Help us fix old issues

[Trotterdam]

#709 5 appeared on a nation with the Atheism policy, and did not repeal that policy when chosen?

[The Free Joy State]

#709 5 appeared on a nation with the Atheism policy, and did not repeal that policy when chosen?

I've amended it. #709 is no longer available to atheist nations, but the lack of repeal is intentional.

[Trotterdam]

#709 is no longer available to atheist nations,

The entire issue? Isn't that overkill? Only the crazy option mentions religion.

[The Free Joy State]

#709 is no longer available to atheist nations,

The entire issue? Isn't that overkill? Only the crazy option mentions religion.

Without that option, there's no option to refuse to provide prostheses and the issue would feel incomplete.

[Zyrkon]

#619.1:
“The Dead Ocean Scrolls clearly state that us Violetists are the real owners of this land!” declares the Grand Purplmistress of Violetism as she makes threatening gestures towards you and the other leaders. “We deserve to be able to practice our hum, err, animal sacrifices, so why can’t we go along, take the land, and do it there? No one else is as cra- I mean, unique as we are. The only thing we ask are only a few million shields to build our temple, and everything else will be taken care of.”

(bolded)
Is it missing an "e" or is this the intended spelling?

[The Free Joy State]

#619.1:
“The Dead Ocean Scrolls clearly state that us Violetists are the real owners of this land!” declares the Grand Purplmistress of Violetism as she makes threatening gestures towards you and the other leaders. “We deserve to be able to practice our hum, err, animal sacrifices, so why can’t we go along, take the land, and do it there? No one else is as cra- I mean, unique as we are. The only thing we ask are only a few million shields to build our temple, and everything else will be taken care of.”

(bolded)
Is it missing an "e" or is this the intended spelling?

I've added an "e". Thanks for reporting it.

[Klorgia1]

Option 1 of issue 1,233:

“I didn’t really want to go on the show,” says Wesley Kennett, still shaking a little. “But this producer kept saying that my son didn’t have the same big ugly nose as me, and then after the DNA test they convinced my partner she’d be happier with my best friend. I’m lucky I survived my suicide attempt, but now I’m better I know who I should be blaming... That show ruined my whole life! Muckraking shows that exploit pain need to be banned, and replaced by shows that emphasise harmony and reconciliation.”


Fixed version: “I didn’t really want to go on the show,” says Wesley Kennett, still shaking a little. “But this producer kept saying that my son didn’t have the same big ugly nose as me, and then after the DNA test they convinced my partner she’d be happier with my best friend. I’m lucky I survived my suicide attempt, but now that I'm better I know who's to blame...That show ruined my whole life! Muckraking shows that exploit pain need to be banned, and replaced by shows that emphasise harmony and reconciliation.”

[The Free Joy State]

Option 1 of issue 1,233:

“I didn’t really want to go on the show,” says Wesley Kennett, still shaking a little. “But this producer kept saying that my son didn’t have the same big ugly nose as me, and then after the DNA test they convinced my partner she’d be happier with my best friend. I’m lucky I survived my suicide attempt, but now I’m better I know who I should be blaming... That show ruined my whole life! Muckraking shows that exploit pain need to be banned, and replaced by shows that emphasise harmony and reconciliation.”


Fixed version: “I didn’t really want to go on the show,” says Wesley Kennett, still shaking a little. “But this producer kept saying that my son didn’t have the same big ugly nose as me, and then after the DNA test they convinced my partner she’d be happier with my best friend. I’m lucky I survived my suicide attempt, but now that I'm better I know who's to blame...That show ruined my whole life! Muckraking shows that exploit pain need to be banned, and replaced by shows that emphasise harmony and reconciliation.”

Pretty sure that's a UK/US grammar difference. It reads perfectly fine.

No change needed.

[Hediacrana]

I got #87, and noted the second speaker's first name was female ('Melania') but the pronoun used was 'his.' Is that supposed to be the case?

“Burning should be allowed for everything! Down with the pig cops and their repressive regime!” says well-known anarchist and arsonist Melania Dredd, from the comfy and non-flammable confines of his cell. “Burn! Burn burn burn! Everything! Kyahahaha!”

