Help us fix old issues

[Ouverte]

Issue 127: Option 1

[...]get rid of all the people too old to work any more[...]

I thought this meant like throwing them off the pensions list or firing them or something.
Never in a million years would i have thought that this was a euphemism for involuntary euthanasia, which is now my nations main cause of death. This should at least be made a bit more clear, because i truly never asked for this and have to refound my nation now.

[Luna Amore]

Issue 127: Option 1

[...]get rid of all the people too old to work any more[...]

I thought this meant like throwing them off the pensions list or firing them or something.
Never in a million years would i have thought that this was a euphemism for involuntary euthanasia, which is now my nations main cause of death. This should at least be made a bit more clear, because i truly never asked for this and have to refound my nation now.

Unintended consequences are a hallmark of this game. It seems pretty straightforward to me though. There are too many old people -> we need to get rid of the old people. Either means deport or kill.

There is an issue that reverses that decision though, so keep an eye out. As a sidenote, it isn't possible to refound your nation.

[Schiltzberg]

Issue #141 The Issue:

A group of 'concerned compatriots' (Citizens Raging Against the Police) have protested against the enormous numbers of policemen enforcing the law on their daily lives.

"Have" should be "has" because "group" is the subject and "of concerned compatriots" is the prepositional phrase. There is only one group, so you need to use the singular form of the word "have," so "has." This makes more sense if you take out the prepositional phrase, which distracts from the subject, and you can see that it says, "A group have protested..." which doesn't make sense.

[Christian Democrats]

Issue #51, Streaker In Snooker Game Fiasco

After a sixty year old man with psoriasis streaked past cameras and millions of sports fans during the snooker league playoffs, protesters have called for tougher action.

The description should be changed to say "sixty-year-old man."

[Luna Amore]

Issue #51, Streaker In Snooker Game Fiasco

After a sixty year old man with psoriasis streaked past cameras and millions of sports fans during the snooker league playoffs, protesters have called for tougher action.

The description should be changed to say "sixty-year-old man."

Fixed.

[Sucrati]

I didn't want to gravedig the Judicial Review on Trial issue thread. But I did have a suggestion, a third option that let a nation completely privatize marriage and/or get government out of marriage. I just got the issue the other day but I dismissed it because I didn't like either of the choices.

[option]"Here's a suggestion," @@RANDOMNAME@@, a well known anti-government activist chimed in, "why don't we just remove government from the equation of marriage? After all, what right does the government have in saying who can and cannot get married, as long as it's consensual?"
[effect]people around the nation start marrying everything from multiple partners to inanimate objects
[stats]political freedoms decrease, civil rights increase

I just felt that the choices were rather limited and those who were more or less lenient toward libertarian ideologies would be able to choose an option that coincided with their beliefs. But, it would also have the effect of what people fear who are for a pro-government involvement in marriage.

I hope I'm not intruding or stepping on anyone's toes with this Suggestions would be great to hear.

[Schiltzberg]

What about my correction at a few posts ago? I don't think anybody saw it.

[Luna Amore]

What about my correction at a few posts ago? I don't think anybody saw it.

Collective nouns can be treated either way. It's an American/British difference.

[Sanctaria]

What about my correction at a few posts ago? I don't think anybody saw it.

Collective nouns can be treated either way. It's an American/British difference.

And Irish!

*mutters something about 800 years*

[Luna Amore]

Collective nouns can be treated either way. It's an American/British difference.

And Irish!

*mutters something about 800 years*

British, Irish, what's the difference?

[Christian Democrats]

Hooray! My issue has been accepted. #452: Foetal Furore

There's only one thing I'd tweak -- changing "prohibit their citizens" to "prohibit citizens" in the second option.

[Trotterdam]

Hooray! My issue has been accepted. #452: Foetal Furore

Huh, I've never seen a trace of #449, #450, or #451...

Would you be so kind as to post it in the spoiler thread? Or are you going to insist on waiting until someone else gets it?

[Christian Democrats]

Hooray! My issue has been accepted. #452: Foetal Furore

Huh, I've never seen a trace of #449, #450, or #451...

Would you be so kind as to post it in the spoiler thread? Or are you going to insist on waiting until someone else gets it?

The latter. I'm sure more than a few nations will receive my new issue during the next update. It entered the rotation three hours ago.

[Schiltzberg]

What about my correction at a few posts ago? I don't think anybody saw it.

Collective nouns can be treated either way. It's an American/British difference.

Oh, sorry, I didn't know that.

[Celseon]

Issue 365: "A Busload of Worry", Option 1, Phrasing Revision

Original:

"This is disgusting, and I shouldn't have to see it," pines prominent homosexual, @NAME@, for once abandoning stereotype to be seen without feather boa, "@NATION@ should be a nation intolerant of intolerance, and what could be more intolerant than this? Have you any idea what damage this fundamentalist advertisement will do to young people struggling to come to terms with their sexuality? We should ban this ad, and instead educate children to be free about their sexual preference, without deference to religious or cultural orthodoxy."

