Help us fix old issues

[Trotterdam]

I got #1333 on Milostein, which complains that "we need real immigration reform so that the citizenship exam isn’t so onerous". This nation shouldn't have a citizenship exam, certainly not one that would push people to such extremes. I always pick the most pro-immigration options I get, including #670 3.

[The Free Joy State]

I got #1333 on Milostein, which complains that "we need real immigration reform so that the citizenship exam isn’t so onerous". This nation shouldn't have a citizenship exam, certainly not one that would push people to such extremes. I always pick the most pro-immigration options I get, including #670 3.

Peeking backstage, I can see that Milostein is above the threshold of the validity that has been placed on #1333, a level used to mean there are some restrictions on immigration.

It is also worth considering that what is considered arduous varies on individual interpretation. An "unscrupulous bride" who resorts to a marriage of convenience may view any requirements for citizenship as "arduous", while someone like your leader's brother probably wouldn't consider it arduous to expect potential immigrants to recite the national anthem backwards while standing on their heads, juggling one handed and taming a man-eating lion with their spare hand.

[Trotterdam]

It is also worth considering that what is considered arduous varies on individual interpretation. An "unscrupulous bride" who resorts to a marriage of convenience may view any requirements for citizenship as "arduous", while someone like your leader's brother probably wouldn't consider it arduous to expect potential immigrants to recite the national anthem backwards while standing on their heads, juggling one handed and taming a man-eating lion with their spare hand.

Yeah, but spending months (and that's just how long the wedding planning is stated to have taken, so the actual courtship might have been years) convincingly pretending to be in love with someone you actually hate is also something pretty much everyone would consider arduous.

Based on how I have always answered issues, it is simply not possible that our immigration requirements are worse than that. If the backstage stats say otherwise, then the backstage stats are wrong. Which might be a problem with other issues that influence those backstage stats, rather than this one, but since they're backstage, it's not like I can tell you which issues.

---

And now, A Badly Conceived Designation got issue #220 ("Statistics have shown a steady decline in voter turnout in A Badly Conceived Designation’s latest elections.") as my very next issue after making voting compulsory. Even if we assume that people are illegally violating the voting mandate, the narrative doesn't present it as a law enforcement problem.

[The Free Joy State]

And now, A Badly Conceived Designation got issue #220 ("Statistics have shown a steady decline in voter turnout in A Badly Conceived Designation’s latest elections.") as my very next issue after making voting compulsory. Even if we assume that people are illegally violating the voting mandate, the narrative doesn't present it as a law enforcement problem.

Taken this backstage.

Thank you for raising this.

[Tinhampton]

I got Olivia Bacon as the randomised name of the "commercial airline pilot" in Issue #1343; as a result, the @@HIS@@ pronoun should automatically display her in relation to that name. However, the speaker in 1343.3 asserts that "the pilot who crashed the damn plane locked the cockpit when his co-pilot stepped out for a few minutes;" this incorrectly associates the random first name "Olivia" with the pronoun "his." Should that not read "...@@HIS@@ co-pilot..." instead?

[Pogaria]

I got Olivia Bacon as the randomised name of the "commercial airline pilot" in Issue #1343; as a result, the @@HIS@@ pronoun should automatically display her in relation to that name. However, the speaker in 1343.3 asserts that "the pilot who crashed the damn plane locked the cockpit when his co-pilot stepped out for a few minutes;" this incorrectly associates the random first name "Olivia" with the pronoun "his." Should that not read "...@@HIS@@ co-pilot..." instead?

Thank you. I fixed it.

[Paffnia]

I just got #609: @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, Drugs, and Rock'n'Roll on a puppet, and I noticed that the spacing in "Rock'n'Roll" is different than #496: Rock 'n' Roll Suicide, at least as recorded on the issues list.

[Merni]

Effect line of issue 1268 option 2: "Sausages are seldomly seen in the supermarket."
Shouldn't it be "seldom"?

[Paffnia]

#433: The Worst Storm To Hit @@NAME@@ Since...Yesterday? is the only one with an ellipsis between words in the title but no space. The rest of the titles (and it looks like issues' text, too) with an ellipsis between words use "XXXX... XXXX," with a space after the ellipsis.

[Pogaria]

I just got #609: @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, Drugs, and Rock'n'Roll on a puppet, and I noticed that the spacing in "Rock'n'Roll" is different than #496: Rock 'n' Roll Suicide, at least as recorded on the issues list.

I'm generally in favor of standardization and continuous improvement... but this seems like more of a stylistic difference.

