Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on May 7, 2016 14:17:18 GMT -6
WHEREAS El Lexhatx has provisions which only make suggestions, and
WHEREAS Laws are by definition provisions which can be enforced, and
WHEREAS Suggestions are unenforceable, and
WHEREAS This means suggestions aren't really laws and shouldn't be in the law code, and
WHEREAS Laws which only make suggestions have no effect, because no one reads el Lexhatx for the purpose of finding out what the government suggests they do, and
WHEREAS Laws with no effect still have the effect of cluttering up el Lexhatx, and
WHEREAS Government suggestions should be of minimal concern in a free society anyway, and
WHEREAS When a government feels entitled to enshrine a suggestion into the law code, it is a sign the government is overreaching, and
WHEREAS If the Ziu wants to make a suggestion, it should pass a Sense of the Ziu, which are specifically meant for non-binding resolutions and suggestions
THEREFORE H.13, which currently reads;
Is hereby repealed
FURTHERMORE H.15, which currently reads;
Is hereby repealed
FURTHERMORE I.2.2, which currently reads;
shall be amended to read;
FURTHERMORE F.27, which currently reads;
shall be amended to read;
FURTHERMORE F.32, which currently reads;
Is hereby repealed because it is redundant.
FURTHERMORE F.30, which currently reads;
shall be amended to read;
FURTHERMORE F.33, which currently reads;
shall be amended to read;
Uréu q'estadra så; Ian Plätschisch (MC-MRPT)
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on May 7, 2016 14:18:04 GMT -6
If I missed any that you know about, please tell me.
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on May 7, 2016 14:44:01 GMT -6
I cannot support this. You hereby blindly do away in your, surely well-meant and efficiency-driven, love for bureaucracy a precise peculiarity of Talossa which makes use of suggestion and silliness to lighten the burden of reading through law. I urge you to reconsider.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on May 7, 2016 15:53:15 GMT -6
I cannot support this. You hereby blindly do away in your, surely well-meant and efficiency-driven, love for bureaucracy a precise peculiarity of Talossa which makes use of suggestion and silliness to lighten the burden of reading through law. I urge you to reconsider. We already have plenty of silliness in our laws, so there is no need to leave in ineffective suggestions (which hardly contribute even to the humor of the laws IMO, but add clutter which makes the code harder to read) in order to lighten el Lexhatx up.
One of the beauties of micronations such as Talossa is that we aren't held back by the "implausibility" of laying claim to land, lunar or otherwise, and quirky or not, if I were an average person surfing surfing on the internet I would be far more intrigued by a position such as Lunar Governor than something like Seneschal which is a title that an outsider wouldn't be likely to understand. Furthermore if creativity is part of what makes Talossa silly then, well frankly I haven't seen a lot of creativity OR silliness in current bills... 1. I don't care about plausibility. Claiming Antarctic land is fairly implausible too, but that doesn't matter, because... 2. What does matter is whether something is really Talossan. Claiming the moon in order to create the position of "Lunar Governor" to attract more immigrants makes Talossa into a tourist trap. 3. Read through el Lexhatx and you'll certainly find silliness. There may be nothing right now, but while your waiting, may I direct you towards: A.14 A.22 A.24 C.1.9 C.5 Almost all of Title F H.6 H.7 Almost all of Title I Z.59
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 7, 2016 20:47:33 GMT -6
Except in many cases, 'the suggestions', are the humorous parts of our laws.
This bill certainly clears the law code up, but, at the same time removes a rather important part of Talossaninity ... that being comic relief.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on May 8, 2016 8:14:49 GMT -6
Except in many cases, 'the suggestions', are the humorous parts of our laws. This bill certainly clears the law code up, but, at the same time removes a rather important part of Talossaninity ... that being comic relief. While I might disagree, I see the point that you and Epic are trying to make, and so I propose a solution which may make the bill more acceptable.
H.13 and H.15 are most certainly not humorous, completely unenforceable, and, in the case of H.15, routinely ignored. They should both be removed.
My modifications to I.2.2, F.27, F.30, and F.33 retain the original humor of the provision, and either establish some "suggested" item as an official Talossan item, or remove a suggestion which wasn't humorous to begin with.
F.32 is redundant and should be deleted.
I take it that your main concern is with the changes to F.8, F.28, F.36, and F.37, which deleted suggestions which many find humorous.
Therefore, if I deleted the modifications to F.8, F.28, F.36, and F.37 from this bill (or at least moved them to a different bill), would this bill become more favorable to you?
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 8, 2016 15:59:02 GMT -6
H.13 and H.15 can become enforceable if we so wish.
H.13 could be changed to an actual limit enforced by the SoS rather than a suggested limit. Might be a decent idea.
H.15 could be amended to become an actual requirement for one of the Ministries. That said, I don't like the idea as it would be a burdensome task and I can foresee consecutive governments failing to keep up with such a task. Yep, lets repeal H.15.
