Introducing The Reverse Charter of Chisrael

[Chatul]

[size="1"]OOC: "As long as it's related to alliance-driven politics, it's in-character and it's not an Alliance Announcement -- it goes here." But, yes, I know I'm taking this/myself/whatever much too seriously. Such is my nature. Coexist.[/size][quote name="The Free Encyclopedia"]A charter is the grant of authority or rights, stating that the granter formally recognizes the prerogative of the recipient to exercise the rights specified. It is implicit that the granter retains superiority (or sovereignty), and that the recipient admits a limited (or inferior) status within the relationship, and it is within that sense that charters were historically granted, and that sense is retained in modern usage of the term. Also, a charter can simply be a document giving royal permission to start a colony.[/quote][quote name="Logic may then have"]A reverse charter is the grant of laxity and privileges, stating that the granter casually recognizes the prerogative of the recipient to exercise the privileges specified. It is explicit that the granter retains equivalence and sovereignty, and that the recipient admits an equal status within the relationship; reverse charters were rarely historically granted, but this is the sense defined in present usage of the term. Also, a reverse charter can simply be a document requesting royal permission to be an independent ally.[/quote]
To the many international alliances and assemblies of Planet Bob,

When our freely provided national message box began being cleared of old messages by the providers, we were understanding but unprepared. We had planned to keep these messages as references until we had chosen and been accepted by a group, but had not thought we would need to archive them ourselves, which we would have been willing to do if we had foreseen the issue. Beginning the research over is not attractive but seemed to be the only option until, while devising how exactly to request the recruitment propaganda be resent, we realized the fact that there were so many means we have something of significant (potential) value.

What follows is the logical conclusion of the train of thought this began. It is a compilation of what we've decided we were aiming to get as close to as possible while comparing various charters and similar documents. It is not written in stone yet and may be changed, but we will grant it to the group that is willing to accept it with the least important changes as judged by us. Should there be more than one group willing to accept it with equally unimportant changes, we will then grant it to the highest bidder willing to accept it with said changes. [size="1"]We do not actually expect need for that provision, but we believe it is always good to have such provisions in place just in case. And (so long as we're adding possibly pointless provisions) should there be more than one group willing to accept our reverse charter with equally unimportant changes and offering equally valuable bids as judged by us, we will grant it to the first group to offer said changes and bid.[/size]

We do not consider the above paragraph legally binding, however. We reserve the right to grant our reverse charter to any group for any reason. Still, we do promise to only grant it to one group at a time, and we hope it doesn't ever have to change hands.

For the convenience of those hoping to accept it with changes, our reverse charter is written so between any two items the most important to us is nearer the start. [size="1"]Items in this case may be words in a phrase, phrases in a sentence, sentences in a clause, or clauses in the document.[/size]

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Light and Life to you and yours declares the reigning prophets of [nation='421320']Chisrael[/nation].

P.S.: To all those who helped us understand what can usually be expected of alliances and especially what could be expected of your own group, thank you again for your help and patience. We regret to have lost your messages as we did appreciate them. Had we archived them or otherwise not lost them, we would likely have joined one of you, but as it is we are taking this turn of events as a divine order. (Sovereignty, as it applies to us, is the freedom to follow the direction of our King without breaking any law such as an alliance charter.)

[quote][center][size="6"]The Reverse Charter of Chisrael[/size]

[size="5"]Preamble[/size][/center]Sovereignty, happiness, altruism, and size are Chisrael's priorities. Protection to pursue the latter three of these without sacrificing the first is the goal of this good faith agreement between ("we") the citizens of Chisrael and ("our allies") the members of [u][size="1"]_______________group name_______________[/size][/u]. We will work to be of great value to our allies, as we will be exceedingly grateful for their protection.

[center][size="5"]Protection Clause[/size][/center]In exchange for the privileges detailed in the Aid Clause and Trade Clause, we will be protected by our allies from tech raiders and other unprovoked aggressors. In the event that aid against an unprovoked aggressor is not received in time, we will receive help recovering from the damages either from our allies or from those our allies hold responsible for the damages.

