We appreciate the feedback from everyone. After reviewing all of these very valid concerns, we were compelled to go back over the information we’d collected in this case and carefully weighed it again against the precedents set in the past. Ultimately, we felt we had no other recourse than to reverse the name change, the key factor being that during this re-investigation we learned that the KenZoku alliance was created several months before the BoB alliance leadership switched hands. That being the case, the name change request was not submitted within a timely manner, as it had been in the legacy cases we were holding up as examples.As I said in my point 1 yesterday, if it was not a special circumstance I have no problem with it. Since it appears the other cases were different then KenZoku to BoBR, then I support the camp of not allowing the change. The ex-BoB corps wanted a quick alliance so they joined their backup Alliance KenZoku instead of making a brand new one, so they are stuck with KenZoku.
We will be contacting the CSM for input regarding our naming policies.
I still think its a tempest in a teacup. LOL