Help us fix old issues

[Frisbeeteria]

The issue: Gunman Kills Three

NationStates issues are supposed to have somewhat radical choices that make the game more interesting. I have to ask, who wrote the choices here, this is all one sided.
Option 1 gets rid of guns
Option 2 really gets rid of guns
Option 3 is a prequel to getting rid of guns

The issue for those who want to read it : Warning! Spoiler! : http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88#020

How about this for Option 4:
The head of the national security service @Random name@ voices concern: "I'm appalled that the government is seriously considering this fear monger agenda!" as he tosses a pile of statistics on your desk. "Hard research shows armed law abiding citizens decrease crime, and regularly use guns to defend themselves and others against these criminal wackos. Even the criminals admit they're not interested in robbing some poor old lady if she's going to pull a gun. Let's make gun ownership and training a requirement for all law abiding stable citizens of age who aren't directly opposed to guns."

RESULT:
Holsters are now offered as a feature on consumer products


(Gun ownership does NOT equal higher gun deaths. Look at Switzerland and Finland as just a few examples. Also in nations without guns, knives become the big killer.)
Suggested adjustments. If it's not listed there is no change. Some with no change are listed with a reason why there is no change.

Arms manufacturing +4
Economy +2
Authoritarianism -2
Averageness -5
Business subsidization 0 Because there is no market price support, direct support, or payments to factors of production. Further there are no loans or grants to companies.
Compassion 0 There is no change in compassion since possessing an item such as this does not intrinsically change a person. It's like carrying a hammer or a book.
Corruption ?
Defense Forces +2 Naturally you'll meet stiff resistance in a nation where everyone is armed.
Eco-friendliness 0 They're is no change to the environmental policy toward the environment here. Also weapons training still has to meet environmental containment policy.
Employment +2 Someone is building those guns and ammo and training those people.
Environmental Beauty 0 No change. Unless you'd like to argue that Switzerland and Finland with high gun ownership are real environmental garbage pits because of guns.
Freedom from corruption ?
Freedom from taxation: Small decrease for pro business nations as they would choose to privatize the citizen training, etc. larger jump for big government / gov control nations.
Government size ? would be a small increase in nations such as mine and a larger increase in big government nations
Happiness ? Not sure... happier with less crime?
Health: 0 Since this is related to general health of a nation. Less crime would also mean better health, but overall I thnk this would be a wash.
Ideological radicality: +5
Retail +1 Lots of gun product sales
Law Enforcement +3 These are law abiding citizens who would support the police. We didn't arm the criminals, they're already armed.
Lifespan: Possible increase due to less crime, and enhanced training with firearms.
Pacifism ?
Political Apathy ?
Safety +1
Safety from crime +2
Manufacturing +1
Social Conservatism: Increase
Taxation: Slight increase in pro business nations, Larger increase in government does all nations.
Toxicity: 0 No change again... Switzerland and Finland seem popular and pretty.
Unexpected death rate: Less unexpected death due to lower crime.
Weaponization: Large increase
Youth rebeliousness: Decrease


Because of the opt out clause and the fact it would guarantee the civilian population can exercise their civil and political freedoms. (As well as gun ownership rights being listed in the Bill of Rights for multiple nations.):
Civil rights +1
Political Freedom +3

This thread is for typos and such, not suggestions for new options. This is one of the original Max Barry issues, and will not be adjusted. It's also not nearly as one sided as you think.

[Idzequitch]

Issue #109:

"Free, youth-orientated martial arts programmes have gained popularity in communities where youth crime is a problem."
I don't believe "orientated" is actually a word. Should be "youth-oriented," unless it's an alternate European form of the word that I'm unaware of.

[Schiltzberg]

Issue 425, Option 4

"You know, all this talk has got me thinking." notes socialist thinker Dave Chen, brandishing a sickle. "Schiltzberg has plenty of arable land, just perfect for cultivation. But we're going about it precisely the wrong way. You just can’t trust private citizens with the people's own food. If we just nationalize the farms, production will surely rise! And with it, the proletariat!"

Shouldn't the period after the quotation in the first sentence be a comma because the sentence continues after the quote?

[Trotterdam]

Shouldn't the period after the quotation in the first sentence be a comma because the sentence continues after the quote?

That's the official rule most grammar textbooks list, although I think it's stupid. He's not saying a comma, he's saying a period. The quote is of a complete sentence.

[Golgothastan]

No, it should be a comma; that he's "saying" a full-stop has nothing to do with it.

