[Emperor Fu]

Any Agency member that surrenders during the current conflict forfeits their membership in the GPA immediately upon doing so. They are in direct violation of the charter and the terms of their admission into the Agency, and thus do not retain the privilege of being a member.

We thought this was common knowledge, and have made it clear in a few topics so far, but it seems some do not know this yet, and thus I felt it would be right to clarify.

Also, for the sake of reiterating, our stance on members that choose to go nuclear has not changed. They are immediately expelled upon launching nukes and deemed a rogue. They forfeit their membership under the same premise. We are giving our best effort forward to prevent further attacks of this manner.

Thank you for your time!

~Emperor Fu
Vice President of the Green Protection Agency

[Sir Wellington]

Im glad to see you are pinning your members loyalties to GPA against their survival.

Good show!

[Emperor Fu]

Sir Wellington, on Feb 20 2008, 12:22 AM, said:

Im glad to see you are pinning your members loyalties to GPA against their survival.

Good show!

Hardly so. If they choose to surrender, then I personally wish them luck along their way. They will not remain members however.

[Crohl]

We don't approve your surrenders if you haven't resigned. If we find out someone has waved the white flag then returned to the GPA before the conflict is over, they will more than likely be perma ZI'd.

This post has been edited by Crohl: 19 February 2008 - 11:26 PM

[Delta1212]

Crohl, on Feb 20 2008, 12:25 AM, said:

We don't approve your surrenders if you haven't resigned. If we find out someone has waved the white flag then returned to the GPA before the conflict is over, they will more than likely be perma ZI'd.

He just said surrendering forfeits membeship... so they couldn't actually stay in GPA even if you'd let them.

[Arcades057]

We'll see how this develops after 3 million more NS and a few hundred more member are peeled off.

[Emperor Fu]

Crohl, on Feb 20 2008, 12:25 AM, said:

We don't approve your surrenders if they haven't resigned. If we find out someone has waved the white flag then return to the GPA before the conflict is over, they will more than likely be perma ZI'd.

If they offer surrender, then they forfeit their membership. We are keeping up with those that surrender to the best of our ability. Some post resignations on our boards. Some only post in the surrender topic.

That said, anybody who surrenders to you will not be granted reentrance into the Agency, or at the very least not while the conflict is still raging. If they surrender, they actively resign. If we find any inclination of them surrendering, we remove their mask. That's how it is. They are not GPA any longer. If they chose to break their surrender terms with you after that, it is clearly up to you what you do with them, as we bear no responsibility for their choice in breaking said terms.

EDIT: Always get the bare/bear thing mixed up. Thanks Lord Hamercy!

This post has been edited by Emperor Fu: 20 February 2008 - 12:09 AM

[Crohl]

Delta1212, on Feb 19 2008, 11:27 PM, said:

He just said surrendering forfeits membeship... so they couldn't actually stay in GPA even if you'd let them.

If you think I plan on taking GPA leadership for their word, you are sadly mistaken. Regardless of what Fu says here, my point stands. If a nation surrenders, then goes back to the GPA before given permission by Continuum leadership they will most likely be perma zi'd.

[Ararat]

Leaving the GPA means you're no longer a member?!? Blasphemy!

[Gene L]

How kind of you to do your members that favor.

[Emperor Fu]

Crohl, on Feb 20 2008, 12:30 AM, said:

If you think I plan on taking GPA leadership for their word, you are sadly mistaken. Regardless of what Fu says here, my point stands. If a nation surrenders, then goes back to the GPA before given permission by Continuum leadership they will most likely be perma zi'd.

Again, if they surrender, we won't be taking them back. They are to abide by their terms with you. We have not taken back any nations whom have surrendered and do not plan to while the conflict is going on. If they surrender, they have to accept responsibility for their choice and follow the terms or face the consequences. The GPA has no intent of getting in the way of you taking care of those who break their contract with you.

You may not care what I have to say as a leader of the GPA, but we've upheld this policy throughout this war. We have not lingered from what I have stated here in the slightest.

EDIT: Strange typo.

This post has been edited by Emperor Fu: 19 February 2008 - 11:49 PM

[nShade1337]

Good policy.

[Emperor Fu]

Ararat, on Feb 20 2008, 12:30 AM, said:

Leaving the GPA means you're no longer a member?!? Blasphemy!

I thought it was rather simple myself. The terms offered were INDIVIDUAL surrender terms after all. I thought that would have spoken for itself.

Gene - This isn't a matter of what we are doing to our members. It is their choice. These are individual terms, not alliance terms. If they choose to seek self-preservation over sacrifice for the GPA, then they are welcome to do so. We are not stopping them in the slightest. I see no foul play from the GPA here as you are indicating. Surrendering is effectively the same as resigning from the GPA.

[andyt2k]

If members can't surrender does that mean the alliance can't surrender, meaning you have to die or disband?

[Emperor Fu]

andyt2k, on Feb 20 2008, 12:37 AM, said:

If members can't surrender does that mean the alliance can't surrender, meaning you have to die or disband?

Oy. Come on people. No where in this topic did I say they cannot surrender. If they wish to, there is absolutely NOTHING stopping them from doing so. You surrendered yourself Andy, so I imagine you of all people would understand this.

[Gene L]

Emperor Fu, on Feb 20 2008, 12:34 AM, said:

Gene - This isn't a matter of what we are doing to our members. It is their choice. These are individual terms, not alliance terms. If they choose to seek self-preservation over sacrifice for the GPA, then they are welcome to do so. We are not stopping them in the slightest. I see no foul play from the GPA here as you are indicating. Surrendering is effectively the same as resigning from the GPA.

I indicated no such thing.
I think your sarcasm detector has been working too hard. I can be genuine from time to time.

This post has been edited by Gene L: 19 February 2008 - 11:41 PM

[Emperor Fu]

My apologies Gene - Suppose I was in serious mode there.. bit tired too

This post has been edited by Emperor Fu: 19 February 2008 - 11:40 PM

[Lord Hamercy]

andyt2k, on Feb 19 2008, 09:37 PM, said:

If members can't surrender does that mean the alliance can't surrender, meaning you have to die or disband?

He's saying members can surrender. By doing so, they resign from membership.

I believe the intent of this announcement is so that if someone surrenders and then goes rogue, their subsequent actions shouldn't be held against the GPA. One might still draw a connection to the caliber of their membership in general, but using such incidents to malign the policies of the alliance overall would be unreasonable. Que no?

[TheyCallMeJeezy]

It doesn't seem like there should be this much confusion on the subject.

[Sir Wellington]

Emperor Fu, on Feb 19 2008, 11:34 PM, said:

I thought it was rather simple myself. The terms offered were INDIVIDUAL surrender terms after all. I thought that would have spoken for itself.

Gene - This isn't a matter of what we are doing to our members. It is their choice. These are individual terms, not alliance terms. If they choose to seek self-preservation over sacrifice for the GPA, then they are welcome to do so. We are not stopping them in the slightest. I see no foul play from the GPA here as you are indicating. Surrendering is effectively the same as resigning from the GPA.

Translated:

Im dragging the GPA down because we cant negotiate alliance wide terms. If someone is fooled into thinking that GPA cares about their membership, they are mistaken.

Comments:

So you are telling me that you wont take them back? Seems a little harsh dont you think, not very neutral if you ask me. Surrendering might very well be the MOST neutral thing you can do.