Thread:LoveSeal990/@comment-34481284-20180517125456/@comment-34481284-20180518201446

Gralician Federation wrote: LukaGaming wrote: Alright, I'll be the rational one here.

1. Agreed.
 * 1) First of all, no one ever host two consecutive summits in the span of just over a month. No one, ever.
 * 2) Sadly I agree that the first GONK summit logo was bad. (no, really, no bias here, I can't even tell whatever the heck was drawn on BF's flag)
 * 3) Alliance name trying to distinguish between "nation" and "kingdom" when a "kingdom" is a "nations". I didn't notice this until just now, when I realised that the acronym was wonky (and hilarious).
 * 4) "This summit has been made to talk about the inclusion of Secondary Nations into the alliance, and how that will be done." This was the reason UKBP told why the second summit would be held, despite my points on article 1. Honestly, if that's the only problem (because you do not include anything else), there's really no need to hold a proper summit for it. You don't host a summit to discuss one problem.

2. Agreed.

3. Seriously agreed.

4. Agreed.

Also we need to reform GONK Security Council. Yes, definatly on the security council. Minnesotan just filled in three random members into a blank template I cam up with.

Second, the logo for the 2nd summit bears no resemblance to any other summit, GONK, MCS or CON, in regards to featuring something about the host nation on it. I spent hours slaving away last night to get the whole debacle organized, only for my nation to recieve no recognition for it in the logo.

Third, the name (with the kingdom bit removed) is exactly the same as CON but with a G instead of a C. I originally intended when Me and Minnesotan created the alliance to have an easy to say and easily memorable acronym. Therefore we played around a bit with what a 'nation' is to achieve that effect. Personally, I think it is fine as it is.