Thomasj_tx Posted February 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 On behalf of Camberlain, I would like to avow our dedication to observing the Neutrality of the GPA. It is thus proudly that I offer my signature to this fine document.Signed, Margrave, Lord Of Camberlain On behalf of the Green Protection Agency, I have added Camberlain to the list of Signatories. Thank You! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobiash Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 In the name of the Blood God and on the behalf of Terminus Est, I too put my X on this noble document. Signed, Tobiash, Primarch of Terminus Est Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomasj_tx Posted February 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 In the name of the Blood God and on the behalf of Terminus Est, I too put my X on this noble document.Signed, Tobiash, Primarch of Terminus Est On behalf of the Green Protection Agency, I have added Terminus Est to the list of Signatories. Thank You! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeFeatherston Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Congratulations on the new document GPA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soyak Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 So is this document saying that the GPA is neutral in everything? Does this mean you don't sign treaties of any kind and you stay in your own little corner? How does that work for you guys? Is it effective? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Nice to see the DoN getting the same treatment as your charter ... it's now very nice and clear and sets things out for all to see. Hopefully you can show us all that neutrality is still relevant in the modern world Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomasj_tx Posted February 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 So is this document saying that the GPA is neutral in everything? Does this mean you don't sign treaties of any kind and you stay in your own little corner? How does that work for you guys? Is it effective? It states that we are legally bound to pursue friendly and impartial conduct toward all other nations and Alliances and maintain strict military and political neutrality and non-intervention. We are able to, and have in our history, entered into "treaties" that support these values and principles. As to "staying in our own little corner", I am not sure what that means, but we encourage all of our members to interact with other nations and alliances in a friendly and impartial way. It works well for us because that is what our values are. As to being effective, that is in the eye of the beholder, but we just had our third anniversary last week so something must be working okay. Thanks for your questions and I hope that I have answered them to your satisfaction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soyak Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Seems like you have an efficient set up apparently Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. I'm a noob but I enjoy learning about other alliances besides my own. Thanks again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Specific Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 a. No GPA nation will intervene, either politically or militarily, in any conflict that does not directly involve the GPA or a GPA nation. Treading lightly here since it would be pointless to pick on an alliance like the GPA with a baiting post. However, what I have quoted above from your announcement seems like a rather arbitrary definition of neutrality, subject to the vagaries of alliance leadership and politics. Is this a new definition or has this always been a part/the heart of the DoN? And something specific, would the GPA ever find someone threatening one of the signatories of this DoN as involving the GPA to the point of defending GPA interests per this said definition? Also, irrespective of the DoN's wording in the past, it is curious that any other sovereign alliance would sign this, unless it is mostly out of respect for your peaceful tradition. I mean no harm here, but I do not see why any alliance would recognize and support an alliance whose purpose is to never come to the assistance of any other alliance. And at last, I realize some of these surely are old and even tired questions for your diplomatic corps, so thank you ahead of time for any consideration of these questions. I'm simply a curious bystander who finds neutrality on Bob both intriguing and terribly problematic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanpedrodave Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Seems like you have an efficient set up apparently Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. I'm a noob but I enjoy learning about other alliances besides my own. Thanks again Thank you Soyak. You will make your alliance proud. And thanks to all the other well wishers and old friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinite Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 (edited) I'll only sign if you DoW on TDO. Seriously though, it looks good. I was wondering when this would come back into the light. Edited February 22, 2009 by Trinite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sun WuKong Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 “Neutrality, as a lasting principle, is an evidence of weakness” - Lajos Kossuth, Hungarian freedom fighter 'Neutrality' is a situational ethos and needs two things: a situation to be neutral about and at least two poles of thought/behavior to be neutral between. Then, one can have the involved parties sanction your neutrality and you don't have to take sides. Permanent 'neutrality' is unmaintainable - and giving you a signature you can point to and say "See? All these people certify we are neutral" is what got you into your mess last year in the first place. 'Isolationist'? Definitely. 'Non-aligned'? OK. 