The ACT's parallel universe, where the Greens and Labor worked quite well together, appeared at joint press conferences, and did some nation-leading policy work side by side has collapsed in on itself.
A more familiar posture for Labor and the Greens will instead be adopted: a stance that allows more criticism and obstruction from both sides. Less coalition, more uneasy cohabitation.
Greens leader Shane Rattenbury, who looked set to continue as the ACT's second-most experienced cabinet minister, will now be operating from the crossbench after long talks with Labor covered lots of ground and made little progress.
The Greens will on Wednesday back Labor's Andrew Barr to stay on as chief minister, but they won't take up any positions in cabinet. Labor will be in minority government.
It's an odd thing: Mr Rattenbury is one of the Greens' most experienced parliamentarians but he's spent virtually no time on the crossbench. Speaker in his first term, Mr Rattenbury had been a minister since 2012.
The Greens had three ministers in the 10th Assembly. Two of them lost their seats at last month's election. Although the Greens' vote had gone backwards by not very much at all - 1.3 percentage points, across the board - it was taken by some as a sign: get out of cabinet.
Sitting on the crossbench demonstrates the Greens are prepared to walk from negotiations with Labor. Maybe this sign they will stick to their principles will have an appeal to those who have condemned the party for being too close to Labor.
Others will see the Greens walking away from an opportunity to carry their toolboxes into the engine room of government, and judge them as they see fit. Isn't being in government what having a political party is all about?
The Greens pitched themselves as capable, experienced people, more ready for government than the Liberals. That pitch would surely change in four years' time, when that experience will have grown stale.
Mr Rattenbury said before the election he was a fan of multi-party governments and the pressure Labor and the Greens put on each other provided the government strength.
"There's a good creative tension in the government. The two parties push each other around in ways that are, I think, good for democracy and good for outcomes, because we have to make the case to each other," Mr Rattenbury said.
Perhaps it was good for outcomes, but in the end the Greens did not see it as good at the ballot box.
Look at what's happening federally. The Greens and Labor are locked in some kind of elimination game, powered by the brute strength of their mutual loathing.
Some within the ACT Greens have been attracted to that take-no-prisoners style, perhaps best embodied by Max Chandler-Mather, the federal Greens member for Griffith. They are sick of working alongside Labor and, they think, being forced to excessively shrink their violets. Better, they believe, to be a thorn in Labor's side.
This is new territory for Mr Rattenbury, who looks first to compromise and pragmatic progressivism. But after the election, he acknowledged the variety of feedback the party had received.
"Some people saying we're too involved in government, perhaps apparently too close to the Labor Party. Other people saying they found our federal role too combative and they pushed too hard," he said.
"And so it is difficult to reconcile these two positions and I think different members of the community perceive us differently in those roles. And that is potentially a challenge as well."
This really is the Greens' internal - some would say intractable - challenge. The party's early moves in its self-imposed crossbench exile will give some indication on how they approach that conundrum.
