How many times...

[Serrenissima]

...do I need to nationalize the newspapers? Why can't they stay nationalized?

...do I need to ban elections? It seems somehow, the people keep having stealth elections and thinking they have more political freedom than I give them. Just because we allow freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, have strong transparency laws, doesn't mean you get any say in anything I decide for you! When I told you those agitating for elections were to be shot last time, I thought you got the point!

...do I need to introduce public health care? I get it, I'm mostly small-L libertarian. But I believe in certain "equality of opportunity" positions, and so you get your public healthcare and education. But it seems over time, with enough small-government decisions unrelated to health care, they eventually forget that I have public health care and I'm stuck instituting it all over again.

Likewise, why do occasionally have only idiot choices available to me? On the one hand, there are PETA animal rights types advocating all meat, leather, and furs are wrong and should be banned. On the other, they're advocating I let them skin and eat all the endangered species. I'm a benevolent despotic autocrat. Both those people would have been shot.

[Valrifell]

You'll get this issues because NationStates offers many chances to change your mind on a particular issue, most do this with follow-up, but some you'll just get the issue again.

[Singaporean Transhumans]

There's something called a "dismiss" button. Use it.

[Golgothastan]

...do I need to nationalize the newspapers? Why can't they stay nationalized?

Because you have a publishing industry, basically. This issue can be looked at it, but my explanation would be that because your nation has private industry and a publishing industry, even if you nationalise the newspapers people will set up their own private ones, which will then become unsuccessful all over again.

...do I need to ban elections? It seems somehow, the people keep having stealth elections and thinking they have more political freedom than I give them. Just because we allow freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, have strong transparency laws, doesn't mean you get any say in anything I decide for you! When I told you those agitating for elections were to be shot last time, I thought you got the point!

Elections are banned in your nation.

...do I need to introduce public health care? I get it, I'm mostly small-L libertarian. But I believe in certain "equality of opportunity" positions, and so you get your public healthcare and education. But it seems over time, with enough small-government decisions unrelated to health care, they eventually forget that I have public health care and I'm stuck instituting it all over again.

You do have public healthcare in your nation.

Likewise, why do occasionally have only idiot choices available to me? On the one hand, there are PETA animal rights types advocating all meat, leather, and furs are wrong and should be banned. On the other, they're advocating I let them skin and eat all the endangered species. I'm a benevolent despotic autocrat. Both those people would have been shot.

Many issues have extreme choices: that's always been a feature of NS issues. What you consider to be an "idiot" choice may be quite reasonable to others.

[Trotterdam]

Because NationStates only has so many issues. Eventually it's going to run out of new problems facing your nation and ask you to reconsider your opinion on a matter you've already addressed.

Also, because for some subjects, there currently isn't a dedicated issue to reverse them. For example, there's currently no issue for de-nationalizing newspapers if they're already nationalized, so the only way to give you an opportunity to change your mind about that is to rerun the issue asking if you want to nationalize them and seeing if you pick a different option from last time.

Similarly reanswering an issue the same way can let you strengthen a position or devote even more funds to it (okay, you have healthcare, but do you want MORE healthcare?).

If you don't like any of the options on an issue or if you think your nation is already handling the subject exactly right, not too much and not too little, then dismiss it.

we allow freedom of speech,

I'm a benevolent despotic autocrat. Both those people would have been shot.

Err, I don't think you quite understand what "freedom of speech" is...

Many issues have extreme choices: that's always been a feature of NS issues. What you consider to be an "idiot" choice may be quite reasonable to others.

Also, some of us play evil or crazy nations and like picking absurd choices on purpose

[Undivulged Principles]

I seem to recall there is an amendment in the US about abortion. Why are there still anti and pro-abortion lobbies out there? Nations evolve so questions that may have been answered by one generation will tend to be brought up again by a later one. Even if the nation in question is a dictatorship.

[Great Scourge]

I seem to recall there is an amendment in the US about abortion. Why are there still anti and pro-abortion lobbies out there? Nations evolve so questions that may have been answered by one generation will tend to be brought up again by a later one. Even if the nation in question is a dictatorship.

An amendment? No, there isn't. Not if you mean the national constitution, at least.