[center][size="5"]Leader Education Clause[/size][/center]Guides and advice on national success are greatly appreciated but adherence to them will not be promised before their analysis in case the priorities of the authors clash with our own. Our leader(s) will take any typed test(s) requested to prove understanding of such guides but may chose to act differently from the recommendations should they seem even slightly in conflict with our priorities.

[center][size="5"]Attack Clause[/size][/center]We will not attack for the the mere sport or profit of ourselves or our allies. We predict the reasons we attack will be rare and include the confidence that we can handle the target in question and their allies. We deliberate enough without outside help; therefore when we finally do make such a decision we will not await further approval. We will [b]NOT[/b] expect our allies to either aid us in or help us recover from a war we initiated without their approval, though they are welcome to.

[center][size="5"]Aid Clause[/size][/center]We will give aid to whoever we deem deserving as long as doing so does not adversely affect our sovereignty or happiness (assuming either can be adversely affected by giving too much aid). When judging a nation's deservedness, their being one of our allies gives them highest priority, their being an ally of our allies gives them second highest priority, their being an ally of an ally of our allies gives them third highest priority, etc., their being a foe to our allies gives them lowest priority, their being an ally to a foe of our allies gives second lowest priority, etc., and they must be able to actually benefit from the aid to be deserving at all. It is possible that a lower priority nation may be deemed more deserving than a higher priority one, but with so many nations on the planet we predict we will probably never find foes of our allies deserving.

[center][size="5"]Trade Clause[/size][/center]We will trade and do tech deals with whoever we deem deserving as long as doing so does not adversely affect our environment. When judging a nation's deservedness, their being one of our allies gives them highest priority, their being an ally of our allies gives them second highest priority, their being an ally of an ally of our allies gives them third highest priority, etc., their being a foe to our allies gives them lowest priority, their being an ally to a foe of our allies gives second lowest priority, etc., and they must be able to actually benefit from the trade/deal to be deserving at all. We will join the team of the majority of our allies but prefer white (the balance and strength of all wavelengths of light). Nations on our team are higher priority than those not. Nations offering resources that aid our priorities are higher priority than those not. It is possible that a lower priority nation may be deemed more deserving than a higher priority one, but this is highly unlikely concerning trades.

[center][size="5"]Communication Clause[/size][/center]As much as his time and energies allow, our primary representative will participate in any forum(s) our allies desire under any mask they deem appropriate. We cannot predict just how much participation that will be. No or little live chat should be expected.

[center][size="5"]Identity Clause[/size][/center]We will not be considered a sub part of a super nation or any such thing besides a unique nation. Our alliance affiliation will be whatever our allies deem appropriate so long as it clearly indicates that we have allies, to deter unprovoked aggressors. If our allies desire, we will fly their flag so long as we do not find it unattractive, and if we find it unattractive we will fly the nearest approximation to it we like better.[/quote]

[Moufassa]

Here at the IAA we completely agree with this reverse charter of your's and we will respect it. There is just one minuscule discrepancy within it that I'm going to send you in a Personal Message that I know you will understand.


Here is a thread about us that I would love for you to read: [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=89372"]Link to: Why Should I Join IAA?[/url]

[Chatul]

[quote name='Moufassa' timestamp='1283613423' post='2441400']
Here at the IAA we completely agree with this reverse charter of your's and we will respect it. There is just one minuscule discrepancy within it that I'm going to send you in a Personal Message that I know you will understand.[/quote]For "understand" in the sense that I comprehend each of the words and what they mean when put together in that order, I understand perfectly. For "understand" in the sense that I agree to changing my reverse charter, I will consider the change and accept this as an offer to accept the agreement with said changes. But I must admit this document was inspired largely by what I liked in the many charters I read, yours being one of them. There should be no surprise if several alliances see similarities.

