Forum:Global and regional issues/EUOIA

Admin note: This page contains discussion on EUOIA from February 2025 onwards. 2021 - 2024 discussion can be found here, Pre-2021 discussion has been moved to that page's "Discussion" page. There is plenty of material there (including flags, treaty proposals, etc.) which could be reused.

📖 TL;DR

This page will be used to develop (hopefully) final iteration of the EUOIA, a proposed union comprising of countries in the Eastern Ulethan Region. Some concepts have already been discussed outside of the wiki, but as this project grows it will be necessary to allow everyone in the region (and the world) to have a voice in this project.

🗺️ Discussion Structure

For this discussion forum, we will discuss the broad EUOIA organization and work our way down into the little details.

Structure for Discussion

All ideas will originate from the Topic Backlog in which people pitch potential topics to discuss. I will put them in a round based off of the "broadness" and importance of the topic

Approved topics for discussion in the round will be available for discussion for one week in which everybody gets to pitch solutions to the topic and others get to discuss about the topic.

After discussion ends, no more new nominations will occur. In this time period we will have two weeks to vote. All voting will take place on the wiki forum, and double voting will not be allowed. During the voting period, there will also be options to reopen the discussion period (and end the voting process early) to extend the discussion period by another week. If you have concerns or want this structure to change, please shoot out a PM or add a comment in the "Concerns" section.

Votes pass the 50% mark in order to pass. To achieve this, every member will rank their votes (one being most preferred, highest number being least preferred)

Membership

If you wish to be a participating member of EUOIA, please put your country below. If we anticipate types of membership (observing states, etc...) and you feel that you might fall into that group, you can still put your country below. This list will not be permanent to allow members come and go as they please.

Country	User
Template:Wendmark-Denkuku	ParrotMan (talk) 16:30, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Eshein	Ifgus (talk) 13:09, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Lantia	Nehalem501 (talk) 22:43, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Izaland	Izaland Terramorphing Committee (talk) 14:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Miuro	Kyunzi (talk) 03:43, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Neberly	Antoon (talk) 18:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Kojo	Leowezy (talk) 15:07, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Ugawa	Ominvar (talk) 15:38, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
Ogesten	Added by Discord Vote
Sanain Republic	Added by Discord Vote
Filo Islands	Added by Discord Vote
Canterra	Added by Discord Vote
Sapvuodma	Added by Discord Vote
Taira	Added by Discord Vote
Sephyra	GreenStumpyMonster (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Topic Backlog

For some topics y'all want to discuss, put them in the region below. For topics currently in discussion (or already have been discussed) check the latter portions of this page.

Topic	User	Additional Notes
Freedom of movement	Izaland Terramorphing Committee (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)	Visa, border checks etc
Educational exchanges	Izaland Terramorphing Committee (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)	Will EU have a student exchange program similar to Europe's Erasmus program?
Military	Izaland Terramorphing Committee (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)	Common army, military cooperation
Common Market	ParrotMan (talk) 15:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)	Will EUOIA have an open trading bloc as a result of damaged economies after "The Great War"?
Common Air Traffic Control Programme	ParrotMan (talk) 15:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)	Shall we have a common organization that manages Aircraft Movement, similar to Eurocontrol?
Flags & Symbols	ParrotMan (talk) 13:29, 28 February 2025 (UTC)	What flags and symbols will we choose to represent our union?
Country power	GreenStumpyMonster (talk) 20:11, 9 March 2025 (UTC)	Should we try to limit the extent of member power. Should one country own the HQ of this organisation and thus have much more power or not?
Institutional Seats	Ominvar (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)	Similar to GreenStumpyMonster's proposal: Where should the institutional seats of EUOIA be?

📢 Current Rounds of Discussion

Round #1:

Round opened on 28/02/25. Vote to be held on 07/12/25.

What Will EUOIA Stand For?

As brought up in the previous discussion, we might be a little doubtful on what EUOIA stands for. Should we keep it as the Eastern Ulethan Organisation of Independent Allies?