PS I notice now that on nsindex, the text supposedly runs 'from a prison cell' whereas I got 'from his cell.' I suppose that the inconsistent pronoun usage may only show up for nations without prisons.

[The Free Joy State]

I got #87, and noted the second speaker's first name was female ('Melania') but the pronoun used was 'his.' Is that supposed to be the case?

“Burning should be allowed for everything! Down with the pig cops and their repressive regime!” says well-known anarchist and arsonist Melania Dredd, from the comfy and non-flammable confines of his cell. “Burn! Burn burn burn! Everything! Kyahahaha!”

Fixed. Thanks for reporting it.

[Klorgia1]

In issue 896 option 5 has this result text:

Competing private ambulances racing to be the first to traffic accidents are a major cause of road accidents.


Both grammatically and for flow (considering it's repeating), I'd suggest this amendment instead:

Private ambulances compete to be the first to start a traffic accident.

[The Free Joy State]

In issue 896 option 5 has this result text:

Competing private ambulances racing to be the first to traffic accidents are a major cause of road accidents.


Both grammatically and for flow (considering it's repeating), I'd suggest this amendment instead:

Private ambulances compete to be the first to start a traffic accident.

Firstly, we don't do stylistic fixes on this thread. This thread is for:

visible objective errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and for suspected problems with validities, macros and the like.

Grammatically, it's fine.

Secondly, making the suggested change would ruin a perfectly good joke. The idea of the effect is that ambulances, racing to accidents are actually causing further accidents.

No change needed.

[Klorgia1]

In issue 896 option 5 has this result text:

Competing private ambulances racing to be the first to traffic accidents are a major cause of road accidents.


Both grammatically and for flow (considering it's repeating), I'd suggest this amendment instead:

Private ambulances compete to be the first to start a traffic accident.

Firstly, we don't do stylistic fixes on this thread. This thread is for:

visible objective errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and for suspected problems with validities, macros and the like.

Grammatically, it's fine.

Secondly, making the suggested change would ruin a perfectly good joke. The idea of the effect is that ambulances, racing to accidents are actually causing further accidents.

No change needed.

I thought it kept the joke while making it seem more grammatically correct, but I respect your opinion nevertheless.

Issue: Desert Island Risks

Issue: “Me want you to make this go away..."

Proposed Change: "I want you to make this go away..."

[The Free Joy State]

Firstly, we don't do stylistic fixes on this thread. This thread is for:


Grammatically, it's fine.

Secondly, making the suggested change would ruin a perfectly good joke. The idea of the effect is that ambulances, racing to accidents are actually causing further accidents.

No change needed.

I thought it kept the joke while making it seem more grammatically correct, but I respect your opinion nevertheless.

Issue: Desert Island Risks

Issue: “Me want you to make this go away..."

Proposed Change: "I want you to make this go away..."

He's talking about himself and clients. I've changed it to "We".

[Trotterdam]

Did the effect lines for #1239 options 2/3 get mixed up?

2. The mannequin suddenly sits up, revealing itself to be @@RANDOMNAME@@, who was also declared legally dead after getting lost in the rain forests of Macronesia ten years ago. "Being dead isn't all bad, I suppose. There are no taxes, my family got an insurance pay-out... I guess it's kind of fun to be a 'zombie'! You should just let me stay legally dead. People like me, who officially 'don't exist', can't claim any government benefits, so you guys get to save some money too."

3. "I may have made a mistake, but after seven years it's reasonable to presume someone isn't coming back," states @@RANDOMNAME@@, the registrar who made the death of Oliver King official. "Of course Oliver is still alive and should be registered as such. Therefore, his family should be made to return their insurance pay-out, and his last will and testament needs to be scrutinized to see if they received any other benefits from his death."

I chose option 3 and got "being dead no longer has any benefits". Option 3 talks about withholding/undoing benefits for the relatives of the deceased, while option 2 talks about removing benefits for the person who is actually dead.

Meanwhile, I haven't confirmed the effect line for option 2, but the one that I suspect is it would make more sense on option 3.