[quote name='Moufassa' timestamp='1283613423' post='2441400']Here is a thread about us that I would love for you to read: [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=89372"]Link to: Why Should I Join IAA?[/url]
[/quote] I read it. Frankly, having read it, I still see little relavant difference between IAA and other alliances I liked.
"Each and every member has a say in everything that goes on in the alliance" does not seem important to me at this time.
"We care about you. Plain and simple. The Imperial Assault Alliance leaves no one behind." These statements are sweet nothings to my ears; I like the sound but don't know how they set IAA apart from many other alliances.
"We will fight to the last pixel for every member. Not every alliance can guarantee you that either." Am I to believe the others are all weaklings? Or am I to believe the others are all contract breakers? These are strong allegations. And if you do not mean either of them, what do you mean?
I'm sure I "will feel right at home in IAA" because I'll feel right at home anywhere. I've learned to be content in whatever state I'm in. That doesn't mean I'll leap head first into any state, but once I'm there I'll make myself at home.
Whenever possible, I do not "try out" relationships. If I sign a charter, I intend to honor it for life. Hence my deliberation joining anyone.

Thank you again for your offer. I do appreciate it, especially because it is the first and it asks for very little change. But, just in case, I will wait a while and see if anyone can do better.

Edited September 4, 2010 by Chatul

[Chatul]

[code]Date Declared By Declared On
9/4/2010 4:48:49 AM aljama Chisrael
Ruler: thelorder Ruler: Chatul
The Democratic Order Alliance: None[/code]
Well, now we really are holding all the cards.[img]http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/836910377/Cheshire_Cat_Tattoo_2_by_CatONineTa_normal.jpg[/img]
I see it was naive of me to assume no one would attack with nothing more to gain than our tiny land and infrastructure, but at least now we don't even have that to offer. And as we've already lost all we care about, all we have left is that potential value. I am patient. I don't have to begin rebuilding until after we have some promise of protection. We have all the cards. (And, honestly, these mad parties are rather fun. I believe we will celebrate today as a national holiday in which we were freed from all need for an alliance and so gained, by an odd turn of events, complete sovereignty. Our King works in mischievous ways. Mhm. Mhmhmhm. MhmhmhmhahahahaHAHAHAHA![img]http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/559/chesirecatlaugh.jpg[/img])

I do know now that I will not be dealing with [nation='421855']aljama[/nation], thelorder, or The Democratic Order for allowing such mafia like behavior as attempting to force our allegiance ([i]that[/i] was an [b]epic[/b] FAIL), but otherwise I'm still open to offers from anyone. We'll be having an impromptu burning man festival until 9/7/2010 whatever I do now anyway. [size="1"]Heh[/size] [img]http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/465497897/logo_normal.png[/img] [size="1"]HAHA[/size] [size="2"]HAHA[/size] [size="3"]HAHA[/size] [size="4"]HA[/size]!

EDIT: We would like to retract the bit about The Democratic Order. See the bottom of [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=91713&view=findpost&p=2442280"]this post[/url].

Edited September 5, 2010 by Chatul

[Chatul]

Responders to this seem to prefer private messages. I respect that, but it also requires me to update this myself when significant developments happen. (That is, significant in my eyes. If it's arrogant of me to presume anything happening to my currently tiny nation is significant, so be it; I have nothing to lose anyway.)

The offers have gotten to the point that I'm no longer accepting actual changes to our reverse charter. Additions yes, changes and deletions no. Just in case anyone else might make an offer. I've no reason to rush this, after all. But in case I'm still getting responses longer than expected (improbable but possible) I think we'll finalize our decision no later than 9/6/2010 so we can have all the documents signed by all concerned parties by the time the parties end

Edited September 5, 2010 by Chatul

[Chatul]

I have recently been informed that a simpler version of our reverse charter would be appreciated. I will make an attempt here to simplify it, but the product of said attempt is not to be taken as a legal document. In other words, if there is conflict between the two documents our original reverse charter should be honored.

[quote][size="6"]The Simplified Reverse Charter of Chisrael[/size]

[size="5"]Reasons for this writing:[/size] We, the people of Chisrael, want freedom to follow our True King without breaking any laws (such as an alliance charter), happiness for our people, freedom to share any wealth we acquire with those in need, and to grow in population, and we want these four things more than anything else. To gain happiness, wealth to share, and greater size we will also gain things of value to raiders, and for that reason need protection. We will try to return the value of this protection to those who agree to this writing and give us the protection we need.