Acronym	Nominator	Nominator's Notes	Discussion
Eastern Ulethan Organisation of Independent Allies	[N/A]		For me this is still te preferred acronym. Not because it goes back a long time, but for some of the words. With 'organisation' i think of a partnership/agency/group. Also i like the 'independant' as for it's too soon to be part of a federation or even a union like the EU. That's because i don't know what other countries/territories will be part, how developed they are and what principles they have. I have no special preference for the 'allies'-part.Antoon (talk) 10:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Eastern Uletha Open Integration Agreement	Izaland Terramorphing Committee (talk) 15:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)	The Eastern Uletha Open Integration Agreement (EUOIA) is a regional intergovernmental organization aimed at fostering economic, political, and cultural cooperation among its member states. Established in the aftermath of the Great War, EUOIA was conceived as a framework for ensuring stability, economic prosperity, and regional integration across Eastern Uletha. EUOIA is built on three core principles: Open Cooperation – The agreement promotes voluntary participation and collaboration between sovereign nations while respecting national sovereignty. Economic Integration – Member states commit to reducing trade barriers, facilitating the movement of goods, services, and labor, and harmonizing economic policies where beneficial. Cultural and Scientific Exchange – The agreement encourages collaboration in education, research, and cultural initiatives to strengthen the bonds among Eastern Ulethan nations. Key Functions and Policies Single Market & Trade Facilitation – While not a full customs union, EUOIA simplifies trade procedures and fosters economic partnerships. Infrastructure Development – Members work together to improve regional transportation and digital networks. Environmental & Energy Cooperation – Joint initiatives focus on sustainable development and energy security. Mutual Recognition of Standards – In areas like education, certifications, and legal frameworks, member states align policies for easier cross-border mobility.	I like these core principles but I don't know about this acronym 🤔; I also suggest that you amend the first two words to "East Ulethan" as it is more grammatically correct in English :) - ParrotMan (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC) With 'Agreement' i'm more thinking of a document/statement rather then an organisation. Maybe because English isn't my first language. Also i'm not sure if the principles, functions and policies have anything to do with what the EUOIA stands for. I would have thought that to be a different discussion for a later time.Antoon (talk) 10:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
East Ulethan Organization for Intergovernmental Accord	ParrotMan (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC)	Hopefully this reflects Izaland's proposed core values as well.	The same as with 'Agreement' i feel that 'Accord' more refers to a document rather then an organisation. But that may well be my lack in the English language. Antoon (talk) 10:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC) Hmm... I can see how that might cause such an implication. I'll propose another one! ParrotMan (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
East Ulethan Organization for Intergovernmental Affairs	ParrotMan (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)	An iteration of my previous proposal	This one actually sounds the most professional and easy to understand. It is the most logical one, I think. GreenStumpyMonster (talk) 20:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC) "Intergovernmental Affairs" may seem a bit broad and vague, and "affairs" may not have much of a positive connotation. Ominvar (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Eastern Ulethan Organization of Intergovernmental Associates	ParrotMan (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)	Another iteration of my previous proposal Proposed by Ifgus of Eshein in the previous discussion.

What Sort of Union are We Aiming For?

What kind of union will EUOIA be? Will it be a strictly economic union, militaristic union, political union, or a sort-of mix?

Type of Union	Nominator	Nominator's Notes	Discussion
Supranationalism	ParrotMan (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC)	I really like Izaland's proposed core values of EUOIA and I hope that it sticks around, but I also want to see a more extensive approach to the EUOIA. Supranational Unions takes some power from member states to create the conditions that reflect extensive cooperation between member states, such as common markets, economic development, etc... Such unions would also allow member states to collectively have a louder voice on the international stage. Of course, if we choose this path, we should determine how far the powers of the supranational government stretches. However if we are planning on forming EUOIA suborganizations, I'd prefer that we take the Supranationalistic approach as it is much more effective accross the union.	I wonder if there should be a parliament for the EUOIA (just like the EU irl) that countries send delegates to? I think we should have only an economic/political union. Ominvar (talk) 21:36, 2 March 2025 (UTC) I would love to see that! But for now, let's determine if such an idea is viable 😅 ParrotMan (talk) 04:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Intergovernmental organization	Leowezy (talk) 13:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)	An intergovernmental organization, like the African Union or the Union of South American Nations, facilitates multilateral agreements between its members, but member states retain more autonomy. Since East Uletha encompasses many different cultural spheres with much looser historical connections than Europe, I think such an approach would be more realistic. Also, within such a framework individual countries are still able to work more closely together on a case-by-case-basis, the other way around is more difficult.Leowezy (talk) 13:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)	Maybe i can agree on Izaland's values, but will that go for all the members of EUOIA? Also i'm not sure if all countries have similar development ratings. To me it seems this discussion is a bit too soon. But should i have to choose between the two types for now, i choose this one. Antoon (talk) 18:56, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
A cooperation organisation	GreenStumpyMonster (talk) 20:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)	An organisation in which everyone in theory has an equal say but the member states are voted to have the power to veto on important issues. All members are required to cooperate and also take into interests of smaller states to retain their higher stataus. The countries will be encouraged to help each other with incentives from doing tasks like engaging in trading blocs though this is not necessary but does limit the privilege to be considered as a member state. This ensures some people can keep autonomy as they wish but limits their say if they aren't willing to collaborate. GreenStumpyMonster (talk) 20:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)	This sounds like the EU in its early days, a mix of an intergovernmental organization and supranationalism... I like it! ParrotMan (talk) 20:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

