Advertisement
by CzechoSlovakishMoravia » Tue Apr 14, 2020 7:11 am
by Trotterdam » Tue Apr 14, 2020 7:16 am
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tskCzechoSlovakishMoravia wrote:#846 Use Your Words: Option 3: "tsking" should probably be "asking"?
by Candlewhisper Archive » Tue Apr 14, 2020 2:27 pm
by TalAkMaChen » Tue Apr 14, 2020 2:54 pm
by The Free Joy State » Tue Apr 14, 2020 11:47 pm
TalAkMaChen wrote:Speaking of naked validities: #61,4 has a dressed person also at Nude nations. Chase him away! No Medieval Faires for the nudes, too sad.
Once one starts looking for these things, there are more and more showing up. Yeah, pun. Hoo Boo
by Lord Dominator » Fri Apr 17, 2020 10:43 pm
by The Free Joy State » Fri Apr 17, 2020 10:51 pm
Lord Dominator wrote:The effect line for 1080.2 reads "Not showing enough enthusiasm for mutual assured destruction is a court-martial offence."
Pretty sure it should be "mutually" here.
by Lord Dominator » Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:43 pm
The Free Joy State wrote:Lord Dominator wrote:The effect line for 1080.2 reads "Not showing enough enthusiasm for mutual assured destruction is a court-martial offence."
Pretty sure it should be "mutually" here.
Having looked it up with the somewhat-knowing-Wiki, it appears both are acceptable.
by Pythaga » Sun Apr 19, 2020 2:19 pm
A 3-year-old girl, named Sonequa , recently died from a nasty chest infection. The case was notable, as doctors are claiming that a simple course of penicillin could easily have saved her life, and are laying blame for the death upon the advice of a ‘spirit-energy healer’ who advised the girl’s parents to treat their child with acupuncture.
by Fauxia » Sun Apr 19, 2020 6:17 pm
by Pogaria » Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:48 am
Pythaga wrote:The introduction of issue #608 has a space between a word and comma.A 3-year-old girl, named Sonequa , recently died from a nasty chest infection. The case was notable, as doctors are claiming that a simple course of penicillin could easily have saved her life, and are laying blame for the death upon the advice of a ‘spirit-energy healer’ who advised the girl’s parents to treat their child with acupuncture.
I have bolded the offending section, as copy-pasted directly from the issue.
by Tinhampton » Mon Apr 20, 2020 4:36 pm
by Pogaria » Tue Apr 21, 2020 10:12 am
Tinhampton wrote:Option 1260.3:“You know, this raises the broader issue of immigration,” announces your Finance Minister, dispensing financial projections with a little flourish. “We have an ageing population, so why worry about whether ‘x’ is cause for asylum but ‘y’ isn’t? All suffering is equal, especially that of the public coffers. How about we loosen the immigration rules, rubber-stamping asylum applications from all people who arrive able and willing to live and work here.”...shouldn't that last sentence end with a question mark?
The effect line of 1260.3 is "a traveller who once stubbed a toe on an 'Air Brancaland' flight has been offered asylum" - are the quotation marks around Air Brancaland necessary? They certainly aren't consistent with how airline names have been presented in the past: there aren't quotation marks around the name of @@DEMONYM@@ Air in Option 716.2; around Oceanic Airlines or Budget Air in Issue 652; nor around Air @@NAME@@ in Issues 747, 787, and 1051.
by Fauxia » Tue Apr 21, 2020 4:59 pm
Pogaria wrote:Pythaga wrote:The introduction of issue #608 has a space between a word and comma.
I have bolded the offending section, as copy-pasted directly from the issue.
I'm not seeing that in the official issue text. There is a remote possibility that this particular random name includes an extraneous space. It looks like you already answered this issue - otherwise, I would ask you to check it again after reloading to get a different random name.
Therefore, there's nothing that I can fix, but please let us know if anyone finds a similar problem.
Do you know how long you have had autarky? Did you just receive this issue, or has it been sitting in your inbox for a long time?
(For narrative purposes, the sanctions could just be symbolic. Even if they don't have an effect, perhaps Skandilund wanted to do something to demonstrate their disapproval.)
by Pogaria » Wed Apr 22, 2020 12:08 pm
Fauxia wrote:Yeah I just received the issue a few days ago, and have had autarky for a good deal longer than that. Probably shouldn’t have dismissed it
So then no one’s planning to edit the validity? Just to be clear.
by Trotterdam » Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:04 pm
Option 3 supports incest, sort of. While it may harass incestuous couples with screening that is implied (though not stated) to be mandatory, the relationships themselves are allowed to continue, and the effect line, "kissing cousins produce the heartiest babies", sounds rather positive.Djuph wrote:Issue: "Intimate relations"
All answers seem to point toward banning incestuous relationships.
But playing as Egypt 2.0 - what if we actually want to permit / encourage these relationships?
by Fauxia » Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:07 pm
Pogaria wrote:Fauxia wrote:Yeah I just received the issue a few days ago, and have had autarky for a good deal longer than that. Probably shouldn’t have dismissed it
So then no one’s planning to edit the validity? Just to be clear.
Well, this issue is directly linked to two other issues that require you to not have autarky. It looks like you answered both of them at some point in the past (more than two months ago). I suspect that the following occurred:
1. You didn't have autarky when you received those issues.
2. You implemented autarky (via a different issue) soon after receiving one of them.
3. You answered one or both of those issues in a manner that made you eligible for #1150.
4. You received #1150.
Does that make sense?
by Aryax » Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:16 am
Pogaria wrote:Wow, I've never seen a nation that was this restrictive. I can see why you're #1 for "Most Extreme".
by The Free Joy State » Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:43 am
Aryax wrote:In issue number #932, the 4th and last option (quoted in the spoiler below) should not be available for nations with the Atheism policy:“Aryax has travelled too far down a dark path,” reprimands Bishop Yasmin Huffington, who is sprinkling holy water on Ms. Bleu. “I agree something must be done, but we must treat the disease, not the symptom. We must ban videos of the naked form, and indeed, prohibit nakedness anywhere but in private chambers.”
by The Sakhalinsk Empire » Thu Apr 23, 2020 3:48 am
by Pogaria » Thu Apr 23, 2020 10:08 am
The Sakhalinsk Empire wrote:Issue #12 (Death Penalty on Agenda) mentions democracies and elections but is still available to dictatorial nations. Obviously this came from the Drew Durnil video, and I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet.
by Polis Diamonil » Thu Apr 23, 2020 12:18 pm
by TalAkMaChen » Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:43 am
by Aryax » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:43 am
Pogaria wrote:Wow, I've never seen a nation that was this restrictive. I can see why you're #1 for "Most Extreme".
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Eurasia102
Advertisement