkie talkie. Talked to my wife for under a minute while she was in the house and I was on the porch feeding one of the neighborhood's stray cats. (The radio worked fine.)
Then, on a whim, I clicked the "talk" button and said "Hail to the King! Long Live Talossa!"
I doubt anyone heard me besides my wife. I've been doing research on Ham radio ever since I got these things. Apparently there are only seven licensed Ham radio operators in my area, and I doubt any of them happened to be tuning in to me when I shouted my Pro-Talossa slogan.
Nonetheless...could this be considered Talossan pirate radio? Has the Admiral become a pirate of the airwaves? Has anything remotely Talossan ever been broadcasted over radio waves?
I may try to get a legit Ham license.
I could get one of those FM radio transmitters and start a Talossan radio station, but the only people who might pick it up are whoever happens to drive past my trailer.

I note that the incident where Ben tried to reclaim his citizenship, then abruptly gave up when we asked for an indication that he'd learned anything from his experience, isn't mentioned :D

Quote from: Sir Lüc on Yesterday at 08:25:06 AMThe Chancery will comply with both requests it received

All three requests

Nice! Do you know if that (and the book of Genesis) were based on an existing translation or more original sources (like the Leningrad Codex or Greek New Testament)?

Former King Robert I translated the first 8 verses of the Epistle of James (note: this is the pre-reform spelling with far more "spaghetti" over the words)

QuoteTXEC, ün servesc da Dïeu és del Segñhôr Iésu- C'hrïost, àls dudësch tribâs dal tvistraziun: Dïeu t'alegra! En consideretz come la pür aleretzâ, quândevri dals diviársen tentaziuns voi ec'hperistent; parç që voi säpetz që la provaziun da voastra féitz encoraxha l'endurançù. Láßetz, që l'endurançù tenadra ça travál entiéir, svo ath voi pëvadretz estarë matürs és complätsilor, nitgil mañc'hînd. Schi iñenviens într-voi mañc'ha la saxheçâ, o fost zemandar da Dïeu, qi zona à toct cün parfüns, és sânc trovar dels focts; és ça serà zonescù à lo. Más quând që o zemanda, o fost credarë sânc la duvitaziun; parç që el qi duvita isch com'iensâ undâ dal már, eißaladâ és xhetadâ par el vînt. Ün ciovec com'acest fost non pensar që o va reçáifar qualse'cosâ del Segñhôr: o isch 'n ciovec dützüc'hoûr és ûnstavál în toct qët o fäts.

"our newest member @Carteir Montagnhă "

x doubt

In a regular TMT, I'd probably vote for Freestyler, but sticking to the category, it just didn't feel like it fit. So then these are my selections:

GROUP 4
3 - Saint Etienne - He's on the Phone
2 - La Bouche - Be My Lover
1 - Scatman John - Scatman


GROUP 5
3 - Snap! - Rhythm Is a Dancer
2 - 2 Unlimited - No Limit
1 - Sash! - Ecuador

Thank you @Sir Lüc for your openness in explaining the situation and for recognising the oversight. Having looked again at both El Lex D.8.5 and the wording of the 2025 Census, I do have several concerns from a data protection standpoint.

The Census wording clearly stated that, if citizens consented, the Chancery would forward electoral communications to them. It did not say that email addresses would be released directly to political parties. Citizens, especially those living in the EU or UK, would have understood that their information would remain under the Chancery's control.

That creates a tension between El Lex and the principles of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Under Articles 4(11) and 7 of the GDPR, consent must be specific, informed, and freely given. Agreeing to receive electoral communications is not the same as agreeing to have one's email address shared with multiple third parties. The consent that was gathered referred to forwarding, not to disclosure.

The Chancery, as the body that collects and determines how citizens' data is used, would be considered the data controller under the GDPR. This carries legal responsibilities, including the need for a lawful basis for any processing, the application of data minimisation under Article 5(1)(c), and the duty to maintain security and accountability under Articles 5(1)(f) and 32. Once email addresses are distributed to several party leaders, the Chancery loses effective control over how that data is stored or used. This increases the risk of unauthorised retention, forwarding, or misuse. In such a situation, both the Chancery and the recipients could be considered joint data controllers for any misuse that occurs.

The principle of purpose limitation under Article 5(1)(b) is also relevant. Data collected to enable election communication must only be used for that stated purpose. Allowing the Chancery to continue forwarding messages on behalf of parties would meet this requirement while maintaining confidentiality and security.

This raises a couple of important legal questions, and on which I would be interested to hear the Chancery's response or viewpoint: if El Lex requires the Chancery to act in a way that conflicts with the data protection laws of a citizen's country of residence (in this case the EU or UK), does El Lex take precedence over the Chancery's obligations under the GDPR? Has the Chancery formally considered its obligations under the GDPR as the data controller, especially in light of how the Census questions were phrased?

Even if enforcement may be unlikely, the GDPR is binding law within the EU and UK. Any organisation, group, or individual involved in processing the personal data of EU or UK residents must comply with it. Even if El Lex directs disclosure, the Chancery would still remain responsible as data controller for ensuring that the processing is lawful and GDPR compliant.

It may therefore be sensible to pause before any release of data and consider a privacy-preserving interpretation of El Lex. An interim measure could be to email all citizens to explain the current situation and include an opt-in link allowing them to give explicit consent for their data to be shared with registered parties, along with clear information on how those parties will handle, store, and delete it. The longer-term fix would be to update future Census or data-consent wording so that it clearly states that opting in means disclosure to registered parties.

This would (I hope) resolve the issue going forward and bring the process in line with both Talossan law and GDPR principles.

My two bence on this quiet Friday evening,

-- Litz

Quote from: Joesaurus on Yesterday at 03:19:41 PMHello all,

I just wanted to inquire and see if anyone had gotten around to making Talossan translations of holy books (Bible, Quran, sutras, etc)? I know we have a translation of the book of Genesis somewhere; just thought I'd ask if we had more.

No, I don't think so. This page is pretty comprehensive as far as I'm aware, even if some of the language is outdated: https://wiki.talossa.com/TalossaWiki:Library#Talossan_Language_Collection