[Suggested Added Option] Issue 999

[Dragonisia]

Forgive me if this is improperly formatted or such I've been digging through information trying to figure out how exactly to propose an addition or revision to an existing issue, but if such guidance exists I have missed it.

This is in relation to issue 999 found here: https://nsindex.net/wiki/NationStates_Issue_No._999

I consider this a 4th wall breaker option. What if you are genuinely the leader of your nation.. you have a perspective your citizens do not have upon reality in that case as you are seeing how they exist in the 2 dimensional narrative. I propose a response similar to this in nature:

Your spouse advises you, "The people deserve to know the truth. Tell them how you see them. Tell them they are a bunch of characters on a page as you have told me that I am in this world. It hurts, but it is better to know the truth of your existence, than to live a lie. It may cause a little unrest when they realize you are a being of a higher dimension and it will be more fodder for those wanting to ordain you as some kind of deity, but the sane ones may actually understand their world better and accept the truth of their nature, allowing them to grow into more mature and complex characters. Tell them, @@LEADER@@, that we are not alone. Enlighten your people. The cult of Max Barry will undoubtedly get a bump from this when it is confirmed he is real." They then go back to their meditations on the unseen world beyond this one. The one you truly call home.

I proposed this realizing that Nationstates.. actually is.. flat. We may imagine it as not flat.. but until we get Nationstates VR, it's flat as a pancake. It poses an interesting moral dilema. If your government discovers the entire fabric society is built upon a common and inconvenient misconception derived from flawed perceptions of reality.. what if it tells the truth on the issue? What if science takes us some place way outside of our safety zone?

[Trotterdam]

Technically, all computer-stored data is one-dimensional deep down. Everything is a sequence of bytes strung up in a row, each identified by a single address number.

[Dragonisia]

Technically, all computer-stored data is one-dimensional deep down. Everything is a sequence of bytes strung up in a row, each identified by a single address number.

This may be true, but the 1 dimensional data still exists in a 4 dimensionals space, 3 physical, 1 temporal. Nation States is at most 2 physical dimensions because those single byte sequences are reinterpreted to form a projection of its reality that we view on our monitors. The question is, where are your citizens defined at? It is not defined at the bit level, it's defined by their presentation as organized information, much as we are represented in 3 physical dimensions as a cloud of nebulous atoms of variable density forming molecular greater wholes. They are text on a screen.

Besides, I'm from antiquity, I should understand this reality better than any of you. Teasing of course.

[Trotterdam]

The question is, where are your citizens defined at? It is not defined at the bit level, it's defined by their presentation as organized information,

Well, at least the user-visible information is organized into several named categories (census scores, policies, causes of death, and such), each of which is a one-dimensional array (most obvious with the census scores, which have explicit index numbers). When there's more depth to the data (like the aforementioned several named categories, or policies being sorted into broad categories like Government and Society), it's more like a branching one-dimensionsional tree structure than a two-dimensional plane (contrast a straight featureless river, a branching river with many tributaries, and a lake: 1D, 1D+, 2D - at first approximation, since of course all of these exist of 3D water).

Even the two-dimensional "text" you see on the page is a human-friendly rendition of what the computer internally sees as a one-dimensional string of letters and punctuation, with the second dimension only hacked in at the last moment.

I suppose the existence of census score trend graphs introduces true two-dimensional data by adding time, but that's still only one spatial dimension.

Though actually, wait. Each individual nation is one-dimensional, as I've said above. But there's a very large number of nations, and unlike real life, they don't have to carve space out of a pre-existing world: which nation you're in is an entirely separate dimension from which part of the nation you're looking at. So the entire world is still two-dimensional in a sense... unless you count regions too, in which case it might be three-dimensional, though since different regions aren't really visibly parallel to each other and moving between regions is so easy, they're not really an important part of how the data is organized.

Besides, I'm from antiquity, I should understand this reality better than any of you. Teasing of course.