[size="5"]Section concerning our protection:[/size] Those who agree to this writing will protect us from attacks that we did nothing to deserve. If Chisrael is damaged by an attack we did not deserve, those who agree to this writing will make sure we get help rebuilding either from themselves or from whoever should give the help according to those who agree to this writing. In return we will usually aid and trade with those who agree to this writing, and with their friends, and not with their enemies.

[size="5"]Section concerning guides and advice:[/size] Our leaders will appreciate any help learning how to raise our nation, but we will not promise to do exactly as taught because whoever came up with the advice may not care about the same things we care about in the same ways. Our leaders do promise to prove in writing they read and understood any guides or advice offered if those who agree to this writing want proof of that.

[size="5"]Section concerning our military's offence:[/size] We will not start wars as if they were a game to see who is stronger. We will not start a war to gain technology, money, land, infrastructure, or any other material thing. We may start a war, but only rarely and only when we believe we can be victorious over the nation in question and anyone helping them. We would take so long making a decision to attack that we will not wait for permission when we finally do. We would not ask for help in fighting a war we started, and we would not ask for help recovering from a war we started, but we will not refuse help if offered it.

[size="5"]Section concerning our aid:[/size] We will give aid to whoever we want and will give aid as much as we can without hurting our freedom or happiness. We will usually want to give aid first to those who agree to this writing, second to their friends, third to their friends' friends, and so on. We will usually want to give aid to the enemies of those who agree to this writing [b]last[/b], to those enemies' friends before that, to those enemies' friends' friends before that, and so on. We'll never want to give to anyone who can't improve much by our giving to them. We may want to give in a different order than just listed, but with so many nations to give to it's not likely we'll give to the enemies of those who agree to this writing.

[size="5"]Section concerning our trades:[/size] We will trade and do tech deals with whoever we want. We will never want to accept a trade or deal that would hurt our environment. We will usually want to trade first with those who agree to this writing, second with their friends, third with their friends' friends, and so on. We will usually want to trade with the enemies of those who agree to this writing [b]last[/b], with those enemies' friends before that, with those enemies' friends' friends before that, and so on. We'll never want to trade with anyone who can't improve much by our trading with them. We will change our team color to match those who agree to this writing, but we do have preferences if more than one group makes the same offer to agree to this writing. We will usually want to trade with nations on the same team. We will usually want to trade with nations offering resources that help us get what we want more than anything else. We may want to trade in a different order than just listed, but almost never.

[size="5"]Section concerning our communications:[/size] We will try to stay in communication with those who agree to this writing but will not make any specific promises how much we will communicate. We will not usually communicate in real time.

[size="5"]Section concerning our identity:[/size] We will be known as a unique nation and nothing else. Our alliance affiliation can be anything as long as it shows we are under the protection of those who agree to this writing. If those who agree to this writing would like us to fly their flag, we will fly it if we like it, and if we don't like it we'll fly the closest thing we can to it that we do like.[/quote]

-------------------------

On a separate note, my earlier attacker has changed alliance affiliation from The Democratic Order to The Legion (possibly without the latter's permission) and probably as prompted by TDO, so I apologize for any damage to TDO's name my post may have contributed. They are, as far as I can tell, an honorable alliance I would consider working with.

Edited September 5, 2010 by Chatul

[Cerridwyn]

I personally find this fascinating and look forward to learning where you finally decide to call home. No matter what your decision, come visit us and make friends.

[url="http://s4.zetaboards.com/Pax_Corvus/index/"]Link to Pax Corvus Forum[/url]

[Mandolus]

Would you mind providing a summary for those of us whose eyes glaze over at the thought of wading through a mountain of dense legal mumbo jumbo? Thanks in advance

[Chatul]

[quote name='Cerridwyn' timestamp='1283740714' post='2443266']
I personally find this fascinating and look forward to learning where you finally decide to call home. No matter what your decision, come visit us and make friends.

