[CHANCERY] Regrettably noting several inactive citizens

[Sir Lüc]

Azul, with the aim of making sure our citizenship rolls are up to date, it is with regret that the Chancery issues the following.

Pursuant to Article X, Section 4 of the Organic Law, with a heavy heart the Chancery belatedly acknowledges S:r Ian Feliceu's renunciation of citizenship of January 17th 2024 and accordingly issues the present to serve as Writ of Termination.

Furthermore, the Chancery notes that the former citizens named in the July 2nd 2024 announcement following the last General Election have now been marked as inactive in the database: https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=3350.0

Lastly, our eternally dear friend Ian Tamoran, TDE, has also sadly been taken off the rolls of active citizens. The Chancery will comply with the requirements of Article X, Section 5 upon migration to the new database.



Sir Lüc da Schir, UrB
Secretary of State

[Sir Lüc]

Two further notes:

- The midterm referendum was already conducted under the assumption these former citizens could not vote (including for the purpose of calculating turnout) as their status was merely not reflected in the database yet;

- The Chancery reserves its right to conduct a further investigation of the status of several "trapped" Dandelions, who are present on our rolls but that are uncontactable, as they have no parents presently holding Talossan citizenship.

[C. M. Siervicül]

- The Chancery reserves its right to conduct a further investigation of the status of several "trapped" Dandelions, who are present on our rolls but that are uncontactable, as they have no parents presently holding Talossan citizenship.

What is the issue with "trapped" Dandelions? Are there Dandelions whose dates of birth are unknown?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Under the old laws, Dandelions were not in danger of "striking out" of citizenship. So, if their parents "struck out", they would be left on the rolls, with no way of contacting them.

[C. M. Siervicül]

Under the old laws, Dandelions were not in danger of "striking out" of citizenship. So, if their parents "struck out", they would be left on the rolls, with no way of contacting them.

Yes, but they still start "accumulating strikes" at 14, right? I thought "trapped" meant they were stuck on the rolls indefinitely but maybe I misunderstood.

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

Under the old laws, Dandelions were not in danger of "striking out" of citizenship. So, if their parents "struck out", they would be left on the rolls, with no way of contacting them.

Yes, but they still start "accumulating strikes" at 14, right? I thought "trapped" meant they were stuck on the rolls indefinitely but maybe I misunderstood.

I would argue that it seems unfair for them to accumulate strikes if we have no way to contact them. That would mean they are not receiving things like GE ballots, which would make it difficult for them to avoid accumulating strikes, no?

If, regardless of their age, they have not yet been taken off Dandelion status, then they are "still Dandelions", so to speak, meaning they should be exempt from strikes.

[Iac Marscheir]

Ehhh, if renaturalization were a burdensome process, I would probably support having them remain on the rolls until they make their own contact. However, because it isn't a burdensome process, I don't think there's much justification for choosing to, well, stalk them in a sense and try to make contact with them without necessarily having their parents involved.

Let them strike out, and if they decide to contact us, just do the normal renaturalization.

[C. M. Siervicül]

Ehhh, if renaturalization were a burdensome process, I would probably support having them remain on the rolls until they make their own contact. However, because it isn't a burdensome process, I don't think there's much justification for choosing to, well, stalk them in a sense and try to make contact with them without necessarily having their parents involved.

Let them strike out, and if they decide to contact us, just do the normal renaturalization.

The law was actually changed in the 57th Cosa so Dandelions don't actually get automatic citizenship. They have to request it, which is actually the same effect as if they struck out and had to renaturalize. So I opposed the change but in practical terms it's pretty much the same from the Dandelion's perspective.

[Iac Marscheir]

That's fine, but not really material to what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that this:

The Chancery reserves its right to conduct a further investigation of the status of several "trapped" Dandelions [...]

is not something we need to be doing.

[C. M. Siervicül]

is not something we need to be doing.

Yeah, that was my original question. I'm not sure what there is to investigate as the law seems to be pretty clear.

[Sir Lüc]

I think there's been a misunderstanding of what I meant and what my intentions would be.

Under the old laws, Dandelions were not in danger of "striking out" of citizenship. So, if their parents "struck out", they would be left on the rolls, with no way of contacting them.

This is correct. "Trapped Dandelions", as I called them when I attempted to fix the problem many moons ago (though smashing against a veto wall), are those whose parents no longer hold Talossan citizenship, and who in virtually all instances are stuck on our rolls as people whose age is unknown, who we have no way to contact anyway, and who likely have no idea they hold Talossan citizenship.

Yes, but they still start "accumulating strikes" at 14, right? I thought "trapped" meant they were stuck on the rolls indefinitely but maybe I misunderstood.

This is correct but in many instances we would have no way of knowing or verifying their age, except by safely assuming that a Dandelion that has been registered more than 16 years ago has now struck out.

I would argue that it seems unfair for them to accumulate strikes if we have no way to contact them. That would mean they are not receiving things like GE ballots, which would make it difficult for them to avoid accumulating strikes, no?

I would certainly agree with this if we're talking about Dandelions of current citizens; but I'm referring to Dandelions of long inactive people who have likely never heard of Talossa or in any way positively agreed to being on our rolls.

However, because it isn't a burdensome process, I don't think there's much justification for choosing to, well, stalk them in a sense and try to make contact with them without necessarily having their parents involved.

This is absolutely not what the Chancery intends to do, and not the kind of investigation I meant I would like to eventually do!

[Sir Lüc]

So my (low priority) plan of action would be:

- Get up to speed with all changes in citizenship law, and how they apply to existing Dandelions;
- Compile a list of Dandelions that have no Talossan parents and have been registered over 16 years ago (14 years + 2 years no contact)
- Attempt to determine whether E.13 applies to other existing Dandelions, ie. if they are to be considered Implinds