What Monarchy Reform do you Want, TNC?

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

The Talossan National Congress has stated in multiple places that it is interested in monarchical reform. However, they have repeatedly ignored requests to elaborate on what specific reforms they want. They have not submitted their own amendment but are almost certain to vote down the currently proposed one (the Compromise on the Compromise Act and Amendment).

Monarchy reform is a top priority for the current Government, and in order for anything to pass we will need to work with the TNC. The TNC announcing before the election that they would flatly reject any reform would be understandable. However, campaigning on reform and then stymying any attempt at it by refusing to clarify their position can only be called dishonest.

Therefore, the Government believes the best way to encourage the TNC to stay true to their promise is for all FreeDem and PdR MZs to vote down all TNC bills unless and until they indicate what monarchy reforms they want.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

I thought an important point was made clear when the TNC pulled out of the coalition with the FreeDems last session after the former Seneschal wrongly assumed that threats would cow any TNC member. Point being ultimatums, threats, gauntlets or whatever branding you want to use are not the right methods to achieve whatever you are seeking. Now you threaten a hostile and unparliamentary blockade of legislation, and we decline to reward you for it.

For clarity's sake let me spell it out for you: There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress. 

We will continue to offer legislation to improve the daily life of Talossans and answers their concerns, and the Government is free to vote it down and explain to voters why they rejected real solutions in favor of thuggish political maneuvers designed to compel that which you did not achieve at the ballot box.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

If this means that the TNC will not accept any reform, then we have our answer. Is that it?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

That seems like a willful misinterpretation of a fairly clear statement from Breneir:  There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.  You can save yourself the time and trouble of writing any threatening speeches, since the answer will always be a clear "no."  I support Breneir on this 100%: if we reward a tantrum like this now -- before the first Clark! -- then you'll be back with a different threat next week: "Support our next bill or we'll vote down all of yours, regardless of merit."

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Well, if polite entreaties don't work; and if the tone of the TNC to the Government parties between the election and now has been one of sustained angry contempt; one must assume that the time for politeness is over.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

the TNC pulled out of the coalition with the FreeDems last session after the former Seneschal wrongly assumed that threats would cow any TNC member

For those who weren't around last year, the Senator's characterisation of events is wildly tendentious and inaccurate.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

the TNC pulled out of the coalition with the FreeDems last session after the former Seneschal wrongly assumed that threats would cow any TNC member

For those who weren't around last year, the Senator's characterisation of events is wildly tendentious and inaccurate.

Azul,
I wanted to take moment and publicly acknowledge a stumble I took in trying to resolve a Coalition issue. Specifically, I came across a bit more forcefully to the leader of former Coalition partner TNC. In my attempt to come across seriously, to our partner... I came across as threatening.

This was not my intention but in my attempt at being as transparent as as possible, I wanted to acknowledge this stumble on my behalf and apologize publicly. As I said in my personal apology to their leader, I want us all to work together as a team for a better Talossa. That includes leaders at all levels admitting a screw up and working to correct it.

Further, I want to ensure all Talossans understand that, under my leadership... I encourage open communications at all times. If there is any issue, before it becomes totally out of hand... come talk to me. I welcome the opportunity to address problems as they arise as that is the core of effective leadership.

Thanks,
Txoteu Davinescu, O.SPM

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I'm amazed that the TNC thinks that reposting Senator Davinescu's humble admission of error and apology makes them look good. The correct response would have been for Senator Tzaracomprada to accept the apology and discuss a return to the coalition agreement. Instead he gave no response at all (or to my own queries on Facebook, which I can reprint if there's interest).

That "tough-guy" attitude, the stance that "apologies are useless, make one mistake and you're on my mieida-list forever", has repercussions, if you seek to be a political leader. The TNC leader might think, in this regard, as to why the Reform Party had no interest in making him Seneschal.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I'm amazed that the TNC thinks that reposting Senator Davinescu's humble admission of error and apology makes them look good. The correct response would have been for Senator Tzaracomprada to accept the apology and discuss a return to the coalition agreement. Instead he gave no response at all (or to my own queries on Facebook, which I can reprint if there's interest).

I do not admire the flexibility of your memory, but I do admire your chops.  It takes some real chutzpah to publicly accuse someone of lying about a past incident, and then try to strike up a victory parade after someone posts proof you're wrong.

