|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Mar 27, 2015 9:38:47 GMT -6
I think those restrictions would really help ameliorate some of the potential dangers, which is nice.
Question, though: what do you think we will actually gain, here?
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Mar 27, 2015 12:18:32 GMT -6
b) The exchange of tourist visa I assume you're not talking about actual tourist visas, but just forum accounts. Lexh. 14.2 talks about Witt accounts for prospective citizens having an avatar image "indicating a visa", but this is meant in a metaphorical sense (it's just an avatar image). I would discourage further expansion of the visa metaphor in our laws, because it reinforces the erroneous perception that Talossa is Witt (i.e., just an online message forum). Which is one of the things that concerns me about the idea of increased engagement with forum-based micronations. In any event, under Lexh. 14.2, metaphorical "visas" are for prospective immigrants and metaphorical "passports" are for non-immigrant visitors. The fact that the avatar images are just a metaphor is confirmed by the fact that non-citizen Witt members get "passport" (not visa) avatars, because passports are issued by one's own state, not the state being visited. So we would never claim to actually be issuing passports to non-citizen Witt visitors who are not prospective immigrants.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Mar 27, 2015 12:30:41 GMT -6
a) The exchange of ambassadors This point is also rather ambiguous, considering that an agreement that "relates to the recognition of a foreign nation" is a treaty that must be ratified by the Ziu. Is this intended to refer only to exchanging ambassadors with states that the Ziu has voted to recognise?
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Mar 27, 2015 14:57:48 GMT -6
I am most likely the Talossan who has the most foreign affairs ministry.
1 ) I was the head of the micronational desk of the minister of foreign affairs of the Kingdom from 2001 until 2004 and as such, the only official allowed to talk to other micronations.
2 ) I was the first minister of foreign affairs of the Republic of Talossa, and in that position, was the founder of ESTO, (named as such by Grubi), the Ephemeral State Treaty Organization, which was an attempt to create a sort of NATO of good micronations.
3 ) I was the first official delegate of the Republic of Talossa to open negotiations with the Kingdom of Talossa over a possible reunison. This was my own "only Nixon could go to China" moment!
4 ) I had contacts with several dozens of micronations in my official duties. It wasn't pretty...
And let me tell you something:
A ) Any direct foreign affairs IN Talossa soil is, I believe, a mistake. We don't want them on Wittenberg, we don't want them close. Not at all.
B ) Any direct foreign affairs on THEIR soil is, I even more firmly believe, a bigger mistake: We would have ZERO control over the messages. They could modify our posts to make it believe we attacked them ( I have actually witnessed that, but fortunately, wasn't a target)
C ) The only way to do this is via something like ESTO. On a ground WE control, but NOT out OWN ground. On a 3rd party ground.
I have a LOT of pages already written in my upcoming history book on ESTO and my work listed above. If this is of real interest, I could make a preview book of just those parts...
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Mar 27, 2015 14:59:15 GMT -6
With ESTO, we could have ESTO recognizing these micronations and have an ESTO delegate talk with them... without Talossa itself being in the process.
The Kingdom wouldn't recognize them, other than via ESTO.
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Mar 27, 2015 16:52:52 GMT -6
If we go that route, we might as well rejoin the League of Secessionist States. It was founded by Talossa, after all.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Mar 27, 2015 17:14:45 GMT -6
If we go that route, we might as well rejoin the League of Secessionist States. It was founded by Talossa, after all. ESTO is a little like the physolophical child of LOSS. In LOSS, all of the states are equal more or less and it's a lot like a League of Nation thing. In ESTO, there was 2 levels of membership, like in the UN. There was the general assembly, and there was the security council, with both elected members and permanent members (with Veto power), with Talossa being the first permanent power. The idea was to prevent hijacking of ESTO since it is very easy to start making a ton of fake micronation filled with fake citizens to overwhelm the general assembly. I will try to publish the part about ESTO, I think it's part V of my book (the introduction and 95% of Part I are done, Part II, III and IV are mostly empty, and party VI is done). Here is the table of content, from my memory: Introduction (100% done) Part 1: 2000-2001 (95% done) Part 2: 2002 (5% done) Part 3: 2003 (20% done) Part 4: 2004, up to June (10% done) Part 5: The birth of the Republic (not done at all) Part 6: ESTO (100% done) Part 7: Leaving the Republic (100% done)
I have over 100 pages in what is done...Here is the actual table of content: Introduction: page 1-11 Part I: The Resident Miracle Worker (2000-2001) Page 11-78 (mostly complete, as far as I know. Might be refined...) Part II: The Secretary of State (2002) Page 79-88 (so just 10 pages or so) Part III: Descent into Madness (2003) Page 89-92 (only 3 pages) Part IV: Birth of the Republic (2004) Page 93-105 Part V: The Republic (2004-2005) Page 106-122 Part VI: Leaving Talossa (2006-2012) 123-128 Conclusion
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Mar 28, 2015 22:12:02 GMT -6
ESTO is a little like the physolophical child of LOSS. The idea of an organisation like that as a buffer between Talossa and the micronational world is an intriguing one, and you obviously speak from a position of a lot of experience with micronations. In the past, the ESTO proposal always left me a little cold for two reasons. First, the "ephemeral" name didn't seem to fit Talossa, which has been around for over 35 years now and which we plan to last indefinitely. Second, in the past the ESTO web site talked about micronations based on other planets, with fictional land, etc. And that's the kind of fictional/fantasy nation that I really don't want Talossa to have anything to do with.