[The Free Joy State]

Did the effect lines for #1239 options 2/3 get mixed up

No, the effect lines didn't get mixed up.

In option two, the family get to keep the insurance pay-out and doesn't have to pay taxes; in option three, they must return the pay-out (along with any other death benefits they may have received). That's why -- in option three -- "being dead no longer has any benefits".

The effect line for #2 will make perfect sense, when you see it.

[Trotterdam]

The effect line for #2 will make perfect sense, when you see it.

The effect line has now been confirmed to be what I thought it was, and no, it doesn't make sense.

I don't see how "what citizens give with one hand they take away with the other" could possibly apply to option 2. There's nothing about giving or taking away in there. I could see it sorta making sense on option 3, which talks about paying out life insurance and then claiming it back again, though it's a bit of a stretch even there. I doesn't make sense on option 2 at all.

---

In other news, #1240 mentions the nation has "democratic values". I have confirmed that all options (at least, four different effect lines) can be chosen on non-democratic nations (so far three have been confirmed on autocracies and one on a sortition-using nation), and if what The Candy Of Bottles posted is the internal numbering, there doesn't appear to be any room for variant options. Is this an oversight?

(The issue's also available on nations without the Atheism policy, but since it's already known that Atheism is a pseudo-policy and the criteria used for the visible policy are a little different from the ones used by the editors for issue validities, that's not really a surprise.)

[The Free Joy State]

In other news, #1240 mentions the nation has "democratic values". I have confirmed that all options (at least, four different effect lines) can be chosen on non-democratic nations (so far three have been confirmed on autocracies and one on a sortition-using nation), and if what The Candy Of Bottles posted is the internal numbering, there doesn't appear to be any room for variant options. Is this an oversight?

I confirm that there has been no oversight. It is coded for democratic nations and testing confirms that autocratic nations should not be receiving it.

[Trotterdam]

I confirm that there has been no oversight. It is coded for democratic nations and testing confirms that autocratic nations should not be receiving it.

Oh, now I see. I typoed the issue number as 120 instead of 1240 when running my check

Ignore that one, then.

[Maverique]

In the 3rd option for the issue, the line "Darling, listen, I have certain standards to uphold, and my collection of 250 perfumes are a vital part of who I am!" contains an error. "are" should be "is" as the subject is the collection, not the 250 perfumes.

[The Free Joy State]

In the 3rd option for the issue, the line "Darling, listen, I have certain standards to uphold, and my collection of 250 perfumes are a vital part of who I am!" contains an error. "are" should be "is" as the subject is the collection, not the 250 perfumes.

It can be either "is" or "are", depending on British or American English.

This issue uses British English, although if Lancaster of Wessex contacts us to inform us that they prefer US English, we will -- of course -- amend accordingly.

[TalAkMaChen]

Since we have some issue on the serial comma (#721), I wonder if there should also be one in option 1 of #948 (1x, 2x, 3x, a Lady):

.... “Boys get chemistry kits and toy robots. Girls get baby dolls and make-up sets. Is it any wonder they think mathematics and science aren’t meant for them? We must legislate to regulate in retail, advertising, parenting and primary education!”

That is, unless parenting and primary education are to be connected, of course.

[The Free Joy State]

Since we have some issue on the serial comma (#721), I wonder if there should also be one in option 1 of #948 (1x, 2x, 3x, a Lady):

.... “Boys get chemistry kits and toy robots. Girls get baby dolls and make-up sets. Is it any wonder they think mathematics and science aren’t meant for them? We must legislate to regulate in retail, advertising, parenting and primary education!”

That is, unless parenting and primary education are to be connected, of course.

We never amend serial comma usage. It is not an error, but the choice of the writer.

#948 has a British author and editor. It's fine.

We're not going through the entire base, making alternate version of every issue, depending on whether players previously selected to use serial commas or not. Some decisions aren't tracked. That's one of them.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I don't mind reviewing the issue base to remove all the serial commas.

[Australian rePublic]

I don't mind reviewing the issue base to remove all the serial commas.

Do It! Do it! Do it!