'Pacifistic'? Perhaps. But, neutral in all things? We know better. We've been there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Is this a new definition or has this always been a part/the heart of the DoN? While the exact wording has changed, that has always been the heart and intention of the DoN. Also, irrespective of the DoN's wording in the past, it is curious that any other sovereign alliance would sign this, unless it is mostly out of respect for your peaceful tradition. I mean no harm here, but I do not see why any alliance would recognize and support an alliance whose purpose is to never come to the assistance of any other alliance. Other alliances sign this out of respect for who we. It also makes sense from a practical standpoint, since an alliance that won't help anyone is also not going to help your enemies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnilynx Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Treading lightly here since it would be pointless to pick on an alliance like the GPA with a baiting post. However, what I have quoted above from your announcement seems like a rather arbitrary definition of neutrality, subject to the vagaries of alliance leadership and politics. Is this a new definition or has this always been a part/the heart of the DoN? I'm not in government (right now) but I'll take a shot at answering your questions. As Thomas said earlier, this is essentially a rewording of the original document, with the intent of keeping the original meaning of the document intact while cutting out fluff. So yes, this definition has essentially always been at the heart of the document. And far from being vague and arbitrary, we find this to be quite a simple and concrete working definition of neutrality for us. And something specific, would the GPA ever find someone threatening one of the signatories of this DoN as involving the GPA to the point of defending GPA interests per this said definition? No, the politics of signatories outside of their direct relations to the GPA are their own affairs; this clause is intended to relate to direct involvement and not any secondary interests. Also, irrespective of the DoN's wording in the past, it is curious that any other sovereign alliance would sign this, unless it is mostly out of respect for your peaceful tradition. I mean no harm here, but I do not see why any alliance would recognize and support an alliance whose purpose is to never come to the assistance of any other alliance. Even though we try to remain neutral and wouldn't take sides in a conflict, we also try to cultivate friendly and mutually beneficial relationships with all alliances. We can contribute to economic trading, tips and information, and community-building activities, for example. Though a signature on our DoN isn't required for us to offer that hand of friendship, it indicates that the signatory recognizes and shares that goal, as well as being a token of mutual respect. Given that there is little cost to doing so, many alliances (and some independent nations!) have elected to advance diplomatically in that fashion. And at last, I realize some of these surely are old and even tired questions for your diplomatic corps, so thank you ahead of time for any consideration of these questions.I'm simply a curious bystander who finds neutrality on Bob both intriguing and terribly problematic. We're always happy to explain ourselves to those who are curious; thank you for your questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Specific Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 (edited) While the exact wording has changed, that has always been the heart and intention of the DoN.Other alliances sign this out of respect for who we. It also makes sense from a practical standpoint, since an alliance that won't help anyone is also not going to help your enemies. Thanks for the answers. I am afraid Sun WuKong expresses my questions about the second part of your reply. All the same, I respect your desire, and it seems that you also acknowledge that signers of this DoN perhaps do so more out of respect for the group of fine people in the GPA over any intelligible principles per se. Thanks again, it is hard for me not be as harsh as WuKong edit: reading omnilynx now... Edited February 22, 2009 by General Specific Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericus Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Congrats on lowering the pixel count of the original DoN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Archer Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Congrats on lowering the pixel count of the original DoN. Saving pixel trees? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrotskysRevenge Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 “Neutrality, as a lasting principle, is an evidence of weakness” - Lajos Kossuth, Hungarian freedom fighter'Neutrality' is a situational ethos and needs two things: a situation to be neutral about and at least two poles of thought/behavior to be neutral between. Then, one can have the involved parties sanction your neutrality and you don't have to take sides. Permanent 'neutrality' is unmaintainable - and giving you a signature you can point to and say "See? All these people certify we are neutral" is what got you into your mess last year in the first place. 'Isolationist'? Definitely. 'Non-aligned'? OK. 'Pacifistic'? Perhaps. But, neutral in all things? We know better. We've been there. Couldn't have said it better myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 “The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crises maintain their neutrality” Dante Alighieri Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ericus Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 (edited) Saving pixel trees? "GPA - saving Planet Bob's pixelforests since 2009" Edited February 22, 2009 by Ericus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reyne Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Couldn't have said it better myself. That's my boy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnilynx Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 “The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crises maintain their neutrality” Dante Alighieri Heh, that's my sig on the GPA forums. I think I'll snag it here, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desperado Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Is this neutral enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agafaba Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Its cold here so some heat would do me some good personally, nice to see GPA is still alive and... watching without any intent to kick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 I don't know how our name got on there but please remove it. That's The Phoenix Federation with one P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.