Effect line of issue 1268 option 2: "Sausages are seldomly seen in the supermarket."
Shouldn't it be "seldom"?

I fixed it.

#433: The Worst Storm To Hit @@NAME@@ Since...Yesterday? is the only one with an ellipsis between words in the title but no space. The rest of the titles (and it looks like issues' text, too) with an ellipsis between words use "XXXX... XXXX," with a space after the ellipsis.

The official version does have a space.

[Paffnia]

Thanks for checking!

[Terra Potestatem]

#1332 We Won't, We Won't Rock You. I noticed option four needs a quotation mark before, "By placing crystals on their corresponding chakras..." in order to open the quotation.

[The Free Joy State]

#1332 We Won't, We Won't Rock You. I noticed option four needs a quotation mark before, "By placing crystals on their corresponding chakras..." in order to open the quotation.

Well-spotted. Amended.

[Paffnia]

Is the validity of the MADness chain only checked before receiving the first issue? Because (in an unsuccessful attempt to find Issue #1380) I received the first issue of the chain on Bus Rapid Transit, then left it unanswered until I could adopt the "No Aircraft" policy, and then proceeded to answer the chain, in which I encountered many references to the air force, bombers, flights, etc. I completely understand if validity checks each issue in the chain would mess it up (for instance, a nation could switch between socialism and capitalism or could get rid of WMDs midway through), but just flagging this.

[Trotterdam]

Is the validity of the MADness chain only checked before receiving the first issue?

Yes, chains have always worked like that. The next issue depends only on what option you choose (although sometimes, similar-looking variant options with option validities are used as a way around this).

As you point out, adjusting the narrative for every crazy thing a nation could do partway through the chain would be impractical, so the only way this could even conceivably be changed is to just cancel the chain and not give you the next issue in the chain if you no longer meet the chain's prerequisites, which would be no fun at all.

[Aryax]

Don't know if this has been reported already, but in issue #739 there's this:
“If I might interject?” interrupts Boutros , the seven-year-old boy at the centre of the saga [...]"

Seems like the space between the name and the comma should be removed.

[Pogaria]

Don't know if this has been reported already, but in issue #739 there's this:
“If I might interject?” interrupts Boutros , the seven-year-old boy at the centre of the saga [...]"

Seems like the space between the name and the comma should be removed.

The official version doesn't have a space there.

[SherpDaWerp]

Per whatever discussions were held as part of this, is it also worth changing option 1 of #535, which has the same derogatory term?

I can imagine it might fall under "characters have flawed ideals, c'est la vie", but I reckon it's more along the lines of "unnecessary use of offensive language^[1]". Up to the editors, I guess.

[The Free Joy State]

Per whatever discussions were held as part of this, is it also worth changing option 1 of #535, which has the same derogatory term?

I can imagine it might fall under "characters have flawed ideals, c'est la vie", but I reckon it's more along the lines of "unnecessary use of offensive language^[1]". Up to the editors, I guess.

That usage came up, and we decided to leave it be as it was in character speech. Characters can be wrong, they can be bigoted, they can be ignorant.

[Republic of Ravens]

Option 2 of Issue 234 results in the effect line: "Tesco was recently named as the new national treasurer."

I am not sure if this is a problem to be fixed per se, but I thought NS was averse to having glaring real-life references in issues (and effect lines).

[Pogaria]

Option 2 of Issue 234 results in the effect line: "Tesco was recently named as the new national treasurer."

I am not sure if this is a problem to be fixed per se, but I thought NS was averse to having glaring real-life references in issues (and effect lines).

1. It's not a rule, just a preference.
2. Older issues tend to be grandfathered in. We have over 1400 issues; they aren't all going to follow the same style or formatting, especially if they're from 13 years ago.

[SherpDaWerp]

Per whatever discussions were held as part of this, is it also worth changing option 1 of #535, which has the same derogatory term?

I can imagine it might fall under "characters have flawed ideals, c'est la vie", but I reckon it's more along the lines of "unnecessary use of offensive language^[1]". Up to the editors, I guess.

That usage came up, and we decided to leave it be as it was in character speech. Characters can be wrong, they can be bigoted, they can be ignorant.

Fair enough. Thanks for your time.

[New Ciencia]

One of the result texts for Issue #1432 misspells "pseudoscience" as "psuedoscience".

[Pogaria]

One of the result texts for Issue #1432 misspells "pseudoscience" as "psuedoscience".

Thank you. I fixed it.

[Jim the Baptist]

In issue 1432, option 3 says “save for the occasional religious rite” but should “save” should be “safe”? I don’t really understand the use of “save for” in this context, seems very opaque.