[Trotterdam]

I'm confused as to how you can say I'm "wrong" when I was explicitly presenting an opinion, not a fact, acknowledging that this isn't what you would find in (American) grammar textbooks but giving an actual reason why I disagree.

There isn't even a universally accepted usage in English, depending on where you are, who you're writing for, and apparently whether you're writing fiction or non-fiction (but isn't fiction usually pretending that it's non-fiction?). My way is as valid as yours, and it also makes more sense and is more accurate.

Stuff that's being quoted goes inside the quotation marks and stuff that describes the quote's relation to the surrounding sentence goes outside the quotation marks.

Not quite the situation that brought this up, but I especially hate it when punctuation gets inserted into quoted stuff that wasn't a sentence to begin with:

"Tom," "dick," and "harry."
You say "terrorists," I say "freedom fighters."

"Tom", "dick", and "harry".
You say "terrorists", I say "freedom fighters".

I'm not going to make a fuss if you want to do it your way in your own writing, but I'm annoyed at someone presenting "correction" when it works fine as it is.

[Golgothastan]

I'm confused as to how you can say I'm "wrong" when I was explicitly presenting an opinion, not a fact, acknowledging that this isn't what you would find in (American) grammar textbooks but giving an actual reason why I disagree.

In every editing job I have ever worked, I have literally never come across a house manual of style that would allow a full stop to be used in that context. Of course, I can't prove a negative, but it is so obviously wrong - just look at it, it even causes the next alleged sentence, "notes..." to begin uncapitalised! That sentence would also be rendered incomprehensible. "[N]otes socialist thinker Dave Chen, brandishing a sickle." Notes what? Forget about the speech marks: that sentence boils down to "Dave thinks". That is one, complete sentence. Not "Dave. Thinks.", which introducing the second full stop parses it as.

I'm not one of the editors who can change existing issues, but it would absolutely be my recommendation that this one be changed.

There isn't even a universally accepted usage in English, depending on where you are, who you're writing for, and apparently whether you're writing fiction or non-fiction (but isn't fiction usually pretending that it's non-fiction?). My way is as valid as yours, and it also makes more sense and is more accurate.

Stuff that's being quoted goes inside the quotation marks and stuff that describes the quote's relation to the surrounding sentence goes outside the quotation marks.

Nothing in that section has anything to do with this issue. American style is to put the comma outside, British to leave it in, but in neither style would a full stop be used. In fact, your own link states: "Only the period, however, may not end a quoted sentence when it does not also end the enclosing sentence".

[Luna Amore]

Issue #350 (Queasy Cuisine) is missing some commas for dialogue.

Fixed.

Just getting through some of the punctuation...

Fixed the ones I thought were needed. In the future, quote the original text with your edit in context. It was a bit cumbersome switching back and forth looking for the snippets you pointed out.

Issue #109:

"Free, youth-orientated martial arts programmes have gained popularity in communities where youth crime is a problem."
I don't believe "orientated" is actually a word. Should be "youth-oriented," unless it's an alternate European form of the word that I'm unaware of.

Either is appropriate.

Shouldn't the period after the quotation in the first sentence be a comma because the sentence continues after the quote?

Fixed.

[The Oecumene]

hello i think one may face misunderstanding in #147: Military Budgets Up For Approval
option #6 means military cut in this or that way which is (as i understood) mainly expressed by the words "...People should be allowed to choose what they do for a living! Conscription is wrong...". However there exists such a thing as contract army and it fully matches conscription abolishing and freedom of choice, so i expected some kind of _cut_ but got full disarmament
so i offer to change this general rastaphrase to something more accurate

[Outer Sparta]

The Reverend says "I am sick and tired of the liberals in this country ruining our family values."
Comma needed after says, so it'll be like: The Reverend says, "I am sick and tired of the liberals in this country ruining our family values."

[Luna Amore]

The Reverend says "I am sick and tired of the liberals in this country ruining our family values."
Comma needed after says, so it'll be like: The Reverend says, "I am sick and tired of the liberals in this country ruining our family values."

Fixed, thanks. I added a comma to the first option as well. That is a weirdly formatted issue.

Next time, please reference the issue #.

[Kaboomlandia]

On Issue #308: Over, Under, or Through?, option 4 should read "pitchfork-wielding" (the hyphen is absent currently).

[Luna Amore]

On Issue #308: Over, Under, or Through?, option 4 should read "pitchfork-wielding" (the hyphen is absent currently).

Good catch. Fixed.

[Kaboomlandia]

On Issue #308: Over, Under, or Through?, option 4 should read "pitchfork-wielding" (the hyphen is absent currently).