I don't really blame Breneir for declining to return to the ranks of people who act like this.  It's clear that there's a larger pattern.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I described Senator T's description of events as "tendentious and wildly inaccurate", and I stand by that. No-one ever intended to "threaten" Senator T, but Senator D's inexperience led him to a bad choice of words which looked like a threat. No-one is ever going to apologise for errors if an apology will be not only not be accepted, but used as proof of wrongdoing on the part of the apologiser and a justification for eternal hostility.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

That seems like a willful misinterpretation of a fairly clear statement from Breneir:  There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.  You can save yourself the time and trouble of writing any threatening speeches, since the answer will always be a clear "no."  I support Breneir on this 100%: if we reward a tantrum like this now -- before the first Clark! -- then you'll be back with a different threat next week: "Support our next bill or we'll vote down all of yours, regardless of merit."

All we are doing here is pressing you to fulfill your own campaign promise. You can end this immediately without giving anything up; this is what you said you wanted!

This will only continue for as long as you persist in your dishonesty. It's becoming increasingly clear that the TNC's desire for monarchy reform was a lark. If that's true, just admit it and we can get on with our lives.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

That seems like a willful misinterpretation of a fairly clear statement from Breneir:  There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.  You can save yourself the time and trouble of writing any threatening speeches, since the answer will always be a clear "no."  I support Breneir on this 100%: if we reward a tantrum like this now -- before the first Clark! -- then you'll be back with a different threat next week: "Support our next bill or we'll vote down all of yours, regardless of merit."

All we are doing here is pressing you to fulfill your own campaign promise. You can end this immediately without giving anything up; this is what you said you wanted!

This will only continue for as long as you persist in your dishonesty. It's becoming increasingly clear that the TNC's desire for monarchy reform was a lark. If that's true, just admit it and we can get on with our lives.

The words below still express the resolve of TNC members:
There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

That seems like a willful misinterpretation of a fairly clear statement from Breneir:  There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.  You can save yourself the time and trouble of writing any threatening speeches, since the answer will always be a clear "no."  I support Breneir on this 100%: if we reward a tantrum like this now -- before the first Clark! -- then you'll be back with a different threat next week: "Support our next bill or we'll vote down all of yours, regardless of merit."

All we are doing here is pressing you to fulfill your own campaign promise. You can end this immediately without giving anything up; this is what you said you wanted!

This will only continue for as long as you persist in your dishonesty. It's becoming increasingly clear that the TNC's desire for monarchy reform was a lark. If that's true, just admit it and we can get on with our lives.

The words below still express the resolve of TNC members:
There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.

There was no cooperation with the FreeDems on this issue not under duress either.

Also, the TNC isn't exactly covering itself in glory by acting like it is under "duress." We are asking that you take five minutes to do something that you are already under an obligation to your voters to do. The TNC is facing not a whiff of adversity.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Let us know when the blockade is over. In the meantime we will be voting on the Clark where you have resubmitted the once-failed Amendment to fail again.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

That seems like a willful misinterpretation of a fairly clear statement from Breneir:  There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.  You can save yourself the time and trouble of writing any threatening speeches, since the answer will always be a clear "no."  I support Breneir on this 100%: if we reward a tantrum like this now -- before the first Clark! -- then you'll be back with a different threat next week: "Support our next bill or we'll vote down all of yours, regardless of merit."

All we are doing here is pressing you to fulfill your own campaign promise. You can end this immediately without giving anything up; this is what you said you wanted!

This will only continue for as long as you persist in your dishonesty. It's becoming increasingly clear that the TNC's desire for monarchy reform was a lark. If that's true, just admit it and we can get on with our lives.

The words below still express the resolve of TNC members:
There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.

There was no cooperation with the FreeDems on this issue not under duress either.

Also, the TNC isn't exactly covering itself in glory by acting like it is under "duress." We are asking that you take five minutes to do something that you are already under an obligation to your voters to do. The TNC is facing not a whiff of adversity.

I would firmly agree that the threat of voting against all legislation, no matter the merit, indefinitely, is also indeed an overreaction completely incommensurate with the situation. Doing something like "possibly posting more than once about it" before escalating to this absurdity would definitely have made more sense. But you have made your bed and now you have to lie in it.

[Antaglha Xhenerös Somelieir]

That seems like a willful misinterpretation of a fairly clear statement from Breneir:  There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.  You can save yourself the time and trouble of writing any threatening speeches, since the answer will always be a clear "no."  I support Breneir on this 100%: if we reward a tantrum like this now -- before the first Clark! -- then you'll be back with a different threat next week: "Support our next bill or we'll vote down all of yours, regardless of merit."

