Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 26, 2012 17:10:15 GMT -6
Could you confirm which year has the census tracts you're using for this map? The base image was the 2010 tract maps, but with the Atatürk-Benito (73-78) and Florencia-Maricopa (108-112) borders reverted approximately to the 1990 boundaries.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 26, 2012 1:48:32 GMT -6
Another alternative might be for Vuode to keep its coast, but cede Canton 76 to M-M? That would be interesting -- M-M trading one reasonably densely-populated inland area (the western part of the current Pórt Maxhestic) for another (the western part of the current Dún Cestoûr), the area it's getting historically having been part of the original Province of Maritiimi. Another alternative might be to not change M-M's northern border, but give it 143 instead of putting it in the new province. The 8th province is then a two-canton province which retains the Mitchell Building, M-M gets a replacement for its loss of populated west Pórt Maxhestic, and Maricopa loses nothing more than the two cantons its citizens (above) expressed a willingness to give to create a new province. We could also draw various plans that go ahead and ignore any and all census tract boundaries from any and all censuses, of course. I'm just running around spouting various ideas in hopes of forging a consensus (or, at least, something that combines the maximum satisfaction of desires with a minimum of disgruntlement). PS: Maybe we should carve one eighth off of each existing province, and create a new province out of seven enclaves, La Raßemblâ del Citaxhiêns Repúblicán.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 25, 2012 23:58:01 GMT -6
By the way, Istefan, it's Her Excellency. Of course. And my post has always said that. (Well it was always supposed to say it, but when I was altering the cut-and-pasted version of Idi Amin's self-granted title, I apparently missed that edit.)
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 25, 2012 16:12:07 GMT -6
I don't know that I'd call it a loss, exactly... I don't see you guys lining up to become citizens of the Talossan Republic, sadly. Well, I note the Republic did structure itself as a secession, rather than a revolution proper. Even completely successful secessions result in two separate states, not one united state under the government of the rebels. (I will miss being President. Being provincial Governor or even Seneschál isn't nearly as bad-ass.) Bah, you guys can make the title for the province whatever you like. "Her Invincible Excellency, Supreme Leader and Field Marshal Miestrâ Schivâ, Bad-Ass, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas, Conqueror of Chuck Norris in Talossa in General and the Eighth Province in Particular, and Most Honored Blackboard Monitor."
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 25, 2012 2:36:48 GMT -6
For what little it's worth, my opinion has always been that the exact proportions of the flag, and the exact colours, are up to the person who's actually making the flag in question. In vexillology, as in heraldry, I favour artistic licence. "Vert" can be any shade that is, roughly, green; "gules" ditto red. Just make it look good, and it's right by me. — John R Well, who's going to argue with that? (Oh, no. I now have visions of the incoming Republicans all demanding detailed flag specifications as an anti-Royal protest . . .) I note, by the way, that US flags are not, by law, 10:19. Rather, there's an executive order (10834) that sets eleven standard sizes for use by executive agencies. Eight of those are 10:19 (at least to two decimal places), but one is 7:11, one is 26:33, and one is 3:4.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Yes?
Feb 24, 2012 22:16:18 GMT -6
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 24, 2012 22:16:18 GMT -6
Sweet! So why is this thing called Bentito? Because people found its historic name of Mussolini a bit off-putting. Now, of course, that only brings up the question, "Why was the province named after Mussolini?" Because the teenaged King Robert I so named it. (I suspect more details are in the History of Talossa, to which I currently do not have access, but Ár Päts mentions Mussolini as "the King’s latest fave dictator" in Part 4, covering July-September 1981. There was rather a procession of these King's favorite dictator of the season in Talossa's early history.) EDIT: And I see the Baron beat me to the punch.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 24, 2012 14:46:58 GMT -6
Yeah, I was vaguely suspicious that R. Ben Madison had a dispute with someone in a position of authority at UWM and included an insult in the dictionary, perhaps inspired by a rector/rectum pun. The high school principal theory also would fit that.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 23, 2012 20:13:35 GMT -6
We really DO need someone to finally say (and mean it, more than like a week) that they'll take the job working the Department of Vexillology in the College of Arms, who can truly serve the flags of the realm well, so that people don't have to ask for drunken whiskey-reeking won't remember-it-tomorrow arbitrary default determinations from a beer-soaked ordinary Talossan. So, um, what would be the actual requirements for someone to do that job? And what would the duties be?
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 23, 2012 18:01:44 GMT -6
Anybody know how Talossan wound up with "pievînd" as the word for a university rector?
All the European languages except Greek on Google Translate come up with something that was obviously derived from the Latin "rector". Greek gives πρύτανης, which, while it has the right initial letter, is quite different. Maybe it's a compound word of some sort?
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 22, 2012 19:20:23 GMT -6
As far as the possible statute I mentioned in my previous post, I'd be tempted to suggest something like:
1. Each party has the responsibility of communicating to the Secretary of State a list of its authorized agents and the name of its leader, and of updating the same.
2. In any case where the authorized agents of a party or its leadership are a matter of dispute, the Secretary of State shall make a good-faith effort to determine which disputants has the best right to name such, taking into consideration the internal rules of the party. Each other disputant shall have the opportunity to register under a party name that differentiates it from the other disputants.