I'm from antiquity too. This isn't my oldest puppet - I've been playing NationStates since before the current generation of My Little Pony started.

[The Free Joy State]

Welcome to Got Issues, OP, but breaking the fourth wall so flagrantly (with the exception of special Easter Egg issues where it's meant to be a non-canon joke), I just... I can't see us ever doing that.

It breaches the premise of the game, which is that you are a leader of a nation, answering issues as a real leader would. It's satirical, yes. We try to add humour. But we do have some guidelines that we operate in (another of which, incidentally, is that it would breach player autonomy to assign @@LEADER@@ a spouse).

I do not think this option -- though it is well-written -- will add to the issue of a flat earth vs. a globular one. It seems extraneous to the question.

New options are only added if they are felt necessary (not just for comprehensiveness), and that they will add a benefit to a large number of players.

I do not feel this will (particularly those who are immersed in their RP and worldbuilding).

[Dragonisia]

The question is, where are your citizens defined at? It is not defined at the bit level, it's defined by their presentation as organized information,

Well, at least the user-visible information is organized into several named categories (census scores, policies, causes of death, and such), each of which is a one-dimensional array (most obvious with the census scores, which have explicit index numbers). When there's more depth to the data (like the aforementioned several named categories, or policies being sorted into broad categories like Government and Society), it's more like a branching one-dimensionsional tree structure than a two-dimensional plane (contrast a straight featureless river, a branching river with many tributaries, and a lake: 1D, 1D+, 2D - at first approximation, since of course all of these exist of 3D water).

Even the two-dimensional "text" you see on the page is a human-friendly rendition of what the computer internally sees as a one-dimensional string of letters and punctuation, with the second dimension only hacked in at the last moment.

I suppose the existence of census score trend graphs introduces true two-dimensional data by adding time, but that's still only one spatial dimension.

Though actually, wait. Each individual nation is one-dimensional, as I've said above. But there's a very large number of nations, and unlike real life, they don't have to carve space out of a pre-existing world: which nation you're in is an entirely separate dimension from which part of the nation you're looking at. So the entire world is still two-dimensional in a sense... unless you count regions too, in which case it might be three-dimensional, though since different regions aren't really visibly parallel to each other and moving between regions is so easy, they're not really an important part of how the data is organized.

Besides, I'm from antiquity, I should understand this reality better than any of you. Teasing of course.

I'm from antiquity too. This isn't my oldest puppet - I've been playing NationStates since before the current generation of My Little Pony started.

Well said, not much more I can add there.

Welcome to Got Issues, OP, but breaking the fourth wall so flagrantly (with the exception of special Easter Egg issues where it's meant to be a non-canon joke), I just... I can't see us ever doing that.

It breaches the premise of the game, which is that you are a leader of a nation, answering issues as a real leader would. It's satirical, yes. We try to add humour. But we do have some guidelines that we operate in (another of which, incidentally, is that it would breach player autonomy to assign @@LEADER@@ a spouse).

I do not think this option -- though it is well-written -- will add to the issue of a flat earth vs. a globular one. It seems extraneous to the question.

New options are only added if they are felt necessary (not just for comprehensiveness), and that they will add a benefit to a large number of players.

I do not feel this will (particularly those who are immersed in their RP and worldbuilding).

Sorry for the delay, reality got busy. This isn't something I'm overly invested in, and I appreciate the explanation and understand the reasoning. Though I would point out that in regards to the spouse issue, there are many that assign sons, daughters, in-laws.. uncles.. to me it was just one of many roles, but I get your point. It can easily be made to be another entity.

