Page 1 of 1
Our Challengers
Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 7:32 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Erik, Scott, your call for a decent YAMO for the sector has been answered ... but not by people signing up for the Small Commonwealth. Instead, it's been by the Vena Peace Conference (small nations only, apparently we're big bullies) and the Keltian agreement. Vena never got off the ground but Keltia, as an EU type thing for that continent, seems to be showing some promise.
Just alerting the Small Commonwealth for those who didn't know.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 4:16 am
by Nickolas
Vena never got off the ground because Jess was using Craitman's nation without permission. I believe you remember Craitman getting pissy about it and having to amend everything. And from what I can tell that created general distrust for it.
In my personal opinion, the Small Commonwealth and the Keltian Agreement will be the two that will survive.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 2:08 pm
by Nathan of Natopia
The Vena peace conference was a joke. I keep checking it everyday to be amused.

Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:33 am
by Kaiser Agni I
What exactly is the Keltian Agreement?
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 10:50 pm
by Andreas the Wise
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:11 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
Not much going on there it seems?
We need to advertise more, get more people to join on. Maybe mediate some conflicts. *shrug*
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 3:07 pm
by Andreas the Wise
KA's only just started.
Mediate conflicts ... shall we give the Ocia one a go?
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 9:01 pm
by Harvey Steffke
I say we plot to take Bayen's silly green hat, clearly the source of their power.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 12:02 am
by Kaiser Agni I
Isn't the Keltia Agreement based on that one continent only? Are they the standard monolithic organization structure. One Treaty to rule them all?
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 3:26 am
by Andreas the Wise
Yes and Don't know, in that order.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:31 am
by Nickolas
Nathan of Natopia wrote:The Vena peace conference was a joke. I keep checking it everyday to be amused.

I'm in the mood for a laugh, link plz?
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:18 am
by Kaiser Agni I
Then doesn't that limit them? They are but one continent organization.
We sprang up first. They are the YAMO. Woot!
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:34 pm
by Nickolas
If I am not mistaking, I think the Keltia Agreement and the Small Commonwealth have some fundamental differences. The Small Cowealth is like NATO (blows shit up), while the Keltia Agreement is like the UN w/o the peacekeeping forces. I think the Keltia Agreement is more geared towars arbitration and negotiation above all else.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:32 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
Actaully.. I think of the Small Commonwealth more like the EU, with UN potential.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:39 am
by Nickolas
You mean no blowing stuff up?

Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:23 am
by Kaiser Agni I
Depends on what treaty you sign..
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 2:34 pm
by Nathan of Natopia
Nickolas wrote:Nathan of Natopia wrote:The Vena peace conference was a joke. I keep checking it everyday to be amused.

I'm in the mood for a laugh, link plz?
Your link, sir.
http://www.kingdomofamokolia.proboards8 ... 145&page=1
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:28 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
wow....
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 7:52 pm
by Harvey Steffke
Appears to require a login, which I can't be bothered to sign up for.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:13 pm
by Nickolas
Danke Schön!
Harvey Steffke wrote:Appears to require a login, which I can't be bothered to sign up for.
Nathan is right, it is pretty fnny. It is a complete farce and poor attempt at domination.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:23 am
by Kaiser Agni I
That's why we ditched the whole concept of domination with this thing. It's laughable.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:53 am
by Jess
We aren't dominating anyone...
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:57 am
by Nickolas
I read the "common citizenship" thing. All you would have had to do was say "you're MY citizens, obey me!".
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:40 am
by Kaiser Agni I
Duel citizenship = bad.
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 12:12 pm
by Nickolas
I have 2 :P.
But the kind of citizenship being proposed was a poorly disguised way to conglomerate a large group of people of varying micronations under one banner, that is domination, albeit shadowy and transparent.
And no, the Small Commonwealth doesn't do that, as it doesn't have anything in there saying "if you join you'll be a citizen of Shireroth".
Re: Our Challengers
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:27 pm
by Kaiser Agni I
As it stands, signing the membership treaty only gets you a seat in the Assembly. Nothing more. You have to sign more treaties to get more.