3. In any case where the authorized agents of a party or its leadership are a matter of dispute, and the Secretary of State is unable to determine that any of the disputing claimants to a party has a best right to name such, each disputant shall have the opportunity to register under a party name that differentiates it from the other disputants. In such a case as to leadership, the original party shall be considered to not have a functional leader for the purposes of Article VII, Section 9 of the Organic Law.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 22, 2012 16:28:51 GMT -6
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 22, 2012 4:50:27 GMT -6
Unfortunately, Istefan, your entire argument breaks down if Rob dies or something, and, sad as it is, people do tend to do that. If Rob dies, the party leader is whomever the Plutocratic Party rules would designate. (Under my hypothetical rules, the Plutocrats would probably have it fall to Mike, as the biggest living contributor.) Difficulty in judging that only occurs if the party has no rules on how to designate a new leader in case of death or incapacity of the current one. In that case, the SoS would have to make his best judgment, which of course someone might well challenge in court. Also, the "only the party can register on the party's behalf" out seems to me to only beg the question "who can act for the party?" as there is no solid law anywhere that says each party must make certain that its agent(s) are known. Sure, if a party doesn't actually have an unambiguous procedure under internal rules for designating such persons, the answer can be ambiguous for the SoS and courts to judge. It could be useful for a statute to require parties to make certain its agent(s) are known, and perhaps include a default rule on the matter in cases where a party has failed to do so, but that doesn't require amending the Organic Law. Other than the "most recently beat everyone to the punch registerer" (which is the problem we're trying to solve) My point above is, current law doesn't actually give any weight to "tries to register the party first". If I try to register the RUMP, the fact that I do so first doesn't actually have any legal weight under current Talossan law. If the SoS accepted my registration attempt, the RUMP would be perfectly free to challenge that in court. Alternatively the RUMP could declare that I was authorized to register it, but that I'm not the party leader, and challenge any effort to treat me as the party leader in court. By analogy, what happens if I try to go to the FEC and state SoSes in the US and claim to be the Republican Party representative, claim the Republican matching funds form the FEC, and designate the Republican candidate for each ballot line in the states? US law and most state laws don't actually dictate internal party procedure for designating party agents; they leave that up to the rules of the parties themselves, occasionally aided by generic laws about organizations. Granted, the results aren't always unambiguous; arguments between party factions happen. In 2000, the US Reform Party broke into two national conventions, and (at least in Michigan, where I was living and so had the best view) into two state parties. The FEC evaluated matters and gave matching funds to the Buchananite faction nationally. In Michigan, the state SoS found it impossible to determine which state faction was legitimate and gave the ballot line to neither; this decision was upheld in the state courts (one faction wound up running under the Natural Law name and the other did a write-in campaign). For example, I was the first leader of RUMP. But when I decided to work on the language, I stepped down from the Seneschalsqab and also from party leadership and handed it to someone else. Unless I misunderstand, I would not have really been able to do that, since only I could register the RUMP until Kingdom come? (I probably do misunderstand.) When you stepped down and handed leadership to someone else, then the RUMP had a new leader who could register the party and submit the 50-word statement.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 21, 2012 18:28:10 GMT -6
Okay, always easier to work with a map (please exclude its crudity) . . . My province reorganization proposal can be seen above. In green is the current Atatürk; the very light gray-blue is current Benito; the lavender is current Florencia. None of these would be adjusted in my proposal. The new 8th province, in white, would consist of three cantons—the Talossan part of 2010 census tract 1874 (the bulk of the current Pórt Maxhestic), plus long-time census tracts 144 (Buffonia) and 143 (Fredericville), both currently part of Maricopa (in light brown). Maritiimi-Maxhestic (in gold) would then consist of the 2010 Census tracts 9800, 1869, and 1870. The magenta line currently marks the portion of 9800 that historically was part of Dún Cestoûr in Vudoe (pink), while the green line marks the current Pórt Maxhestic-Maritiimi canton boundary. I would then suggest that the Maritiimi Canton comprise of 1869, 1870, and the part of 9800 north of the magenta line (which was the shore of the original Maritiimi Province back in the early 1980s), while a new Costâ Maxhestic canton has the rest of 9800.
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 20, 2012 16:38:13 GMT -6
Bah! I wanted to be the one to make this petition! Darnit . . .
|
|
Istefan Perþonest
Cunstaval to Fiôvâ; Regent of the University of Talossa
Posts: 1,024
Talossan Since: 2-21-1998
|
Post by Istefan Perþonest on Feb 20, 2012 2:04:59 GMT -6
That would suggest that for the time spent in the Republic we haven't been Talossans Mmm. No, it actually wouldn't suggest you weren't Talossans; citizens get repatriated all the time. After all, nobody suggests POWs who are repatriated weren't citizens of their home country while in the POW camp. But it would suggest the Republic wasn't Talossan; you can't get repatriated from your homeland. So it still isn't suitable. Hmm. (And I note that the only reason that Romulus and Vulcan haven't been reunited is the warlike humans of the Federation using armed force to prevent the Romulan Star Empire's people from embracing their brothers on Vulcan. As long as no humans interfere with things, I'm sure Reunision will go through quite quickly.)
|
|