Union Address | Zero Tolerance Policy and COFR Relations

Following a vote by the administrative team, a decision has been reached about the current status of relations between the AIN and COFR. Today we have decided that any further attacks by COFR members on the AIN will be treated with Zero Tolerance. If a COFR member is seen to attack the AIN/ an AIN member, they will be banned for at least three days, in accordance with the Constitution.
Any AIN member who goes over to the COFR and abuses them or attempts to inflame arguments about the two unions will also find themselves with a ban here as well.

Thank you.

Thomas Simpson
President of the AIN

:AOIN:

Following recent discussions, all relations with the COFR will now be FROZEN until further notice. Diplomatic ties with the union will not be established and any threads discussing relations with this specific union will be deleted immediately.
I would also like to stress again that any provocative posts will lead to 3-day bannings and further restrictions will be considered if a banning is necessary.

Thank you.

Thomas Simpson
President of the AIN

:AOIN:

On Monday the administrative team decided that we should freeze relations with the COFR, with immediate effect following a series of clashes between members of both unions. The COFR has continued to state that the frozen relations is unnecessary and is requesting that relations are restarted between the two unions.
Today I wish to ask the members of this Alliance whether they want to keep the freeze on relations for a further period of time, or whether relations should begin with the Confederacy.

Thank you.

Thomas Simpson
President of the AIN

:AOIN:

I'm ok to de-freeze the relations.

Even if I didn't understood why there was clashes...

Well i am not against too of opening the relationships. Only if we have peace and if no topic on the conflict on AOIN forum be created by COFR members. And well still i call for not ending the Zero Tolerance Policy.

Edit. But i am not to against on keeping the relationships freezed.

De Freeze!

Voted.

Voted.

If any of them reach 50% during this weekend, then that will be considered the majority and will be the decision that we take as a Union.
Currently it's very close between "Yes, start relations" and an indefinite ban, which will be at least 1-2 months.

I voted to undo the ban.

tear down that wall! jk

Voted

As a former COFR member. I believe we should de-freeze it. Much has changed over a year, and I know who the original members were before the conflict within the COFR. I know the history of it when I first signed up with the COFR in January 2008. The original members never started a conflict, plus the original members are with the AOIN, and I'm glad to see a new change of the COFR.

So let's do this... and I pray there is no conflict

The new COFR is a totally new COFR, its a new organizations, whit new laws, forums and well not many original members. More of members have joined the SCJU and AOIN and stayed. So COFR is a new organization that we need to understand we need to use new diplomacy whit. Right now we will decide how we will see COFR. Also is it possible to see who has voted?

As Hiigarar says, this is a totally new COFR - just using the name, basically.
It's not possible to see who voted either.

Currently it's a tie between starting relations and an indefinite freeze. I won't make a decision on the matter now, because it would go against what 42% of AIN members say, and I want at least one of them to reach 50% before I choose where to go with this.
If none of the options reach 50% then we'll have another admin vote.

I'm pretty neutral, but hopeful of a new relationship.

Well the problem whit a vote, is well that there is a possibility that some other members not AOIN voted. So well in the future we can say as a few right members did say - Voted.

As anarchy0029, I too support neutral. But well there wore small conflict that we can't ignore, conflicts after the new organization was founded (On are forum too) and what i see problematic is that the Government of COFR is a little bit agressive. But we as an older org. need to see neutral relationships. And the main point that i think, that AOIN only must protect AOIN members. And the votes are still supporting some kind of freeze.

hiigarar wrote:Well the problem whit a vote, is well that there is a possibility that some other members not AOIN voted. So well in the future we can say as a few right members did say - Voted.

That's not supposed to be true, Constantine, according to Thomas:

Thomas wrote:And I have now edited the rights of ambassadors and guests so they cannot vote in any polls again. Only Junior members, full members and administrators can vote.

A sorry then remembered by old forums.

I know some of our members are still friends with the ex members on skype and that's their choice but shouldn't it be once you resign thats it? They shouldn't still be able to have access to our site after they resign. It will just keep leading to altercations and arguments and will be an never ending distabling situation. In the real world when you resign from a job you can't keep coming back and seeing what your old co workers are up to from the inside.. It just doesn't happen. Just my thoughts.

I don't agree with you Jo. Why shouldn't they be allowed to see the site? We will not start making diplomatic censure, we're not wild. Learning how to live side by side in the world of SC4, that's the key to success of our union. Do you think EU will stop trading and doing other things with a resigned nation just because it resigned? No. If you care about if they get involved in our discussions about them, it's totally normal they are involved. If France is saying to the EU to stop buy products seals' products to Canada, Canada will interfere. That's normal.

I have triple-checked that only Administrators, Union Founder, Member States and Associate Members can vote in here.
There will not be a question of banning them, unless there is an admin majority supporting this. However we still have zero tolerance, so if any of them act out then they can expect a ban.

If no majority is achieved by tomorrow then I will contact the admins and we will decide on the future of relations. This has gone on too long, and we need to make a definite decision as soon as possible.

voted

Due to no majority verdict being achieved, the admins will now vote on whether relations will happen or not.

You don't count a vote difference of 1 as a majority?

It's only 40% of the vote though - it needs to be 50% minimum.