Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Dec 5, 2015 21:48:48 GMT -6
As Premieir of Maricopa and as a member of the Royal Commission, I would like to officially welcome all of you to our cozy province. I look forward to what we are going to accomplish!
|
|
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 Dec 7, 2015 12:49:08 GMT -6
Sir C. M. Siervicül, can you confirm you accept your nomination as Commission Chair? (And thus the responsibility to make sure we get a report in by March 1?)
|
|
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 Dec 10, 2015 17:19:11 GMT -6
GAAAH! We only have 3 and a half months to do this, people. I'm not sure why some people accepted a nomination to be on the Royal Commission when they don't want to do any work. Maybe deliberate sandbagging, I don't know.
Anyway, we could start discussion on Title 1 of the OrgLaw.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Dec 10, 2015 18:37:39 GMT -6
Isn't that the Declaration of Independence? We should make that its own document separate from the Organic Law
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Dec 11, 2015 11:04:10 GMT -6
Isn't that the Declaration of Independence? We should make that its own document separate from the Organic Law Posted below is the first two articles of the OrgLaw. I agree that Article I should be put into a separate document and that we should then renumber the remaining sections. Thus, Article II (Points of State) would become Article I. I'd like to see Article I Section 1 either stripped entirely or vastly re-edited.
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Dec 11, 2015 11:11:33 GMT -6
Many of the sections in this Article could also be spun out into El. Lex. I'm not sure it is necessary to protect via OrgLaw things like the flag, who administers/oversees the Talossan language, or any national anthems or songs.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Dec 11, 2015 14:37:51 GMT -6
Many of the sections in this Article could also be spun out into El. Lex. I'm not sure it is necessary to protect via OrgLaw things like the flag, who administers/oversees the Talossan language, or any national anthems or songs. Agree completely. Many moons ago I made a poll about this I say keep Sections 1-5 and shift Articles 6-10 to Title F of el Lexhatx
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Dec 11, 2015 16:20:52 GMT -6
Many of the sections in this Article could also be spun out into El. Lex. I'm not sure it is necessary to protect via OrgLaw things like the flag, who administers/oversees the Talossan language, or any national anthems or songs. Agree completely. Many moons ago I made a poll about this I say keep Articles 1-5 and shift Articles 6-10 to Title F of el Lexhatx Do you mean shift SECTIONS 6-10 of Article I to El.Lex?
|
|
Ián Tamorán S.H.
Chief Justice of the Uppermost Court
Proud Philosopher of Talossa
Posts: 1,401
Talossan Since: 9-27-2010
|
Post by Ián Tamorán S.H. on Dec 11, 2015 16:26:33 GMT -6
....I agree that Article I should be put into a separate document and that we should then renumber the remaining sections. Thus, Article II (Points of State) would become Article I. I'd like to see Article I Section 1 either stripped entirely or vastly re-edited. PLEASE do NOT renumber, but put cross references (if needed) in the new text to the old. Thus if a clause is removed its number is also removed; if a clause is added then it should receive either (a) a number greater than the last one used in the law/bill/utterance being amended, or (b) a number placed between the existing numbers (using the usual continued decimal representation). Renumbering is a BAD IDEA as it makes back references hard to trace. If a law is to be heavily amended, then it should be completely repealed, and replaced by a new (not amended) law containing the new text and the new (consecutive) numbering. Please.
|
|
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 Dec 11, 2015 16:59:29 GMT -6
Can I ask that non-members of the Commission contribute via another thread? Thanks.
I'm generally in favour of shifting as much into El Lexh as possible, but I'd like to hear some input from the cantankerous conservatives on this.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Dec 11, 2015 17:03:03 GMT -6
Agree completely. Many moons ago I made a poll about this I say keep Articles 1-5 and shift Articles 6-10 to Title F of el Lexhatx Do you mean shift SECTIONS 6-10 of Article I to El.Lex? Yes, though the sections are in Article II. I have edited my last post, good catch.
I certainly support moving as much as possible to statue, but I worry that filling it with cross-references may make it messy and confusing. What is likely is that we will replace entire Titles at once, like the current Standing Committee bill aims to do.
|
|
Ieremiac'h Ventrutx
Former Senator of Florencia ~ Citizen of Talossa
Posts: 990
Talossan Since: 3-1-1997
|
Post by Ieremiac'h Ventrutx on Dec 12, 2015 15:26:07 GMT -6
Why move it though? It is not enough to just want to move it. Personally I would not want to move them as it sets a precedence for the the original declaration as it was... could it be handled other places, maybe but it is already here, why mess with the history of it?
|
|
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 Dec 12, 2015 17:46:30 GMT -6
Well, I don't think we NEED to move the Declaration since it's a founding document.
As for II.6-10, can I ask this Commission to consider very carefully how much of this we would like to be able to be changed by a simple law, which would be the effect of moving them out of the OrgLaw? As for me, I really would NOT want to be able to change the Flag or the National Language, so leave 7 and most of 6 in there. The Motto, the National Anthem and the Coat of Arms are less fundamental, as is the line about the CÚG.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on Dec 12, 2015 17:52:27 GMT -6
Well, I don't think we NEED to move the Declaration since it's a founding document. As for II.6-10, can I ask this Commission to consider very carefully how much of this we would like to be able to be changed by a simple law, which would be the effect of moving them out of the OrgLaw? As for me, I really would NOT want to be able to change the Flag or the National Language, so leave 7 and most of 6 in there. The Motto, the National Anthem and the Coat of Arms are less fundamental, as is the line about the CÚG. Think of what a constitution really is though. It is how the government is supposed to be set up. So, I don't think it makes sense to have the Declaration of Independence or provisions about the language in it.
With the Declaration, I think it's inclusion in the Constitution actually detracts from its grandeur (which it certainly does have, it created Talossa!), which would be more noticeable if it were separated.
|
|
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 Dec 12, 2015 17:56:28 GMT -6
The national language is an issue of the highest constitutional importance, IMHO. Especially for Talossa. Almost every Constitution in the world - with outliers such as the United States - agrees.
|
|