[url="http://s4.zetaboards.com/Pax_Corvus/index/"]Link to Pax Corvus Forum[/url]
[/quote]Why thank you , I'll certainly stop by and have a look. To answer your question: Chisrael will be my home. We will be affiliated with an alliance, not absorbed into an alliance. At least that's how it looks based on the offers I have now.


[quote name='Mandolus' timestamp='1283744706' post='2443328']
Would you mind providing a summary for those of us whose eyes glaze over at the thought of wading through a mountain of dense legal mumbo jumbo? Thanks in advance[/quote]
I was hoping the simplification would not be taken as legal mumbo jumbo. Ah well, here's the crux of it: The nation of Chisrael will do whatever the Heaven it wants, will almost always trade with and give aid to the group that protects it, will be protected from random attacks but will take full responsibility for its own aggressive actions, and will be known as an allied nation rather than part of a big group. All clear?

Edited September 6, 2010 by Chatul

[Poyplemonkeys]

I'll be intrigued to see which alliance you join, and what the final signed agreement with that alliance is.

I'm surprised you've had so many offers that you're now confident enough to reject any changes to this charter given how very self-serving it is. The Attack Clause is the main one that jumps out at me and it surprises me that alliances are willing to accept your 'membership' with that section remaining as it is. I mean you openly state that you won't go to war with your allies unless you feel you can handle the target and their allies, and I find that there are people willing to accept this incredible. There are many reasons to go to war, and not helping allies when you think it might hurt too much to do so isn't a popular stance to take. Not to mention how long you state it will take you to help your allies, if you even decide to do so.

Perhaps try one of the neutral alliances.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Poyplemonkeys

[Chatul]

Ah, I see my attack clause isn't clear. It is NOT that I won't go to war with my allies if I think the opponent is too hard. It's that I won't go to war on the offensive for what I judge as a poor reason (sport or profit). That's NOT to say that I think these are poor reasons for everyone - if that's what your people want have at it - but my people will not risk their lives on an attack for entertainment or to make a quick bit of tech or land or whatever can be "gained" in a war. It is also that if I do see a good reason to go to war, it will be partly because I feel we can take the target without help and so needn't get permission, and that we will take full responsibility for the consequences of attack without permission. I do NOT explicit say that I will not go to war for my allies for other reasons; although that is intentionally implied, it is not set in stone.

Further, if I were looking for 'membership', I'd be surprised if anyone would accept this agreement as well. But, again, [b]I am NOT looking for membership[/b]. I'm only looking for allies who will protect my nation from senseless attacks in exchange for most of our trades and aid (as we will be a generous nation once we have something tangible to offer).

But your pointing this out does remind me to say that I've been a bit misleading with my "no longer accepting actual changes". I meant by that we will not be giving up any freedoms explicitly mentioned in our reverse charter, but if some responsibility needs to be added that doesn't contradict those freedoms and tacking them on at the end doesn't look good, we may change the document to include the new responsibility for aesthetic reasons. For instance, if there is a specific reason for war you want to know we would attack for...

But I think I'll be finishing this today, so if anyone wants to try and change my mind they'd better hurry. I'll give a hint: the reverse charter I'm currently looking to sign does have a new Attack Clause. It still explicitly states that I will not go to war for those two reasons, and that I can attack without awaiting approval if I'm willing to accept the consequences of that, but it also has more responsibility for me and an implication of more possible help from my allies.

Thank you for your comments.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Chatul

[Poyplemonkeys]

Odd. I'd suggest selling tech to Nueva Vida as they protect their tech sellers with very few conditions if I recall correctly. I may be wrong, but I believe FOK also do this. RIA are also running a protection scheme for their trade partners on Maroon with very few conditions too. Essentially it reads like you're looking for a one man protectorate agreement, and those are the closest to it that are already established and would have very little infringement on your sovereignty.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Poyplemonkeys

[Chatul]

[quote name='Poyplemonkeys' timestamp='1283790084' post='2443890']
Odd. I'd suggest selling tech to Nueva Vida as they protect their tech sellers with very few conditions if I recall correctly. I may be wrong, but I believe FOK also do this. RIA are also running a protection scheme for their trade partners on Maroon with very few conditions too. Essentially it reads like you're looking for a one man protectorate agreement, and those are the closest to it that are already established and would have very little infringement on your sovereignty.
[/quote]
Thank you, I hadn't heard of two of those yet! These things should be made easier to find if their providers want them to be taken. I had in fact been considering one of them as one of my favorite offers

But, yes, you see what I'm after exactly now. (Except I see it as "one nation", not "one man". I am for my people as much as they are for me.) And, oddly enough, the reverse charter I'm currently preparing to sign isn't even one of those you mentioned. But I will look into the other two just in case they look better (which I doubt, but anything's possible).

