Help us fix old issues

[Steelfeather Rapture 2]

Issue #1333 ("Married With Benefits?") has arisen for Steelfeather Rapture 2. I don't remember ever instating a citizenship exam in this nation. Could someone check the validity on this?

Issue #1321 ("Who Wants to Know a Millionaire?") has arisen for Steelfeather Rapture 2. This needs a validity check so that it doesn't arise in nations with negative gambling.

[Haganham]

I just got 778, the fourth option talks about my hideous income inequality, but it's 3.9, which is smol

[Lemsrow]

First time browsing this part of the forum to give my opinion on Option 4 of Issue No. 23.

Option 4’s speaker states “Can’t we just legislate so that everybody in @@NAME@@ uses an @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ definition of pi? Let’s just say pi is 3.2. I mean, that’s true anyway for a given curvature of space-time. Just say 3.2, and leave it at that, eh?”

If I recall correctly. Rounding 3.14 to 3.2 is essentially incorrect, no? Rounding to the tenths leads to 3, cancelling the decimal zero, and rounding to the hundredths is 3.1.

So is this an intentional thing? Or was it by accident? With the title “Minister for Mathematical Certainty”, is this something like “Are you certain your math is correct?” or something like that?

[Bears Armed]

Rounding to the tenths leads to 3, cancelling the decimal zero

At least one of the metal vessels that King Solomon had made for his Temple in Jerusalem reportedly [KJV] was "one cubit across and hree around", for pi=3, and Solomon was noted for his wisdom...

[Verdant Haven]

First time browsing this part of the forum to give my opinion on Option 4 of Issue No. 23.

Option 4’s speaker states “Can’t we just legislate so that everybody in @@NAME@@ uses an @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ definition of pi? Let’s just say pi is 3.2. I mean, that’s true anyway for a given curvature of space-time. Just say 3.2, and leave it at that, eh?”

If I recall correctly. Rounding 3.14 to 3.2 is essentially incorrect, no? Rounding to the tenths leads to 3, cancelling the decimal zero, and rounding to the hundredths is 3.1.

So is this an intentional thing? Or was it by accident? With the title “Minister for Mathematical Certainty”, is this something like “Are you certain your math is correct?” or something like that?

Very intentional. It is a reference to a fool by the name of Edward Goodwin, who in 1897 managed to get the legislature of the state of Indiana to vote on a bill to legally define "mathematical truth" as Pi being 3.2 (mostly so he could sell textbooks with his own, extremely incorrect, theories). He duped the state house into unanimously passing the bill, but thankfully that led to widespread realization of what it was, and the resulting public derision caused the state senate to shoot it down with the help of a math professor who came in to explain to the politicians that math doesn't work like that.

[The Serendipitous]

hi guys

in issue 1036 "when in maxtopia" the premise is worded in a confusing way. it took me a lot of tries to read it correctly. to me it sounds like "... won the favor of [the maxtopian government and locals, international media, as well as some of the mainstays of serendipitousian media], have lambasted you for it" when it should be ""... won the favor of [the maxtopian government and locals], [international media, as well as some of the mainstays of serendipitousian media], have lambasted you for it".

i dont know if this makes sense and its not that big of a deal but its a little bit confusing and would probably be better if it was fixed.

thanks

[Cataleenia]

In issue #1181 (Jolly Jousting Japes), option 3 says

Jousting could very well be a boon for the economy.

When (I think) it should say

Jousting could very well be a boom for the economy.

[Charoskania]

In issue #1181 (Jolly Jousting Japes), option 3 says

Jousting could very well be a boon for the economy.

When (I think) it should say

Jousting could very well be a boom for the economy.

Boon sounds more correct, as it is defined a timely benefit

[Cataleenia]

Boon sounds more correct, as it is defined a timely benefit

Yeah that does make more sense now

[Newland City]

Yesterday, I got issue 236, which describes my nation's "Liberal Marriage Laws" and has option 2 talking about divorce as if it's a regular thing... Despite the fact I have the "Permanent Marriage" policy.

Not a huge deal; I've been trying to get rid of that policy ever since I re-founded my nation, but I still think it's strange that I got this issue. Is this a bug or a miswritten validity requirement?

[Laka Strolistandiler]

Got #566 Drive My Car, chose the first option which increased the fines and gave the police more ability to collect them yet it somehow increased Poor income without reducing Rich income or anything else… How? Like shouldn’t increase in fines lower the people’s income instead of increasing it? Or is there something I do not understand here?

[Steelfeather Rapture 2]

Issue #632 ("Dying for a Kiss") should have a minimum crime rate to occur. Even a murder rate of 0.1% would establish enough homicide for the purpose. It's best at low rates of homicide, I'd say. When murder is rare enough to be shocking and common enough that official statistics are still admitting it happens, that's when the issue should arise.

That or it needs a "just increase policing" option. Arrest the killer, increase protections, because if honor killings can still occur obviously the crime rate isn't low enough yet. That would better protect civil rights as well!

[Zinertia]

Issue No. 1199, Locked Down, features references to a smartphone manufacturer named 'Pear Inc'. and one of the response options is from its CEO. Is that a feasible circumstance in socialist states?

[Chocolatistan]

I just got Issue #26: Compulsory Organ Harvesting Proposed, but I already had the Compulsory Organ Harvesting policy.

A short while ago, I got issue #526: Any Idea Where the Law Is, Bessie? The 4th option talked as if I had banned guns or something, but I had (and still have) the Gun Ownership policy.

These Issues to not seem to correctly recognise my policies already in place.

[Aryax]

In issue 329 ("Military Uniforms Under Scrutiny", this option

“The solution is not through technology, but through religion,” declares zealot @@RANDOMNAME@@ as she waves a censer under your nose. “Why not make all soldiers fight in the name of a major religion, and give them priestly robes while they’re at it?”

still shows up for nations with the Atheism policy.

