New diplomacy suggestions, can I get some opinions and discussion please

How would people feel about some changes in the diplomacy. I have few ideas that I would like to run through and get some comments:

I) No research clause.

This is a bit of a wierd thing, I can see some reasons to incorporate it, but mostly it is too clumsy even if you wish to use it. This is why I would like added options for it. Now it forbids all research, but how about a research max level?

For example, you could suggest a treaty, where "both empires research max. 100 000 pts worth." or "Our empire researches max. 50 000 pts worth."
That would make it more usable, as currently the "no research" is mainly a humiliation clause ("W3 pwn j00 n00b, agree to this treaty that prevents you from doing research or we destroy you").
I don't think such cap reinforcement would be hard to make in code. More difficult would be the limit setting. Preferably it would have similar interface as resources in gifts/trade so player could set it to any level, instead of few pre-set options.

If you wish to get really fancy, there would also be a possibility to "relative levels", like "empires can only research as many points as the other", or "max. 1.5 times the research points of other empire."

This could be used as a way to limit development reasonably, to stop arms races etc.

II) No intelligence clause.

This is much like the no research, but it suffers from (IMO) a massive fault: I think that even at full ban, you should be allowed to use defensive intelligence. If you have treaty with one side, which prevents intel, all other races will have a field day in your empire. In general, the "no intel" could also use set limits, and perhaps also a "no intel against us clause". (Enforcing these would be more problematic though. ) After all, what do they care if you use intel against someone else? As of now, when you see the no intel clause, it pretty much nullifes any interest the treaty might have. If there are only two empires in the galaxy, it makes sense, but when there are parties outside the treaty, that is when it comes problematic.

III) No treaty with others.
This is also problematic. Because the treaties are so different, there can be a big difference with them. A simple 5% trade treaty is hardly the same as full tech sharing, allowing colonization in same systems and sharing sensor vision.
Again, this would benefit from more versatility. I have two possible ideas:
1) Easier: "Can not have treaty with specific empire", and "can not have treaty with empire in war with other side". Maybe the later could use a few turn "mercy time", so you can actually choose to end the "worse" threaty (one with no treaty clause) intead of the "better" treaty when your friends start to fight one another.

2) Harder: Each treaty suggestion would be ranked, say on scale 1-5. 1 is the most basic (trade, general non-agression,tribute), while 5 is the really tied together stuff (share all tech, share sensor sight of cloaked ships). Then simply "can't have treaty higher then lev. 2 with others." The levels of each clause should be visible when making treaty of course. This would allow more basic treaties (simple trade&non-aggression) to be in power with others.

IV) Clear comments.
This is partly for people who make empires, partly for basic game. Sometimes it is hard to figure out what the other empire want's if the message is not specific. Adding a clear version in the end might reduce the "feel" of diplomacy, but would make it easier to understand.
Something like this(for random religious empire):
"The great chariot in the sky has honored you with request to see him, and we are honored to provide your the access to his castle. [We declare war and plan to exterminate you all]"

This example might be a bit extreme, but should get the point across.

SO, any comments, feedback, etc.?