This will not mandate such a donation by my reading.  If that's the intention here, then it's otherwise fine, and I vote to approve.

That's true!  And I am doing my best by trying to focus national interest on this topic through public speeches and parliamentary questions.

When the immigration rate dropped down to zero because the application was broken, it was the Opposition that started loudly demanding answers.  And when help was needed, I personally pitched in to fix the problem.

And now that it's been months and months with only meagre improvement, we are again trying to force the Government to actually do something to fix the problem.  We want to make this crisis very public and very widely-known, so that you guys will be embarrassed enough to try some new things.

The Progressive Alliance works hard to participate in positive aspects of civil life to improve our country.  The leader of the Progressive Alliance runs our social media, and he does so in a positive and fun way.  I have led and fought hard to reduce the toxicity in our country with the summit -- I wrote the bill coming up for a vote and I have been organizing the whole effort, as you know.  I also am the author of some cultural efforts to promote our language, working with the Government to make them a reality.

And of course, we work to help matters in another way: we are campaigning to replace this Government.  The Progressive Alliance does a lot from the Opposition, but we will be able to do even more if we return to lead and put things right.

I didn't have a chance to comment on the merits of the bill before it hit the CRL, so outside of that, I'll note that replacing the essay with a test is a really poor plan, and likely to discourage potential immigrants.  So I will be voting against this.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on June 24, 2025, 02:05:40 AMshall be amended by deletion of the phrase "upon certification from the Ministry of Immigration that the prospective citizen has sufficient understanding of Talossan life and culture for full participation".

This should be changed by adding in the following text:

Subsections 7.1 through 7.12 shall remain in their current form.

This prevents any ambiguous reading wherein the entire section is replaced with the above.  I think the bill would probably be okay without it, but this is more clear and it is my recommendation.

For extra points, the sponsor could even instead make the altered section 7 into a new subsection 7.1 and then direct the Scribe to renumber all subsections within section 7 to accommodate, although then we'll need to check for any cross-references.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on June 04, 2025, 07:49:49 PMI is a title of el Lexhatx.  El Lexhatx is divided up into titles, which are then divided into sections, and then into subsections, and then into subsubsections, and so on.  Please fix the spots where you have used erroneous and confusing labels.  (Section I could be read as Section 1 of the title you were just referencing, for example.)

Looking at the text of the bill, I see this same problem.

Quote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on June 28, 2025, 09:57:49 AMTo make it clearer, and chronologically sorted, I would suggest :

Therefore, be it enacted that el Lexhatx F.5.3.13 (Culture) which currently reads:

Quote10 December. Human Rights Day. A suggested method to celebrate Human Rights Day is reviewing Article XI of The Organic Law and/or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

is deleted

and current el Lexhatx F.5.2.7 which reads:

QuoteDecember 12: Llimbaziua (Language Day).

is renumbered F.5.2.8

and is inserted the following as el Lexhatx F.5.2.7

QuoteDecember 10. Sentient Rights Day. A day to celebrate the dignity and honor the rights of all sentient beings.

Thank you, changes have been made.

I like the nostalgic feeling of the piano part, a remembrance of the painful history of our island. Thank you Barclamïu.

Quote from: Sir Lüc on June 28, 2025, 09:15:14 AMThe abandoned tag is to comply with Lexhatx H.2.1.9.1; as you said, it's just bookkeeping and the tag carries no prejudice towards republishing an archived proposal, as H.2.1.9.1 itself states. (I've explained this already somewhere else but I can't find that reference right now.)

Compared to H.2.1.9.1, I've actually tried to be as fair to legislators as possible by also stipulating that, as an internal rule, a (non-joke) bill needs to have been passed up for Clarking at least twice to be sent to the archive and be tagged as abandoned.

By the letter of the law, the Charitable PermSec bill should technically be considered abandoned, but I consider my additional policy to be fairer; the bill was moved to committee on April 22, meaning it became Clarkable on time for the June Clark and this is therefore the second and final chance at Clarking.

Thanks for clarifying Mr. Secretary. I knew that bill wasn't abandoned and am glad that it has therefore been Clarked.

Maki, my Talossan-in-nature cat, accepted to play a part in the making of today's posts about the Talossachess Rapid Swiss 2025. on X/Twitter, Bluesky, Instagram, Threads, Linkedin, Reddit and Facebook.

Quote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on June 28, 2025, 10:50:32 AMGreat news in my mail today! I just received my ID Card, 3 months after it was posted from Oshkosh on March 31st. I don't know where this mail was stuck, but it was intact, and I now can proudly present my Cartă da Säp to any inquisitive police officer if needed. Thanks to all MinStuff team in charge of this tangible proof of our citizenship.

And I of course never did.