Thank you again

[bakamitai]

What is this I don't even

[Chatul]

[quote name='bakamitai' timestamp='1283820871' post='2444594']
What is this I don't even
[/quote]

Is that considered normal grammar here?

I can answer the first three words: This is an attempt to get protection from raids without having to be involved with the rest of the alliance drama.

Did I answer it or do the last three words contribute a meaning beyond my present comprehension?

[Poyplemonkeys]

All of the alliance drama is most of the fun of this game in my opinion Each to their own of course...

[Chatul]

[quote name='Poyplemonkeys' timestamp='1283873021' post='2445350'] Each to their own of course...[/quote]
Of course

[Chatul]

Two or more people expressed interest in seeing what would become of this, and in my experience one person expressing interest is indicative of several who are also interested but don't voice it. I wonder if these people grow a fraction as tired of waiting as I do; I wanted this done the day before yesterday.

It seems my favorite offer was in actuality a hope to recruit us as a member. They were not honestly ready to handle an ally nation that wasn't a member, but told us "you would still keep your reverse charter" as if that would mean anything signed together with an alliance charter. [size="1"](I imagine something like "Yes, of course you're a free nation! Now let me introduce you to your superior...")[/size]

They may get back to me, I don't know, but meanwhile I'm going to assume they won't and fall back on my second favorite offer: become an RIA Trade Partner. If I had seen that as an option back when examining alliances, I wouldn't ever have bothered with this reverse charter. Of course I'm grateful for the experience, but now feel I aught to apologize for making a big to do about nothing. Those things Poyplemonkeys mentioned really aught to be easier for a new ruler, unexperienced in the ways of this forum, to find.

I'm vaguely curious how many offers people think I received. I wasn't looking for quantity, though; just quality. I stopped accepting "offers" when I realized most of what I was getting was recruitment propaganda customized to me. Two offers didn't ask for any change of my document, so I decided if I didn't get anything better than that I didn't want any more at all and made that post. Especially since one of the offers was ready before I got here.

Interest was also expressed at what exactly I would end up signing. Most of the document is unchanged; here is the latest Attack Clause. It looks changed at first blush, but really I just added something each signer would do and took out the part about how long we'd deliberate because I realized how obvious it is even without that part that nation on nation wars (compared to alliance wars) are extremely rare anyway. [quote][center][size="5"]Attack Clause:[/size][/center] We will not attack for the the mere sport or profit of ourselves or our allies. If we do attack, we will inform our allies but may choose not to await their approval. We will not expect our allies to either aid us in or help us recover from a war we initiated without their approval, though they are welcome to. If our allies find our reason for attacking legitimate they will send aid to help in the fight, usually militarily but otherwise financially.[/quote] It is still implied that we don't have to go to war for any reason, but of course if we saw a good reason we would.

So, the RIA Trade Partner terms are plenty loose enough that I can keep this document available in case anyone wants to "steal" us away from them. Unless, of course, the group I was negotiating with decides they could use an allied nation that isn't a member, in which case we'll grant it to them, but meanwhile we're ready to begin building and so will wait no longer.

So that should satisfy everyone's curiosity.
Thank you to the providers and maintainers of this international forum for humoring me, insignificant as I currently seem.
[size="1"]Indeed, having seen the state of the world more clearly, I am amazed you'd even give anyone with so relatively few supporters a computer to access these things, much less allow us to contribute to them! It is very much appreciated![/size]
And sorry for the anti-climax to anyone who cared. I find it disappointing as well.