|
|
|
Post by Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. on Mar 29, 2015 4:46:49 GMT -6
ESTO is a little like the physolophical child of LOSS. The idea of an organisation like that as a buffer between Talossa and the micronational world is an intriguing one, and you obviously speak from a position of a lot of experience with micronations. In the past, the ESTO proposal always left me a little cold for two reasons. First, the "ephemeral" name didn't seem to fit Talossa, which has been around for over 35 years now and which we plan to last indefinitely. Second, in the past the ESTO web site talked about micronations based on other planets, with fictional land, etc. And that's the kind of fictional/fantasy nation that I really don't want Talossa to have anything to do with. Like I said, ESTO was named by Grubi. I wanted to name it LOSS, but he didn't like the idea of using LOSS since it was a creation of Ben and we were the republic. Personally, I would suggest using the ESTO charter I built, but naming the organization LOSS since, well, look at that, we ARE the Kingdom!
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Mar 29, 2015 18:33:00 GMT -6
b) The exchange of tourist visa I assume you're not talking about actual tourist visas, but just forum accounts. Lexh. 14.2 talks about Witt accounts for prospective citizens having an avatar image "indicating a visa", but this is meant in a metaphorical sense (it's just an avatar image). I would discourage further expansion of the visa metaphor in our laws, because it reinforces the erroneous perception that Talossa is Witt (i.e., just an online message forum). Which is one of the things that concerns me about the idea of increased engagement with forum-based micronations. In any event, under Lexh. 14.2, metaphorical "visas" are for prospective immigrants and metaphorical "passports" are for non-immigrant visitors. The fact that the avatar images are just a metaphor is confirmed by the fact that non-citizen Witt members get "passport" (not visa) avatars, because passports are issued by one's own state, not the state being visited. So we would never claim to actually be issuing passports to non-citizen Witt visitors who are not prospective immigrants. Im a bit conflicted here. You make a good point. I very much agree that Talossa isnt just witt. On the other hand, the law does state that: "No Cestoûr (non-citizen or ex-citizen) shall have an account on WittenbergTelecomuna, except by explicit permission of the Seneschál. Such permission shall be extended solely at the will of the Seneschál, and may be withdrawn at any time." This already being the prerogative of the Seneschal, I do think the Seneschal should be able to make agreements about such guest accounts with micronations without having to ask the ziu for permission first. Similarly such an agreement could also about Talossan citizens getting access to another country. Not sure if such Not sure how to solve this. Maybe change the language. How about x) Agreements about tourism. x) Telecomuna guest accounts. a) The exchange of ambassadors This point is also rather ambiguous, considering that an agreement that "relates to the recognition of a foreign nation" is a treaty that must be ratified by the Ziu. Is this intended to refer only to exchanging ambassadors with states that the Ziu has voted to recognise? No. I was also thinking about things like the sale of goods and services (within the scope of the already approved budget of course). Suppose we want to sell stamps or something like that using our contacts with another nation. Maybe something like that should be included as well. Then again, Im not really sure what constitutes a treaty anyway. Maybe, alternatively we can just expand on the things we do not want the government to do without the consent of the Ziu and remove the whole treaties part, cause its getting a bit messy. Also, the list of exceptions is not to say that we should do all these things, but rather that the government should be able to. So just say No recognitions, nothing that has the force of law, no alliances. (Anything that is not the governments task or is illegal is obviously ruled out already.) Anything else?