If the intent is to convey a stereotype that homosexuals are never seen without feather boas is being violated by this person's attire the statement should probably read something like:

"This is disgusting, and I shouldn't have to see it," pines prominent homosexual, @NAME@, for once abandoning the stereotype by being seen without a feather boa, "@NATION@ should be a nation intolerant of intolerance, and what could be more intolerant than this? Have you any idea what damage this fundamentalist advertisement will do to young people struggling to come to terms with their sexuality? We should ban this ad, and instead educate children to be free about their sexual preference, without deference to religious or cultural orthodoxy."

Using "to be" in the place of "by being" suggests the stereotype is to never be seen with feather boas rather than never being seen without them.

[Bears Armed]

NO. 453, Parliamentary Playground

The Issue

After a WhoTube video featuring MPs in an outright brawl went viral, foreign commentators now regularly mock the hijinks in the @@DENOMYNOUN@@ Parliament. In order to save face, several MPs have tried to reign in the legislature's embarrassing behavior.

Should be "rein" rather than "reign".

[Luna Amore]

NO. 453, Parliamentary Playground

The Issue

After a WhoTube video featuring MPs in an outright brawl went viral, foreign commentators now regularly mock the hijinks in the @@DENOMYNOUN@@ Parliament. In order to save face, several MPs have tried to reign in the legislature's embarrassing behavior.

Should be "rein" rather than "reign".

Swore I fixed that before...

Fixed now.

[Trotterdam]

I got #452 even though I'm pretty sure I had already outlawed abortion. I thought I'd been careful about avoiding anything that even hints at relegalizing it since the last ruling.

Also, checking my dictionary says that "furore" is valid as a British alternative spelling but it still looks weird to me. I can't recall having ever seen that spelling before, and #434 (which, incidentally, was my previous issue) uses "furor".

[Sanctaria]

I got #452 even though I'm pretty sure I had already outlawed abortion. I thought I'd been careful about avoiding anything that even hints at relegalizing it since the last ruling.

Also, checking my dictionary says that "furore" is valid as a British alternative spelling but it still looks weird to me. I can't recall having ever seen that spelling before, and #434 (which, incidentally, was my previous issue) uses "furor".

I edited it so I'm going to use British English.

Checked the validity and it's definitely only going to those that have abortion - or at least haven't outlawed it. Checked your stats and abortion is set to legal.

[Trotterdam]

Hmm. Does #136 option 2 count as abortion being legal? It probably shouldn't since it's banning it in 99% of all cases, and the situations that do allow it to apply aren't ones a woman will ever deliberately cause.

[Sanctaria]

Hmm. Does #136 option 2 count as abortion being legal? It probably shouldn't since it's banning it in 99% of all cases, and the situations that do allow it to apply aren't ones a woman will ever deliberately cause.

I'm not going to give out the results of options.

[Trotterdam]

...Seriously? Seriously? I'm not asking about the exact stats, I'm asking whether an issue that's supposed to ban abortion actually bans abortion. If it doesn't, that's stupid and needs to be fixed.

It's not like life-threatening situations allowing an exception to laws that hold otherwise is something unusual or specific to abortion. Ever heard of good samaritan laws? We don't say that breaking and entering is legal in our nation just because it might be necessary if there's a fire in your house.

...On that note, I don't think we currently have an issue about actual good samaritan laws in the game. Well, there's one idea for whoever wants to pick it up.

[The Misconception]

That option doesn't affect civil rights. You're obviously reading the trend line wrong, and it'll be another issue that caused that change.

Well, I have only completed two issues in the last three/four days (not counting the one an hour ago) so the list of suspects is rather short as to what caused the change (my second issue choice also lowered it by 2 points, but that one I rather suspected would happen).

I am pretty sure it does effect civil rights, I did look online on another users choice results and their effects page (they had reported the same result, only they lost three points).

Two points in not a huge deal, I can eventually get it back; but you might want to double-check that it is not unexpectedly effecting civil rights somehow.

The website i check for results reported i'd get a drop in my civil rights on choosing option 1 so i'm choosing option 3 (which instead increase corrption by 1 but atleast doesn't increase taxes or supposedly affect my civil rights). We will se..

[Luna Amore]

...Seriously? Seriously? I'm not asking about the exact stats, I'm asking whether an issue that's supposed to ban abortion actually bans abortion. If it doesn't, that's stupid and needs to be fixed.

It's not like life-threatening situations allowing an exception to laws that hold otherwise is something unusual or specific to abortion. Ever heard of good samaritan laws? We don't say that breaking and entering is legal in our nation just because it might be necessary if there's a fire in your house.

...On that note, I don't think we currently have an issue about actual good samaritan laws in the game. Well, there's one idea for whoever wants to pick it up.

Bans are binary. So if something sets extreme restrictions rather than outright bans it, it's unbanned in the game's eyes.

[Sanctaria]

...Seriously? Seriously? I'm not asking about the exact stats, I'm asking whether an issue that's supposed to ban abortion actually bans abortion. If it doesn't, that's stupid and needs to be fixed.

I make it a policy not to confirm or deny anything in the effect line.

But when you originally mentioned it should be fixed, I did look at it, thanksverymuch. It's consistent and no correction was needed.