Yeah I really don't like the way the alignment system is sounding. Good/Neutral/Evil should be a personal POV that changes depending upon who you're talking to. Even the bad guy is the hero of his own story.

I think alignment should be something more like allowing the players to form alliances and then be identified with the morality of the alliance in the same way alignment seems to be intended. Opposing alliances will of course consider one another evil. There could be a way for tribes to set restrictions. ie. Check the box that says 'Reject alliances with foes.'. Then whoever your tribe marks as a foe either excludes any tribe from allying with you who also allies with them, or it break alliances to those who are currently allies and decide to ally with your foes.

There should be as many organizations of players as the players see fit to classify themselves. Rather than simply good/neutral/evil, which is a fraudulent system imo.

EDIT: In a good/neutral/evil system. Evil can't be too evil (you can call yourself evil but we're going to add a bunch of rules that requires you to behave), and good is only as good as they are restricted from being evil (which makes it the new neutral).