Good catch. Fixed.

I didn't realize it actually changed it on my end (it's the issue I have at the moment). I thought it was just for everyone else who got the issue. Thanks.

[The Oecumene]

hello i think one may face misunderstanding in #147: Military Budgets Up For Approval
option #6 means military cut in this or that way which is (as i understood) mainly expressed by the words "...People should be allowed to choose what they do for a living! Conscription is wrong...". However there exists such a thing as contract army and it fully matches conscription abolishing and freedom of choice, so i expected some kind of _cut_ but got full disarmament
so i offer to change this general rastaphrase to something more accurate

[Golgothastan]

Can you try rephrasing your complaint? I don't understand what you're saying well enough to be able to comment.

[The Oecumene]

I say option#6 sounds like an offer to cut military expenses greatly (because of the words about conscription) but it gave me military share decrease from 15% gdp to 0%.
Just abolishing of conscription doesnt lead to disarmament. "People should be allowed to choose what they do..." they can shoose to be contract servicemen.
So if choosing option#6 causes total army destruction it should sound more radical

[Golgothastan]

I see. Well, conscription is only mentioned because the previous speaker raised the issue; option #6 also states that the military "is a stain on the peace-loving nature of our nation" and that tax money spent on it "should be going to more important places - like our pockets". That's clear enough about what the speaker truly believes.

[Dolee]

3."We could always just kill off all the dogs," Barack Clinton of the "Keep The Species Pure" foundation whispers to you in a conversation. "The Dolee is one of the many things our country is famous for; any perversion of its image reflects upon us all! We can't have their image spoilt by these ugly abominations! Just get the police to go around and kill them all and we can rest easy knowing our countryside is safe!

There should be a quotation mark at the end, since it is a quote from Barack Clinton. Also Barack Clinton is a very unexpected twist in politics (yes I know it's a randomly generated name).

[Luna Amore]

3."We could always just kill off all the dogs," Barack Clinton of the "Keep The Species Pure" foundation whispers to you in a conversation. "The Dolee is one of the many things our country is famous for; any perversion of its image reflects upon us all! We can't have their image spoilt by these ugly abominations! Just get the police to go around and kill them all and we can rest easy knowing our countryside is safe!

There should be a quotation mark at the end, since it is a quote from Barack Clinton. Also Barack Clinton is a very unexpected twist in politics (yes I know it's a randomly generated name).

Fixed, thanks.

[Orogen]

The issue "They Took Our Gubment!"
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88#427

Are these people immigrants who became citizens or immigrants here on temporary visas or never completed citizenship or illegal immigrants? That's a huge difference.

[Trotterdam]

Are these people immigrants who became citizens or immigrants here on temporary visas or never completed citizenship or illegal immigrants? That's a huge difference.

How easily does your nation let immigrants become citizens?

Anyway, the issue describes the candidate as having "immigrated from Smalltopia at a young age", implying that he's pretty much a citizen of your nation at this point and has few ties left to his nation of origin.

The third option also suggests that this particular immigrant may be a rather corrupt individual, but native citizens can be those too

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Issue 305:

1. "Frankly, we shouldn't be wasting time giving our children costly educations, just to have Bigtopians take their jobs," remarks Kathleen Delauter, a wealthy business executive sharing a drink in your office. "Let's lift the ban on child labor and instead put our children to work in service jobs in retail-jobs that can't be sent to other countries. They might not get paid much, but it'll at least get them working and this economy moving again." Handing you a wad of money, he continues, "And we'll both make a ₦anotech dollar or two off it as well..."

Should either change @@RANDOMNAME@@ to @@RANDOMMALENAME@@ or insert a variable pronoun (do you have those?).

[Luna Amore]

Issue 305:

1. "Frankly, we shouldn't be wasting time giving our children costly educations, just to have Bigtopians take their jobs," remarks Kathleen Delauter, a wealthy business executive sharing a drink in your office. "Let's lift the ban on child labor and instead put our children to work in service jobs in retail-jobs that can't be sent to other countries. They might not get paid much, but it'll at least get them working and this economy moving again." Handing you a wad of money, he continues, "And we'll both make a ₦anotech dollar or two off it as well..."

Should either change @@RANDOMNAME@@ to @@RANDOMMALENAME@@ or insert a variable pronoun (do you have those?).

Changed to @@RANDOMMALENAME@@. Thanks!

[Centenniality]

Found a typo in issue #385 in the 3rd choice:

"Just auction of the rights to field a mascot to the highest bidder"

Should be off.