republic of granat Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Congrats GGA, here's to a brighter future! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fallin Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 I'm glad to see the GGA picking itself up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathias Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Question about D - perhaps I'm just a noob here, but how come spying an unaligned nation is fine, but spying an allied one is not? that hardly seems fair... (not that it has to be, merely pointing it out) Spying on a nation in an alliance can get your alliance killed. It's serious business. Seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) I share Delta's concerns on the exeunt issue but otherwise, this is a huge step in the right direction. Keep on truckin'. Edited September 27, 2009 by Style #386 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Question about D - perhaps I'm just a noob here, but how come spying an unaligned nation is fine, but spying an allied one is not? that hardly seems fair... (not that it has to be, merely pointing it out) Not to get too far off topic but the short answer is the unaligned guy has nobody to kick your $@! if you spy on him. vice versa if you spy on, say a GGA nation, GGA will kick your $@! for spying on their alliance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He Who Has No Name Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Hey, you guys aren't saddled with Bilrow anymore, it's all improvement from here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ephriam Grey Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) F2. Elder Statesmen of the Grand Global Alliance: Elders are former members of the council who have retired, resigned, or have been removed. The position and title are honorific, signifying our appreciation for their efforts and sacrifices for the GGA. This position has no power or say within government. Elders may act in an advisory capacity to current government, but have no final say in decisions made by the council or any other government member. Privileges and powers of the Elders on the forums and IRC shall be determined by the council. Will the current GGA government recognize Derek Jones as an Elder Statesman? A. Foreign Policy: The GGA will conduct relations with countries fairly and courteously. Good relations with all alliances, great and small, is hoped for but we will not stand for insults or threats from any nation or alliance. The GGA does not support terrorist organizations, actions, or tactics. GGA will not submit to terrorist threats or demands. What do you mean when you say you will not stand for insults or threats? Will you go to war over insults, specifically? Define terrorist. C. Policy Towards Unaligned Nations: If a member attacks or spies on an unaligned nation they cannot expect support or aid from the alliance. Are these your only policies on tech raids? Define unaligned nations. E. Policy on Use of Nuclear Weapons: At no time shall a member of the GGA use a nuclear weapon in an offensive manner unless ordered by the Triumvirate. GGA members shall only launch Nuclear weapons in defense of their nation from a nuclear attack. Please clarify, will the GGA first strike nuke, assume the Triumvirate approves? G. Policy on Use of Sanctioning: Sanctions shall be used on nations who are, but not limited to nuclear rogues. What other uses aside from nuclear rogues does the GGA have in mind? I. Policy on Espionage: No GGA member shall willfully spy on any other alliance. The punishment for spying is immediate ejection from the alliance. What about spying commit with the sanction of the Council? This policy only seems to talk about specific members committing acts of espionage. Will the GGA as an alliance agree not to spy on other sovereign bodies? J. Conduct of Members: We believe each member's behavior reflects the alliance as a whole. Does this mean you will associate any statement made by any player on CN with the alliance they hail from? Edited September 27, 2009 by Ephriam Grey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ephriam Grey Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) Edit: Double post. Edited September 27, 2009 by Ephriam Grey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeignOwnage Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) nice B) but yeah i still thinnk the rule on leaving is harsh Edited September 27, 2009 by ForeignOwnage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ch33kY Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) A revitalised Charter. A revitalised GGA. Here's to a bright and fruitful future. I am interested in the responses to Ephraim Grey's questions. I think they will shed more light on the changes to the Charter. Edited September 27, 2009 by Ch33kY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Stalin Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Still a lot of problems with the charter, but hey, at least you're trying to change. Good luck in the future GGA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre27 Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Quite a few questions regarding our charter, i'll do my best to answer them. Your policies regarding leaving are still pretty awful and make me wonder whether anyone who read your charter before joining would actually consider doing it, but good luck with this I suppose. The reaction to the policy of "asking permission to leave" is somewhat surprising. In my time in the GGA i don't recall that anyone who wanted to leave, was denied. Then why this policy. There is both a practical and philosophical reason. Practical because by departing from the alliance means losing access to "Members only" sections and the triumvirate needs to change the mask of the departed member. Philosophical because we care about each and every member. When someone decides to leave the alliance and abandon those who were his/her brothers/sisters for so long we like to know why. This way we know the reasons for leaving and this helps in identifying potential problems in the alliance. Will the current GGA government recognize Derek Jones as an Elder Statesman? AFAIK DJ does not have a nation on CN and therefor cannot be an Elder Statesman What do you mean when you say you will not stand for insults or threats? Will you go to war over insults, specifically? We mean that we expect to be treated with the same respect and dignity we will show when we approach other nations/alliances. We will not go to war over insults, but said nation and/or alliance can kiss both our respect and any chance of future diplomatic cooperation goodbye until they have grown mature enough to deal with us as alliance. Define terrorist. Damaging activities towards nations/alliances without a declaration of war. Are these your only policies on tech raids?Define unaligned nations. If you mean that we allow tech raids on nations without AA then yes. We believe our members are mature enough to make a decision to attack an unaligned and face the consequences if such a decision backfires. Please clarify, will the GGA first strike nuke, assume the Triumvirate approves? I think it's pretty clear. No GGA nation is allowed the