# New map act **URL:** \ **Category:** Kelssek Legislative Records\ **Tags:** house-and-senate\ **Created:** [February 6, 2005, 12:52am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526 "2005-02-06T00:52:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/user_avatar/forum.theeastpacific.com/packilvania/32/10499_2.png) [@packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/packilvania)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 12:52am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/1 "2005-02-06T00:52:18Z")
Seeing as the map is becoming cluttered with inactive nations. Seeing as active nations actively seek to conquer inactive nations. Seeing as mainly valuable coastal and island plots are being squatted by inactive nations. This act will change the Map law top add: “Any nation wanting to claim a sovereing plot will be able to do so only AFTER the accumulation of 50 \ posts on the offsite forum. Any nation claiming a plot before the indicated 50 posts will be given garrison status only, and if such post numbers are not met in a reasonable time, the garrison status will also be stricken.” In additon to the limiting of plot claiming, a commitee will be formed to investigate every nation currently on the map to judge if they have become inactive, and if found as so, and the nation in question was not at one time a major contributor to the EP as a whole, they will be stricken from the map, and their plots opened up for free claiming. ---
**Author:** ![Milesandia](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@Milesandia](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Milesandia)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 1:18am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/2 "2005-02-06T01:18:52Z")
The demands are being made to add an official date of cut-off/grandfathered nation status. Such nations as Oddball Ned (or whatever they’re called) and others like them should be added. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Nouveau\_Bretagne](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/b487fb/32.png) [@Nouveau\_Bretagne](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Nouveau_Bretagne)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 1:20am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/3 "2005-02-06T01:20:53Z")
The only issue I have there is a flooding of posts…someone new will want that plot RIGHT NOW BOY HOWDY and launches 50 useless posts on the board. But other than that, it’s certainly a good idea. ---
**Author:** ![packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/user_avatar/forum.theeastpacific.com/packilvania/32/10499_2.png) [@packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/packilvania)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 2:08am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/4 "2005-02-06T02:08:36Z")
well if THAT happens, then they get booted from the forum under the ‘Anti Spam’ Law- ---
**Author:** ![Nouveau\_Bretagne](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/b487fb/32.png) [@Nouveau\_Bretagne](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Nouveau_Bretagne)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 2:36am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/5 "2005-02-06T02:36:08Z")
Ah, of course. Alrighty then. ---
**Author:** ![Kelssek](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/user_avatar/forum.theeastpacific.com/kelssek/32/11532_2.png) [@Kelssek](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Kelssek)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 3:00am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/6 "2005-02-06T03:00:12Z")
Sheesh, if you wanted them gone just say so… I see no need to formalise the process. I’ll take off the inactives next update. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Wachovia\_Coalition](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/da6949/32.png) [@The\_Wachovia\_Coalition](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/The_Wachovia_Coalition)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 3:39am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/7 "2005-02-06T03:39:14Z")
While I understand some small part of the concern that brough this about, I think it’s uncalled for. We have more than enough spaces on the board to welcome new people in with and as Kelssek points out we need to welcome new people not put up barriers. Please folks, don’t pass this. ---
**Author:** ![Howard\_Dean](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/h/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Howard\_Dean](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Howard_Dean)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 3:51am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/8 "2005-02-06T03:51:51Z")
Wheres the grandfather clause for those who had this done prior to the legislation? Sayeth the one with a postcount lower than 50. edit: err… equal to 50 ---
**Author:** ![packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/user_avatar/forum.theeastpacific.com/packilvania/32/10499_2.png) [@packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/packilvania)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 4:43am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/9 "2005-02-06T04:43:52Z")
it is assumed that they are that way. The EP automaticaly grandfathers nations, unless otherwise stated. this may be one of those resolutions that doesnt pass unanimously! ---
**Author:** ![Milesandia](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@Milesandia](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Milesandia)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 6:07am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/10 "2005-02-06T06:07:18Z")
I think I’m going to have to agree with Kelssek and others on this. It just don’t make good policy. ---
**Author:** ![packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/user_avatar/forum.theeastpacific.com/packilvania/32/10499_2.png) [@packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/packilvania)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2005, 6:52pm UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/11 "2005-02-06T18:52:17Z")
so it is 3 to 3… if it doesnt move by monday, FPS gets to make the final call… I think technically its my call, but that wouldnt be fare now would it 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Fish\_Island](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/f/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Fish\_Island](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Fish_Island)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 4:09am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/12 "2005-02-07T04:09:45Z")
Personally I think that if they post one or more IC posts they should be given land… I.E. Something besides I claim this here land… Something about their IC nation and action in an RP. ---
**Author:** ![packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/user_avatar/forum.theeastpacific.com/packilvania/32/10499_2.png) [@packilvania](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/packilvania)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2005, 7:11pm UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/13 "2005-02-07T19:11:05Z")
I see what you mean, Pompistan has thouroughly inpressed me. But I dont want the nations that go “I want this” and never post again. Maybe if this was changed to something along the lines of: Adding in a review time for nation plot approvals. ---
**Author:** ![Infinite\_Loop](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/848f3c/32.png) [@Infinite\_Loop](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/u/Infinite_Loop)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2005, 4:31am UTC](https://forum.theeastpacific.com/t/new-map-act/9526/14 "2005-02-08T04:31:21Z")
Certain nations I can see getting to remian on teh map perminantly, at least their main plot, conservative cajuns I see as our New Orleasns, so I see it remainin, otherwise, Perhaps nations can be say Pink until they reach citizen status (50 posts) then they get their color.