I don't see a practical benefit to, nor a practical difference of, a smaller-number Cosa if we still allow members to hold more than one seat at a time. In reality, by shrinking the seats but allowing plural seat-holding, we are really just excluding smaller parties as well as overall political participation. I think that one-person parties are a GOOD thing in the context of Talossa, and that they make Talossa a greater democracy.
If we want a "real" Cosa - which I support, to be clear - then we have to get rid of plural seat-holding. One seat, one member.
If that is unpalatable, then we should stick to the current EM200 method.
The half-measure of reducing seats but allowing plural seat-holding does more harm than good.