use of nuclear weapons unless nuclear weapons are used against their own nation, against members of our alliance or against allies (because we consider an attack upon one of our allies as an attack upon the GGA). What other uses aside from nuclear rogues does the GGA have in mind? Please explain this particular question further. What about spying commit with the sanction of the Council? This policy only seems to talk about specific members committing acts of espionage. Will the GGA as an alliance agree not to spy on other sovereign bodies? Espionage is only allowed ingame when there is a declaration of war. No other acts of espionage is allowed by any member of the GGA. Does this mean you will associate any statement made by any player on CN with the alliance they hail from? Please explain this particular question further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwilliams Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 G. Disbandment of the Alliance:In order for the Grand Global Alliance to be disbanded a vote must be put to the General Membership of the Grand Global Alliance. (1) The vote for disbandment must be opened for voting for seven (7) days/168 hours and it must obtain a 67% or better vote in favor of disbandment in order to take affect. (2) It takes a unanimous (3/3) decision by the council to bring a vote of disbandment before the membership of the alliance. I believe you forgot to make this article unamendable like it was in the other charter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) This thread lacks the hilarity that I have grown used to in the past. On one hand I'm happy for GGA, on the other hand i'm sad for the rest of us Edited September 27, 2009 by hizzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ephriam Grey Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 AFAIK DJ does not have a nation on CN and therefor cannot be an Elder Statesman I don't see anything saying that an Elder Statesman needs to have a nation - perhaps some clarification on that could be added . Allow me to rephrase this question: assuming Derek Jones was to return again, would he again be denied re-entry to the GGA and attacked, as he was by the old government, or would he be recognized as an Elder Statesman and allowed entry? Damaging activities towards nations/alliances without a declaration of war. When you say damaging, do you mean, specifically, damage done in a quantitative, in game fashion? Or could this cover damage to your reputation, your forums, etc? If you mean that we allow tech raids on nations without AA then yes. We believe our members are mature enough to make a decision to attack an unaligned and face the consequences if such a decision backfires. Just to clarify - GGA allows no raiding on alliances that have an AA set, then? Please explain this particular question further. In what situations will the GGA sanction a nation, aside from cases of nuclear rogues? Please explain this particular question further. Does the GGA consider something that a member of another alliance says to be representative of the other alliances official opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King MyLife Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Big but necessary Changes..Good luck with your new charter.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwthegreat Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Congrats to GGA on this change o/ Shane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flonker Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Told you guys they were changing for the better, and that M*A*S*H stood beside them during their transition. You didn't believe us. At least the day-to-day stuff got moved to the Ministers. IMNSFBHO, triumvirates need to concentrate on external policies, not internal ones. That's the way we do it, and it works for us. Having all government responsibility in the tris is a recipe for burnout. This is yet another step in the right direction, in my opinion. Good job, guys. Proud to know you better now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fingolfin Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 I have nothing against GGA and hope this works out for you guys. But in all honesty...this is a bureaucratic mess. The Regent seems to be a completely pointless position that just wastes a competant gov member. As do the Triumvirate. Ministers with one person in charge of the alliance as a whole is more than adequate. You don't need 3 people to set policy who then send a PM to people to the ministers to enact the policy, who then in turn send it to their deputy to enact the policy, who then passes it on to the general staff of the ministry. Seems...excessive. But anyways O/ GGA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Just to clarify: E. Policy on Use of Nuclear Weapons: At no time shall a member of the GGA use a nuclear weapon in an offensive manner unless ordered by the Triumvirate. GGA members shall only launch Nuclear weapons in defense of their nation from a nuclear attack. Does that mean that the alliance holds the right to lead on the offensive with nukes? Aka - first strike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titodafarmer Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Good charter is good. o/ Green o/ UJA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 Just to clarify:Does that mean that the alliance holds the right to lead on the offensive with nukes? Aka - first strike. Andre already gave an answer to this: I think it's pretty clear. No GGA nation is allowed the use of nuclear weapons unless nuclear weapons are used against their own nation, against members of our alliance or against allies (because we consider an attack upon one of our allies as an attack upon the GGA). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laserwolf Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) While I think that Policy D may be a little much, I do understand the point/philosophy behind it. Instead of a PM, maybe an exiting thread requesting demasking coupled with the soon-to-be-nonmembers filling out a questionnaire? Just an idea/thought for what it's worth. Good move in a good direction. Good luck to your future GGA. EDIT: typo Edited September 27, 2009 by Laserwolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre27 Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 While I think that Policy D may be a little much, I do understand the point/philosophy behind it. Instead of a PM, maybe an exiting thread requesting demasking coupled with the soon-to-be-nonmembers filling out a questionnaire? Just an idea/thought for what it's worth.Good move in a good direction. Good luck to your future GGA. EDIT: typo We believe that by privately contacting a Triumvir the departing member has more freedom to express why he/she wishes to depart then in a public demasking thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ephriam Grey Posted September 27, 2009 Report Share Posted September 27, 2009 (edited) Andre, is there any chance you could answer those questions for me? If not, please let me know who could. Is Sognatore an Elder Statesman? Edited September 27, 2009 by Ephriam Grey 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.