NationStates

Kwomo wrote:I've looked through this thread, and apparently Free Speech counts as a civil right.
And a political freedom.
Also, it turns out that this is not the place to discuss this.
I would really like to know where I can raise this issue, because it's killing two of my nations, this one included. Also, there are a number of issues where it makes sense to only affect one, but it ends up affecting both.

If you want a specific issue, here's "Nazi Sympathizers Plan Rally," option 1: this both decreased civil rights and political freedoms.
Free speech, in the context of a political rally, should only affect political freedom. Doing otherwise is silly.

Trotterdam wrote:Posting on behalf of someone else in my region.

Emerses just noted that #300 3 ("Why don't you just get rid of these new-fangled licenses and trust a parent's instincts?") failed to remove the Parental Licensing policy.

My own data concurs that it only sometimes removes this policy. In fact, it hasn't been seen removing the policy in a little over two weeks, making me wonder if a recent change to the issue accidentally broke it.

The Free Joy State wrote:

Kwomo wrote:(...) it turns out that this is not the place to discuss this.
I would really like to know where I can raise this issue, because it's killing two of my nations, this one included.
(...)

This is not a thread to discuss how you'd like effects to work. This is a thread to raise unusual effects on issues and receive answers.

(...)

The Free Joy State wrote:By the way, this is your first time interracting on the forums, so perhaps we got off to a bad start. But dismissing things as "silly" is not the most effective way to get people to help you.

Daroso wrote:Issue: I Spy a Diplomatic Crisis, #233.
Response: Diplomats in Daroso are furious at constant police surveillance, 3.
Unusual effect: Economic freedom went down. What's the correlation between embassies (a political and international institution) and economic freedom?
Thanks!

The Free Joy State wrote:By the way, this is your first time interracting on the forums, so perhaps we got off to a bad start. But dismissing things as "silly" is not the most effective way to get people to help you.

Sanctaria wrote:

Daroso wrote:Issue: I Spy a Diplomatic Crisis, #233.
Also in that option: "We risk all sorts of trade sanctions, true, but it pays to be careful."

Kwomo wrote:

The Free Joy State wrote:By the way, this is your first time interracting on the forums, so perhaps we got off to a bad start. But dismissing things as "silly" is not the most effective way to get people to help you.

Right, sorry. I've been fed up with the twin correlation for so long with other alts, so I wrote that more in a fit of rage than with honest intentions. Thank you for keeping a cool head -- it helps to know it's not as arbitrary as it seems. Still frustrating for trying to split left-wing nations from democracies (both ways).

Leporidaeland wrote:Issue: A Nude Day, A New Awakening
Response: T-shirts displaying a photo of Leader performing the Full-Monty are selling out.
Unusual Effect: I gained the State Surveillance policy.

The Marsupial Illuminati wrote:

Omnistria wrote:- Omnistria
- 2018-05-10
- Reclaim The Streets! (102)

I chose option 3 and enacted the No Automobiles policy. Moreover the Bike Lane banner and the Railworks banner were unlocked.

What happened is that Public Transport fell by 0,11%. Does not seem ok to me since I now have no cars on the streets.

Yeah, those stats are definitely screwed up. Thank you for the helpful report; I will bring this up backstage.

Dungeon wrote:Hello, I don't usually post about unexpected results, but I received an outcome that seemed precisely opposite of the expected results, so I thought I'd post in case there was something going on.

Issue #988
Highway Robbery by the Book

Nation: Dungeon

Date: May 10

I chose the 4th option:
“Daddy, who let the poors out onto the front lawn?” questions Richard Kensington-Wellington III, whose famed millionaire misanthropic father is currently turning on the garden sprinklers. “The working classes should have never been allowed to study in the first place. I mean, what good does it do them? It only fills them with ridiculous aspirations above their natural station. It’s quite obvious after all that only the elite of society should be educated. All of my friends and their daddies say so! The common folk would be happier doing something useful with their lives!”

The outcome was a 13% decrease in wealth gaps, and an attendant rise in income equality.

I apologize if there's some simple explanation for this being rational outcome, that I'm just overlooking. I'd be interested to learn what that may be.

Thanks you for you time and patience.

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:

Dungeon wrote:Hello, I don't usually post about unexpected results, but I received an outcome that seemed precisely opposite of the expected results, so I thought I'd post in case there was something going on.

Issue #988
Highway Robbery by the Book

Nation: Dungeon

Date: May 10

I chose the 4th option:
“Daddy, who let the poors out onto the front lawn?” questions Richard Kensington-Wellington III, whose famed millionaire misanthropic father is currently turning on the garden sprinklers. “The working classes should have never been allowed to study in the first place. I mean, what good does it do them? It only fills them with ridiculous aspirations above their natural station. It’s quite obvious after all that only the elite of society should be educated. All of my friends and their daddies say so! The common folk would be happier doing something useful with their lives!”

The outcome was a 13% decrease in wealth gaps, and an attendant rise in income equality.

I apologize if there's some simple explanation for this being rational outcome, that I'm just overlooking. I'd be interested to learn what that may be.

Thanks you for you time and patience.

Thanks for the report.

I agree that it is entirely against the story of the issue for wealth gaps to decrease.

However, the explanation is basically that the simulation is limited.

Wealth gaps are worked out primarily as a function of how free your economy is. Any measure that reduces economic freedom (for example restricting the education market to a specific group of people, and creating an environment where economic mobility is denied by statute, as in this issue) will reduce the wealth gap, even if the specific story of how economic freedom falls isn't consistent with a drop in wealth gaps. We've got no tools to directly move wealth gaps - it's a knock-on calculation from other changes.

So unfortunately this unexpected effect will remain as it is.

Dwarfpolis wrote:Should 860.4 decrease cheerfulness, or was it because of charmlessness rising?

First Nightmare wrote:After answering issue 61, option 1, I gained the Feudalism policy.
Now I have both the Feudalism policy... and the Socialism policy.

Trotterdam wrote:... not necessarily for the workers' benefit...

First Nightmare wrote:After answering issue 61, option 1, I gained the Feudalism policy.
Now I have both the Feudalism policy... and the Socialism policy.

Trotterdam wrote:Today, I want to talk about the relationship between feudalism and emigration.

When looking at my list, I was surprised to find that #605 1 is one of the only two options in the game that removes No Emigration, despite the issue actually saying nothing about that, the option's primary purpose being to remove Feudalism.

On closer inspection, I found that #61 1, the sole option to give the Feudalism policy, also gives No Emigration. So, this gives the impression that the Feudalism is interpreted as automatically implying No Emigration, and so the latter is gained and lost with the former even when the issue doesn't explicitly talk about it.

However, there are two problems with this.

First, I disagree that Feudalism should actually imply No Emigration. Yes, serfs had little freedom of movement, but a feudal society doesn't consist only of serfs. Nobles and yeomen were also important parts of medieval society, and they generally had somewhat more mobility. Even serfs often had some sort of recourse, though it tended to involve paying their lord through the nose for the priviledge of leaving his service.

Second, the other options which remove Feudalism (#710 4, #894 3, #940 5) don't affect No Emigration, so this policy, whether I agree with it or not, is not applied consistently.

Yahlia wrote:I just received an answered Issue 358 - Not Another Teen Pregnancy: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88#358
I chose to go with option 6, which resulted in prioritized sex education, free contraception, and abortions on demand, and my social conservatism rose. That sounds like a mistake to me, unless I'm missing something