As to it being extraneous to the question, the question is about whether the earth is "flat" flat is a dimensional premise as it implies 2 dimensions and not rounded. To me the implication goes to the very heart of the issue and it may very well be an issue we have to deal with in the future that there are a lot more than a mere 4 dimensions, 3 spacial, 1 temporal that we are aware of even in accepted models and who knows what the implications of that may be? Knowledge of the character about its own reality is central to the question imposed and truthfully answered, nation-states.. is.. flat though in an unconventional sense as discussed previously. Is it really breaking a 4th wall or a character being far more advanced in its understanding of itself than we are accustomed to in fiction? I would assert the latter. Being aware of such a state can be part of a character. However, I understand that the goal isn't to be wholly comprehensive so I accept the explanation, I just wanted to highlight there were other ways to interpret the data.

To me, the concept is not immersion breaking.. or world building disrupting, it's just a different method of approach. More like, "world-entering"... the barrier between imaginary state ruler and player gone entirely.

[The Free Joy State]

Welcome to Got Issues, OP, but breaking the fourth wall so flagrantly (with the exception of special Easter Egg issues where it's meant to be a non-canon joke), I just... I can't see us ever doing that.

It breaches the premise of the game, which is that you are a leader of a nation, answering issues as a real leader would. It's satirical, yes. We try to add humour. But we do have some guidelines that we operate in (another of which, incidentally, is that it would breach player autonomy to assign @@LEADER@@ a spouse).

I do not think this option -- though it is well-written -- will add to the issue of a flat earth vs. a globular one. It seems extraneous to the question.

New options are only added if they are felt necessary (not just for comprehensiveness), and that they will add a benefit to a large number of players.

I do not feel this will (particularly those who are immersed in their RP and worldbuilding).

Sorry for the delay, reality got busy. This isn't something I'm overly invested in, and I appreciate the explanation and understand the reasoning. Though I would point out that in regards to the spouse issue, there are many that assign sons, daughters, in-laws.. uncles.. to me it was just one of many roles, but I get your point. It can easily be made to be another entity.

As to it being extraneous to the question, the question is about whether the earth is "flat" flat is a dimensional premise as it implies 2 dimensions and not rounded. To me the implication goes to the very heart of the issue and it may very well be an issue we have to deal with in the future that there are a lot more than a mere 4 dimensions, 3 spacial, 1 temporal that we are aware of even in accepted models and who knows what the implications of that may be? Knowledge of the character about its own reality is central to the question imposed and truthfully answered, nation-states.. is.. flat though in an unconventional sense as discussed previously. Is it really breaking a 4th wall or a character being far more advanced in its understanding of itself than we are accustomed to in fiction? I would assert the latter. Being aware of such a state can be part of a character. However, I understand that the goal isn't to be wholly comprehensive so I accept the explanation, I just wanted to highlight there were other ways to interpret the data.

To me, the concept is not immersion breaking.. or world building disrupting, it's just a different method of approach. More like, "world-entering"... the barrier between imaginary state ruler and player gone entirely.

Giving @@LEADER@@ a spouse or child is different to assigning them a mother, brother, niece, etc. You can choose whether or not to marry or have a child. You cannot choose whether you have a brother, who married and has children.

And, I'm afraid this idea really is no-go.

It may not break your immersion, but it would for many of our players. All new options are added based on whether they add value to the maximum number of players.

And it really does not fit the issue at hand -- which is how a real-life leader would approach the issue of teaching a flat-earth in their nation.

If you do remain further involved in issues, this guide to what we look for may be of use to you.

[Trotterdam]

To me the implication goes to the very heart of the issue and it may very well be an issue we have to deal with in the future that there are a lot more than a mere 4 dimensions, 3 spacial, 1 temporal that we are aware of even in accepted models and who knows what the implications of that may be?

Nah, that's irrelevant. When people talk about "whether the world is flat", that basically comes down to "can a map which is practical to use for navigation be printed on a sheet of paper with minimal distortion?". All those theoretical extra dimensions (which aren't really that well-supported, string theory is still kind of fringe science at this point) are irrelevant to navigation. The world that we are concerned with is still largely two-dimensional (with a minor third dimension that only reaches pretty tiny extents compared to the other two), except it's non-Euclidean two-dimensional (i.e., not flat).