All we are doing here is pressing you to fulfill your own campaign promise. You can end this immediately without giving anything up; this is what you said you wanted!

This will only continue for as long as you persist in your dishonesty. It's becoming increasingly clear that the TNC's desire for monarchy reform was a lark. If that's true, just admit it and we can get on with our lives.

The words below still express the resolve of TNC members:
There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.

I mean no disrespect to you Breneir, however I am not exactly sure where you got the idea that we were asking for cooperation from yourselves, all we have asked, is that you state a position on something you had promised to do, so we know if you were serious about that or not, seeking clarification from yourselves is far far away from seeking cooperation, and as i have asked in https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=1480.0  to your party, if when we tried to be civil, and got radio silence, then what choices were we left with to know what your position is?
To know more of my views, i recommend reading the thread, but yeah, on the point of cooperation on this issue, i do believe you have miscalculated what was being asked of you.

But yeah, all that we have asked is your position to be put forward, in the ONLY way we could get your attention, and a response of any kind, it is sad it has come to this, however, this was the last option we had to seek clarity from yourselves. If you had engaged with us, named your position before this, and not stonewalled our attempts in the election for discourse, then this would never have happened. We are not innocent in this, however the hands of the TNC aren't clean in this either.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

That seems like a willful misinterpretation of a fairly clear statement from Breneir:  There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.  You can save yourself the time and trouble of writing any threatening speeches, since the answer will always be a clear "no."  I support Breneir on this 100%: if we reward a tantrum like this now -- before the first Clark! -- then you'll be back with a different threat next week: "Support our next bill or we'll vote down all of yours, regardless of merit."

All we are doing here is pressing you to fulfill your own campaign promise. You can end this immediately without giving anything up; this is what you said you wanted!

This will only continue for as long as you persist in your dishonesty. It's becoming increasingly clear that the TNC's desire for monarchy reform was a lark. If that's true, just admit it and we can get on with our lives.

The words below still express the resolve of TNC members:
There will be no cooperation with the FreeDems or the PdR on this issue under duress.

There was no cooperation with the FreeDems on this issue not under duress either.

Also, the TNC isn't exactly covering itself in glory by acting like it is under "duress." We are asking that you take five minutes to do something that you are already under an obligation to your voters to do. The TNC is facing not a whiff of adversity.

I would firmly agree that the threat of voting against all legislation, no matter the merit, indefinitely, is also indeed an overreaction completely incommensurate with the situation. Doing something like "possibly posting more than once about it" before escalating to this absurdity would definitely have made more sense. But you have made your bed and now you have to lie in it.

I know that we in fact posed the Monarchy question to the TNC several times.

The TNC's behavior reminds me of this XKCD comic:

The reasonable response to someone telling you do something which you are already under an obligation to do is to do the thing, not moan and groan.

You keep saying that if you reveal your plans for Monarchy reform now, we will just come back with more demands later. However, this is clearly ridiculous. The TNC does not have to compromise one inch of their platform (as I keep saying, the TNC has already promised their voters they would do what we are demanding), nor spend more than five minutes on this. The logical connection between the current situation and the sorts of future demands you are expecting is non-existant.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

however, this was the last option we had to seek clarity from yourselves.

Really?  Because I think "doing literally anything beyond asking once where no one saw it" might have also been an option.

It seems kind of silly to me to claim that the Government was left with no choice.  I admire the simplicity of the two-step process, though:

   
• Ask about something once.
• Escalate immediately to demanding an answer on your own terms by way of threatening to block all legislation, no matter the topic or need, indefinitely, unless your demands are met.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

You keep saying that if you reveal your plans for Monarchy reform now, we will just come back with more demands later. However, this is clearly ridiculous.

A few days ago, I would have said it was ridiculous that the entire Government would threaten to block all bills from the Opposition, no matter how necessary they might be, until their demands were met... on the basis of a question that they didn't even both to repeat when no one saw it.  Yet here we are.

Our policy is very simple and our leader stated it very clearly: we will not engage on this topic under duress.  If in the future you find yourself inclined to make threats about this or any other topic, save yourself the time and mark us down for defiance right now.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

however, this was the last option we had to seek clarity from yourselves.

Really?  Because I think "doing literally anything beyond asking once where no one saw it" might have also been an option.

It seems kind of silly to me to claim that the Government was left with no choice.  I admire the simplicity of the two-step process, though:

   
• Ask about something once.
• Escalate immediately to demanding an answer on your own terms by way of threatening to block all legislation, no matter the topic or need, indefinitely, unless your demands are met.

We asked about it several times.