🗳️ Previous Discussions & Votes

Nothing in here yet lol

🤔 Concerns?

I am confused about some aspects of this post.

• Why exactly is a new post needed, if discussion here already proceeded substantially and the nature of the project has seemingly not changed much? I don't see any downside to why you would not continue there. If the page seems to bloated with old and irrelevant material, you can hide such parts using spoilers for example. But if we start a new post everytime we want to move the direction of a discussion, discussions will fizzle out more.
• Secondly, what is the difference between "Motion to begin EUOIA project" and "Motion to Take Over EUOIA as MSTR is No Longer Regularly Active"?
• Second and a half-ly, even if mstr is no longer active, how and why would someone "take over" a discussion on the forum - you could still just built upon the previous discussion, it doesn't seem to me like any of the material there is only accessible to mstr?
• And lastly, mappers are free to coordinate their bi- or multilateral cooperations anywhere they like, including Discord, the Metaverse, or per carrier pigeon. But it is an established rule that anything that affects other mappers or that claims some form of community-wide validity needs to be discussed and decided on in the forum. That is not a matter of efficiency or ease of use but of transparency and fostering a community where everyone feels (and is) heard.

Please address these points before going into further details. Thanks! Leowezy (talk) 07:33, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

I like the questions of Leowezy being answered too. Last week i received a message from Parrotman with an invitation to the Discord-server, as my territory of Neberly is in East Uletha. Parrotman highly encouraged me to join "as many other mappers use is as a medium for communication and coordination as Eastern Uletha becomes a busier place. For EUOIA stuff, we will continue to post stuff on the forum but most of our decision making will take place on Discord." I'm not a member yet of Discord and i'm not looking for another way to discuss topics in our 'corner of the world'. For me this forum works fine, also as it can be viewed by all Opengeofiction-members and not just the ones getting an invitation. Antoon (talk) 10:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Hey guys! Both of you raised very valid points and concerns as I have not clarified some aspects of this post, to which my reply below helps clarify some issues that have emerged.

To reply to Leowezy's questions:

• I did originally want to proceed with the "hiding elements in the previous discussion" idea, but I'm quite new to the wiki and that I didn't know how that would quite work out. If you are able to do that, feel free to delete this page and move everything to the other -- with the expandable feature -- thanks!
• "Motion to Begin EUOIA Project" is to just find a general consensus on whether or not if the majority of those in the region are interested and want to resurrect the EUOIA project; "Motion to Take Over EUOIA as MSTR is No Longer Regularly Active" is to clarify whether or not if we are looking to bring back EUOIA specifically or if we want to make another supranational union, dropping the EUOIA namesake.
• The whole point of a new forum (or per the first question a revived discussion on the old forum) is to rebuild from the ground up, as the needs and requirements of the EU region has fluctuated over the past few years of when the discussion kind of died out. We've seen new countries pop up in this region and recently we have collectively revised the history in the region (which is emerging on the wiki) and I have found that the current working EUOIA doesn't fit as well as it might've before... it might just be easier to scrap everything, and start over again... and recycling some elements from the previous discussion (such as flag ideas, etc...) are already being considered.
• Although I have considered carrier pigeon, wiki forums, and more recently Pictionary as a mode of communication over the topic of EUOIA, for the past few months I have grown a discord server that communicates about mapping, history, and commercial bits in the region and I thought it would be more convenient if we just communicated it through there. Obviously, I didn't consider the transparency and "putting the idea to the rest of the world" aspects until a few days ago when Izaland brought up this concern, which is why I'm pushing the previous Proposals for Communicating and Voting. Obviously, using Discord as the sole means of idea pitching, voting, and discussing is never going to happen, as I do agree that the community shouldn't be gatekept from collaborating in the EUOIA project. However, I do want to determine discord's role in this discussion (e.g., as an auxiliary for discussion?) for this post. However, I think that we can all agree that from now on, anything that is discussed outside of the wiki pertaining to EUOIA will have to be posted on the wiki anyways.