[Steelfeather Rapture 2]

In issue 329 ("Military Uniforms Under Scrutiny", this option

“The solution is not through technology, but through religion,” declares zealot @@RANDOMNAME@@ as she waves a censer under your nose. “Why not make all soldiers fight in the name of a major religion, and give them priestly robes while they’re at it?”

still shows up for nations with the Atheism policy.

I am not a mod, but I think the official ruling for those is that such speakers are dissidents trying to end the nation's atheism policy.

[Ozeanreisende]

in issue #539 titles all my bits are belong to you in option 4 where a lot of policy stuff happens i noticed that public healthcare goes quite a bit up but that dosent make much sense as it bans a lot of tech which hospitals heavily rely on to treat patients so i feel like the effects should be negative or not so much of an increase
/not a doctor

[Steelfeather Rapture 1]

Issue #932 ("Teacher’s Past Blown Wide Open") uses the effect line "attendance of fathers at PTA meetings is at an all-time high" on option #2. This effect line could use an update for nations with vat reproduction policies, since fathers are highly unusual in such nations.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

Would it be a good idea to give “#491 Friends, @@DEMONYMNOUNPLURAL@@, Countrymen, Lend Me Your Ears“ more portions instead of “give, don’t give, do something wierd.”? Like, for example, naturalization through military service.

[The Pacific Northwest]

I just got issue 1173 and it struck me as odd considering I’m pretty sure I don’t have a military. I’m pretty sure I got rid of it completely awhile ago, I’ve had negative defense funding for months and I did get a banner for eschewing it entirely when it dropped to zero. I don’t remember getting any issues mentioning military anything since, although it’s possible I overlooked some.

I don’t think psyops is strictly a military thing and option 4 is all about just claiming I have a psychic army to scare other countries, but stuff like: “just imagine the potential strategic advantages on the battlefield”, “Set aside all conventional arms, and train your army to fight purely with psychic force”, and especially “It’s time that we clamped down on ridiculous superstitions, and purged all magical thinking from our military! Any soldier caught spouting mystical mumbo-jumbo should be dishonorably discharged immediately”, all seem to heavily imply I have a functional military already, and I’m fairly certain I don’t.

Is there a way to check if a tiny army has been operating behind my back all this time for this issue to be aimed at? It doesn’t make much sense for me to have received it otherwise.

[Krogon]

I'm not sure what issue # I got, since I already answered the issue, but I got the issue about angry businessmen asking for Capitalism to be reinstated. Two of the options were for Capitalism to be reinstated, while the other option, the only one available that kept Socialism, not only kept Socialism but also canceled protests, as I found out after reading the effect "the words 'private' and 'enterprise' must never appear in the same sentence." I've been playing Nationstates for many years now, so I'm fully aware the decision cannot be taken back, however I do think the issue definitely needs clarifying. If not clarifying, it at least needs an option that still keeps Socialism while not canceling an entirely separate policy.

[Newland City]

it at least needs an option that still keeps Socialism while not canceling an entirely separate policy.

Such an option exists in the form of the "Dismiss Issue" option

[Inclusive Conservatives 1]

Issue #1279 ("Crate Work, Plane and Simple") shouldn't happen for nations with sufficiently bad economies. A nation with an economy score of 0 like IC1 is surely a third world country itself.

Someone should write an issue for nations with extremely bad economies that lets them cut foreign aid with unusually little backlash on the grounds that their economy is too fragile to be propping up the economies of other nations.

Editing 2023/01/02 since mine is still the last post in the thread:
#192 ("Coup d’Etat in @@NAME@@!") references rule by rich people in its first option, the one that accepts the coup. If the issue occurs in a hardcore socialist nation, I recommend that it should have different text.

[Trump Almighty]

On issue 163 (about ballot measures, I believe), I chose option 2 and got this as my result

Referenda are banned by law and the Parliament has absolute control of the legislative process.

I feel like this doesn’t apply to all forms of government since not all countries refer to their legislative body as a Parliament, mine included. While I don’t think it’s that big of an issue (no pun intended), I believe the wording should be changed to “legislature.” Maybe also change “legislative” to “law making” in order to make the wording less repetitive. But that’s just my opinion

[Verdant Haven]

On issue 163 (about ballot measures, I believe), I chose option 2 and got this as my result

Referenda are banned by law and the Parliament has absolute control of the legislative process.

I feel like this doesn’t apply to all forms of government since not all countries refer to their legislative body as a Parliament, mine included. While I don’t think it’s that big of an issue (no pun intended), I believe the wording should be changed to “legislature.” Maybe also change “legislative” to “law making” in order to make the wording less repetitive. But that’s just my opinion

While there are some contexts where one might assume "parliament" to be a proper name, it is also a neutral term for a legislative body, as is "congress" (which also gets used in issues). Certain terms simply have to be usable for issue writing, in order to permit basic functionality of language, and this is that sort of thing. This is no different than the leeway that also is allowed for issues with regards to specific government job titles. The use of titles like "minister" or "secretary," are allowed to be made up regardless of what people use internally. Similarly, judicial systems, in nations that haven't completely removed them, are assumed to work in certain ways, have certain levels of courts, and certain operating principles. The names of government departments, military ranks, cities and towns, and numerous other elements of a nation are all freely made up for the purpose of issues, because there is no possible way, ever, to make them match each individual nation's RP.

Basically, I would suggest that it is best to think of your RP as a separate entity from the text of issues. I've got a rather in-depth RP government structure developed myself, with a judiciary head of government, and with a very specifically laid-out executive branch to carry out state duties. When issues arrive though? Doesn't matter - those are their own thing.