Your modifications to I.2.2, F.27, F.30, and F.33 are completely fine.
F.8 ... yeah, lets take it out and deal with separately.
F.28 ... redundant. The restaurant no longer exists. I've put forward an alternative bill to deal with this separately.
F.36 ... This was one of my Bills. When I put it forward I didn't actually think it would pass!!! Yeah, lets take it out and deal with separately.
F.37 ... Again, let's take it out and deal with later. I note you mention that this is not "humorous". Sure. However, it's not about being funny 'Ha-Ha' ... it's about being funny in a geeky, toungue-in-cheek, pretentious way.
So, to sum up...
I.2.2, F.27, F.30 and F.33 are good.
Take the parts referring to F.8 and F.36 and F.37 out and we can look at them separately.
Take the part referring to F.28 out and I'll put forward an alternative in a few minutes.
I could vote PER on this bill then.
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 8, 2016 16:17:33 GMT -6
Also, putting forward an alternative bill in respect to F.36
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on May 8, 2016 17:20:15 GMT -6
Take the parts referring to F.8 and F.36 and F.37 out and we can look at them separately. Take the part referring to F.28 out and I'll put forward an alternative in a few minutes. These changes have been made
|
|
|
Post by Eðo Grischun on May 8, 2016 18:03:25 GMT -6
Yep, I can go with that.
Epic?
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on May 9, 2016 3:18:22 GMT -6
Do not touch H.15! NO TOUCHING TALOSSAN! NO NO NO!
Otherwise, I would also leave H.13, because I actually adhered to that suggestion ever since I became a member of the Ziu. It may be good — in absentia of a Code for MZs — to leave such suggestions for MZs.
I am down with the rest, but I would suggest splitting F.30 in two, if we are at it.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on May 9, 2016 5:25:35 GMT -6
Do not touch H.15! NO TOUCHING TALOSSAN! NO NO NO! Why? You (or anyone else) could still translate bills if you want to. An action does not have to be legal mandated in order for it to be legally performed. The truth is that nobody pays any attention to H.15, so, despite your idealism, having it in the law makes no sense.
Placing this suggestion into AD's "Guide to Legislating" would probably do more good than keeping an unenforceable provision in the law. Sir Alexandreu Davinescu ?
Ok, I will fix that when I can.
|
|
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 May 9, 2016 15:27:04 GMT -6
Do not touch H.15! NO TOUCHING TALOSSAN! NO NO NO! Why? You (or anyone else) could still translate bills if you want to. An action does not have to be legal mandated in order for it to be legally performed. The truth is that nobody pays any attention to H.15, so, despite your idealism, having it in the law makes no sense. ... The clause only recommends translation, without mandating it. Thus to have it in the law or not have it makes no difference to what we may or may not do: it does no harm. So let's leave it in, to remind passing Talossans that they should be learning, and using, our unique language.
|
|
Ian Plätschisch
Senator for Maritiimi-Maxhestic
Posts: 4,001
Talossan Since: 3-21-2015
|
Post by Ian Plätschisch on May 9, 2016 16:23:20 GMT -6
Why? You (or anyone else) could still translate bills if you want to. An action does not have to be legal mandated in order for it to be legally performed. The truth is that nobody pays any attention to H.15, so, despite your idealism, having it in the law makes no sense. ... The clause only recommends translation, without mandating it. Thus to have it in the law or not have it makes no difference to what we may or may not do: it does no harm. So let's leave it in, to remind passing Talossans that they should be learning, and using, our unique language.And therein lies the problem this bill is meant to address. Laws are not meant to "recommend," they are meant to be enforced, as the government has little to no business "recommending" what people should do. Provisions which are completely unenforceable and routinely ignored take up space in the law without contributing anything. The harm of H.15 lies in the unnecessary wordage and bulk it creates. The more streamlined the law is (and keep in mind that silliness can still be a part of a streamlined code!), the easier it is to read, so provisions like this should be scrapped.
Here's an idea; if I proposed a Sense of the Ziu which included the contents of H.13 and H.15, would dispensing them from the law be acceptable (Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun)?
|
|
|
Post by Magniloqueu Épiqeu da Lhiun on May 10, 2016 4:10:49 GMT -6
Not at all. I cannot condone doing away with H.15, and as long as Davinescu’s “Guide to Legislating” does not belong to the official House Rules of the Ziu (or as long as such official House Rules are not created), I would also be askance about removing H.13.
Honestly, I do not see the harm in leaving any of those. I am sorry, but you whine around about us having a few “unnecessary” laws in a unified Code, when about a year ago, or so, we did not even have a code, and nobody was really sure which law was in force, and which was not. I reiterate that students and non-students of law have it much easier now, going through this one Unified Code of Law, than I and many other Talossans before El Lexhatx had.
I do not feel the necessity for it, especially not, if H.15 — part of our Culture — is going to have to go. So the law does not mandate, but recommend. So what?
|
|