To reply to Antoon's question:

• Firstly, I want to apologize if you were feeling offended in any means -- that was not my intention. This invitation obviously occurred before Izaland's concerns. As per other concerns you have brought up, please read my reply to Leowezy.

Hope to hear from y'all soon! ParrotMan (talk) 15:55, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

To be honest i think i was a bit annoyed by the way the discord-server was brought on to me. But from the answers and the way this page is revised i take it every decision concerning the EUOIA or it's follow-up will (also) be discussed here in the open, and that's good enough for me. On the whole i quite enjoy the bits of mapping i do, still after over 10 years i'm part of this project. But also it isn't my main priority with things going on in private and work. So i only invest bits of time here and can't do much more then follow what others do and post here. It would be too much for me to follow or take part in discussions on different platforms. Therefore i'm curious to the ideas and discussion that come. Antoon (talk) 17:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I had a look at the old EUIOA page; in fact it not only contained an old (~up to 2024) discussion, but even a pre-2021 discussion which was moved to that page's talk page. This reminds me how long this topic has been going on... Facilitating and finalizing discussion on this topic has clearly been challenging.

May I propose the following before you start on the contentual discussion:

• I do see now how a new forum post might be needed...
  • but please remove the voting on wiki vs discord. Anyone is free to use discord or other means of communication to discuss ideas as they seem fit, but each proposal needs to be spelled out and eventually voted on on the wiki.
  • Please also remove the voting records from the discord discussion. It gives members who are not active on discord the wrong impression that formal parts of the decision making take place there. If there is a wide consensus on specific questions among so many members, it should be easy to reestablish that on-site. Also, I still don't clearly understand the difference between the first two motions, but it might not matter anyway.
  • I have highlighted the link to the past dicussion more prominently at the start of this forum post.
• I would advise (personal opinion) to structure the discussion process a little more clearly. If you already have a proposal agreed upon by a dozen members, spell it out clearly and give non-discord members the opportunity to comment and, if they like, declare they would like to join. Past discussions on EUOIA seem to have failed in my eyes because the discussion dragged on too long, getting deeper and deeper into the details of the inner workings of the union and the regulations it would set before anything concrete was finalised. To avoid this happening a third time, I would advise to start with a "bare minimum" of a union: name; type of union (economic, defense, ...); member states; structure for how further details will be added later (see next point).
• Once an EUOIA (or differently named union) and a list of participating mappers is established, you could then use the treaty system from the past discussion to flesh it out. That system has the benefit that individual member countries might be allowed to opt in or out of treaties as they which, reducing the complexity of discussion and voting by a lot. These treaties could range from defining the union's flag over freedom of movement and trade to defense clauses. But this discussion should probably only start after the "bare minimum" union is up and running, including a dedicated wiki article. Again, this is my personal opinion as a normal member, not as regional admin.

Best, Leowezy (talk) 18:50, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Will do! Thanks for the guidance! 😊 ParrotMan (talk) 23:05, 16 February 2025 (UTC)!

I have corrected the voting guidelines above, since they were not properly corrected to what Leowezy said. Official votes do not take place in full or in part on Discord. It is one thing to have a user commit their territory to the project in an unofficial platform, but official votes that are supposed to be open to the public take place only here for transparency, to be maximally inclusive of those who do not use other platforms, and to avoid confusion. If someone does not have a wiki account, I'm happy to get it set up. All they have to do is send me a message on the OGF messaging system. On another note, votes are typically open or two weeks to allow for participants that do not get online to check the wiki regularly. Cheers. — Alessa _(talk) 17:46, 3 March 2025 (UTC) Hello Alessa, I will extend the discussion period per your recommendation. However I'd really prefer if we also allow discord as an option for voting as it is more immediate and easier to vote there. There are ways to ensure transparency like providing names or screenshots (in the form of links as I do not want to clog the servers on OGF) and if that is your concern - ParrotMan (talk) 22:03, 3 March 2025 (UTC)