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Mar 29, 2015 18:46:10 GMT -6
Second, in the past the ESTO web site talked about micronations based on other planets, with fictional land, etc. And that's the kind of fictional/fantasy nation that I really don't want Talossa to have anything to do with. Good point, I think joining/forming some kind of large micronational organisation would get us involved with a lot of nations that we arent really interested in. The goal of this act is not to go back to the situation of before the SPWA, but rather give the elected government the possibility to decide on a foreign policy if an occasion arises in which this could be beneficial, but this would most likely not involve most of the micronations that are around there.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Mar 29, 2015 18:53:22 GMT -6
Please submit this bill to the Clark, Glüc!
|
|
|
Post by Sir Alexandreu Davinescu on Mar 29, 2015 19:04:18 GMT -6
Second, in the past the ESTO web site talked about micronations based on other planets, with fictional land, etc. And that's the kind of fictional/fantasy nation that I really don't want Talossa to have anything to do with. Good point, I think joining/forming some kind of large micronational organisation would get us involved with a lot of nations that we arent really interested in. The goal of this act is not to go back to the situation of before the SPWA, but rather give the elected government the possibility to decide on a foreign policy if an occasion arises in which this could be beneficial, but this would most likely not involve most of the micronations that are around there. When might that be beneficial?
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Mar 29, 2015 20:00:15 GMT -6
This already being the prerogative of the Seneschal, I do think the Seneschal should be able to make agreements about such guest accounts with micronations without having to ask the ziu for permission first. Similarly such an agreement could also about Talossan citizens getting access to another country. Not sure if such Not sure how to solve this. Maybe change the language. How about x) Agreements about tourism. x) Telecomuna guest accounts. Good point. I like the latter. Or maybe something a little more flexible, like "facilitating guest accounts on Talossan online fora." I was also thinking about things like the sale of goods and services (within the scope of the already approved budget of course). Suppose we want to sell stamps or something like that using our contacts with another nation. Maybe something like that should be included as well. Hmm. Well, that kind of rings alarm bells for me, because there are a lot of scam artists in the micronational world, and whenever you put together micronationalism and buying/selling things, I get very nervous. The last guy to propose using micronational contacts for commercial purposes was Tony Weckström, and I strongly suspect he was trying to scam us. So yeah, marketing or commercial agreements with micronations are things I would hope the government would bring to the Ziu (either by including the particulars in the budget, or via a treaty or other special legislation), even if Ziu approval wouldn't strictly be legally required. Then again, Im not really sure what constitutes a treaty anyway. Maybe, alternatively we can just expand on the things we do not want the government to do without the consent of the Ziu and remove the whole treaties part, cause its getting a bit messy. Also, the list of exceptions is not to say that we should do all these things, but rather that the government should be able to. So just say No recognitions, nothing that has the force of law, no alliances. (Anything that is not the governments task or is illegal is obviously ruled out already.) Anything else? I think that pretty much covers it. My comment was mainly based on the fact that an exchange of ambassadors essentially is diplomatic recognition--you don't exchange ambassadors with an entity unless you recognise that entity as a sovereign state with diplomatic status. If you don't recognise it as a sovereign state, you'd call your envoys something other than "ambassadors". For example, most countries don't officially recognise the Republic of China (Taiwan), so for such countries the office that represents the country's interests in Taiwan is called something other than an "embassy" and the officer in charge of it is called something other than an "ambassador". The U.S. has the American Institute in Taiwan, Germany has the German Institute Taipei, the UK has the British Trade and Cultural Office, and so forth.
|
|
Glüc da Dhi
Secretary of State
Posts: 6,112
Talossan Since: 5-14-2009
|
Post by Glüc da Dhi on Mar 30, 2015 9:33:37 GMT -6
Edited the bill to include most of the suggestions I made earlier. I have left out the treaty bit cause the list of exceptions was becoming a mess and it seems wiser now to just have a list of stuff we dont want the government to do rather than have a long list of exceptions. I cant really think of much else that we definitely dont want the goverment to do without the ziu, apart from the things that are already listed in this bill, already require the consent of the ziu, or are already illegal. With regards to the commercial bit, Sir Cresti makes a good point. However, the Ziu will have to agree to any expenditure already anyway, as it needs to be budgeted. This is also the only protection we have from individuals scamming us. If we want to include some additional protection in the case of micronations, Id be ok with including that, but I have currently no idea what language to use for that. I will clark the bill in 7 hours to be in time for the deadline. If you have any other suggestion to improve this bill, please say so. Tagging all the cosponsors to see if they have any further objections. Lüc da SchirSevastáin PinátschC. Carlüs XheraltescùTxosuè Éiric RôibeardescùDr. Txec dal NordselvăMiestrâ Schivâ, UrN, do you want to be included as a cosponsor?
|
|