Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on August 10, 2026, 05:43:48 PMHowever: there is no dispute over what RZ26 does, only the point at which it happens. Assuming there are no snap elections, by February it won't matter.

Right, but the description I proposed for RZ26 supports what you're saying: the only "points at which it happens" that are in there are the seats-per-member cap raise happening immediately, in the third bulletpoint, and the 20-seat Cosă entering into effect at the first election after next February, just as you mentioned, which is in the first bulletpoint.

Quote from: Sir Lüc on August 10, 2026, 04:47:21 PMWe're seemingly deciding that it is acceptable to kick the can down the road and submit to the citizenry an amendment whose effects we are effectively agreeing to settle after the election.

This is the outcome of rushed legislation that was required to get a 2/3 majority consensus before a hard deadline. And this is also why we need a professional, full-time civil servant to proofread legislation. However: there is no dispute over what RZ26 does, only the point at which it happens. Assuming there are no snap elections, by February it won't matter.

I'm genuinely struggling to put into words my thoughts here, and I couldn't find any time to do so over the weekend, so this response is also rather delayed, so I apologise in advance on both counts.

That said, my thinking roughly boils down to two aspects.

1), about the descriptions themselves: Objections to option 3 all seem to be about RZ26's effects, rather than the idea of summaries themselves, especially since it seems like everyone would rather ditch the full text rather than keep it, if that was the binary choice. I take it to mean that if we truly think interpreting RZ26's effect by the majority opinion is unacceptable, then we might as well keep the other summaries and only apply option 2 to RZ26.

2), about RZ26: We're seemingly deciding that it is acceptable to kick the can down the road and submit to the citizenry an amendment whose effects we are effectively agreeing to settle after the election. I don't think that is wise nor a good thing for Talossan democracy. (Partially, I suppose, because it seems like there is only one person actually disagreeing with the majority opinion.)

Quote from: Tierçéu Rôibeardescù on August 10, 2026, 09:29:02 AM@Sir Ian Plätschisch is A fellow. Chelli dal Nordselvă also.

The Queen is not very active on Wittenberg so she would not be a great steward. She keeps updated by my constant conversation about the kingdom :-)

-Txec R

@Sir Ian Plätschisch is A fellow. Chelli dal Nordselvă also.

That sounds good and big and clever

@Þon Txoteu É. Davinescu, O.SPM is also a potential steward.

Im limited you see by the loss of the late, great Ian Ián Tamorán and Mr ESBs current... questionmark over membership as they are currently not a citizen. I am also willing to lower the level of qualification to steward to the fellowship should they be willing.

While it's well and good to run on the Democracy Agenda, it's not the only thing we intend to bring to the 63rd Cosă. We'll encourage activity and creativity, resume Talossa's process of making new connections in the micronational world, and pursue upgrades to Talossan institutions and infrastructure.

• Encouraging Creativity: We've seen some talk of things like new national maps. Thankfully, this is another area URL candidates have already been working ahead of the game, but we also think "just" creating new maps is a bit of a narrow view of the possibilities. We think it makes more sense to have a place citizens can put all their creative projects: road signs, license plates, sports jerseys, you name it. A "worldbuilding bureau" of sorts to give Talossa a bit more panache. This can (and should) be tied into an updated set of clearer criteria for promotion in the Royal Zouaves in order to encourage creativity and award participation in Talossan society in many ways beyond the political arena.
  
  
• New Micronational Connections: We believe Talossa ought to resume the process it's been pursuing on-and-off of wider relations with the rest of the micronational world. We've seen some half-hearted attempts at "information gathering" in this past term, and while that's all well and good, information gathering is only a productive use of your time if you intend to actually do something with the information you gather. The micronational community is one of those things that can be of good use to Talossa, especially when we consider that some members of the community think to themselves "micronationalism is fun, but it's a lot of work to do myself". Wouldn't it make more sense to try and get some of those people to see the value in working as part of a larger group in Talossa? It's another good example of what our campaign has said this whole time: we're stronger as a group. Ja pevar din 'n Uniun. Don't we owe it to Talossans to let them show off a bit in the various competitions and tournaments out there? We ought to let our best chess players and wargamers and whatever else represent us to the community as a way of showing others what Talossa is supposed to be all about.
  
  
• Upgraded Institutions: The first of these that comes to mind is the CRL. The committee that reviews legislative proposals for linguistic errors and the like has been a good idea in principle, but this term showed some of its key weaknesses and places where the process can be abused. The URL supports reforming legislative procedures to encourage more thorough review of legislation before it's Clarked; including either a greater role for the Tuischac'h and Mençei, or a shift to Civil Service legal review positions as has been previously suggested.
  
  
• Upgraded Infrastructure: While we're not quite in agreement with some parties about downplaying the role of Wittenberg in favor of places like Discord -- and we believe the Chancery ought to be consulted on the matter, which we've not seen anyone else mention -- it is worth acknowledging that the Secretary of State has advocated for a move to a new version of Witt with an improved set of features compared to the current platform. In recognition of the Civil Service's independence from the Government, a URL government will support the Chancery's professional judgement on the future of Wittenberg.

Group 9

4 - Coldplay
3 - Soundgarden
2 - Led Zeppelin
1 - House of Pain

Group 10

4 - The Smiths
3 - The Who
2 - Talking Heads
1 - Radiohead

-Txec R

Quote from: Gjermund Higraff on August 09, 2026, 04:08:22 PMGroup 10 is properly stacked.

Yup. We've had some pretty strong groups this round, but this one definitely takes the cake.