Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on August 18, 2026, 06:01:55 PMThis discussion has clarified a lot.

One of the benefits of political parties is that they offer a clear ideological signal. If the people of Vuode re-elect Eðo Grischün, they know what they are getting - support for the URL manifesto, the Democracy Agenda etc.

And in me they will get someone who will vote in the best interests of the people of Vuode and Talossa, not someone who will vote in the best interest of the party he is associated with. I have no doubt that my esteemed opponent is a good and loyal member of your party Miestra, I also have no doubt that despite our differences both yourself and the good Baron are loyal subjects of the kingdom and well meaning patriots. I do fear that your apparent hatred for one another may blind you and as such your parties at times. If truth be told, I had no true belief that I would win this election I simply felt that it was wrong for someone to run unopposed.

Thank you for your input, Dama Miestra.  While we disagree about the appropriate way to go about this, the Cort has agreed with what you have been arguing, and so you seem to have the right of it.

Nice to see Judge Plätschisch agreeing with me, almost to the letter.

The Ministry of Justice would be best served to first work with the Chancery to find any prima facie evidence a crime was committed. Enthusiasm for justice is commendable, but restraint is also required it.

The reference to the ESB sock puppet case is interesting, because if I recall right the problem then was that the then-King privately confronted ESB with an ultimatum to quit the country rather than face a Cort case. We seem to have the same issue of trying to "fast forward" through steps of criminal procedure - in this case, seeking an indictment of a hypothetical person for a crime without any evidence a crime is committed. The Justice Ministry, should it ever actually find prima facie evidence of a crime, would be entitled to interview subjects of interest "under caution" without a fanciful indictment.

There have only been a few criminal prosecutions in our history.  Of those, I'm only aware of one where there was any investigative work that was done.  Years later, the manner in which that happened was used as partial justification to overturn the criminal conviction.  We're not going to make that same mistake in this investigation, and instead everything will be done above-board.  We want to do this right.

We know that this is a new way to approach things. This Government rejects cronyism and backroom dealing -- we are a nation of laws, not of politicians -- and this is part of that commitment.  We've asked a magistrate to supervise the gathering of evidence and affidavits under oath, since that's the legal way to do it and since it will help protect the rights of all involved.

This discussion has clarified a lot.

One of the benefits of political parties is that they offer a clear ideological signal. If the people of Vuode re-elect Eðo Grischün, they know what they are getting - support for the URL manifesto, the Democracy Agenda etc.

Thank you. So it is a "Inschinescu" indictment.

Now: I think this charging document is prosecutorial malpractice because it offers no evidence that a crime was actually committed, i.e. that there is any reason to believe that the person who used 2747's vote (that's what I"m going to call him from now on) knew what they were doing. What the Attorney-General is demanding is judicial sanction to go on a "fishing expedition", drag Talossan citizens into a dark room and give them the third degree (metaphorically speaking). If the Cort is going to consider this document, I would like to issue an amicus brief against it.

1,5 hour left!

(When the deadline passes no votes will be accepted anymore, even if I probably won't be awake to officially call it.)

Unfortunately it does look like well be stuck on 6 votes again, unless we get some last minute votes. (þerxh perhaps?)


Tomorrow voting will open for this years Semifinal!

GROUP 4
6. Kate Bush - Wuthering Heights
4. The Smiths - How Soon Is Now?
3. Soundgarden - Black Hole Sun
2. Led Zeppelin - Stairway to Heaven
1. Black Sabbath - Paranoid


GROUP 5
6. Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds - The Mercy Seat
4. Dire Straits - Telegraph Road
3. New Order - Blue Monday
2. Johnny Cash - Hurt
1. Talking Heads - Psycho Killer

I remember the occasion of which you're speaking, and that is sometimes what happens when you belong to a party. The party votes on an agreement, and we ask everyone to abide by that agreement. Otherwise, we can't make agreements at all - we wouldn't be able to hold up our end.

If you're not comfortable with that idea, then this has probably been the right move for you to make. Party politics doesn't seem to be your thing.

Quote from: xpb on August 18, 2026, 10:11:34 AM

Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on August 18, 2026, 08:31:12 AMTo be clear on at least one occasion as a member of the Cosa representing the Progressive Alliance I was TOLD to change my vote to preserve an alliance with another party. It was one of the reasons I left the party and my position as attorney general (which I never felt qualified for in the first place).

We all possess free will, and you were convinced in discussion to preserve an alliance which you could have also chosen to let fall.  You are also free to join or leave any party that you wish, as are we all.  At times a party or individuals may contact members to consider all factors related to their actions, however there is no way to compel someone to vote in any specific way.

The only exception to this is when there were fictitious citizens accepted into the Kingdom that one person or small group of persons were directly manipulating.  I believe that that problem has been eradicated.

All i can tell you is that I was told by the party leader that I had to change my vote. I did leave the party after feeling compelled to vote as I was told. Hence the reason I am now running for Senate as an independent. I will not be compelled to vote for or against any issue based upon a party affiliation.