NationStates

Is it common to get the Zombie outbreak issue? Or is it one of those seldom to come to your nation's attention?

Sorgan wrote:Is it common to get the Zombie outbreak issue? Or is it one of those seldom to come to your nation's attention?

It's one of those random "Easter Egg" ones. I think they only come when your nation meets some standards. Some of them, that is.

Ballotonia wrote:Added:

#251: The Trouble With Hobos [Responsible; ed:Sirocco]

At first glance, I read that issue's title as "The Trouble With Hippos"...

(The trouble being, of course, the fact that they're really quite LARGE... )

The trouble being, of course, the fact that they're really quite LARGE... )

In Unibot, its the Hobos that are quite large.

i recieved issue no 7 today and i was a little confused on what action woudl be the best for my nation....


The increasingly militant Animal Liberation Front struck again last night, freeing dozens of chickens bound for delicious snack packs.
The Debate

1. "These nuts have got to be stopped," demands concerned consumer Calvin Thiesen. "They need to face the fact people want snack packs, no matter how many innocent chickens must be sacrificed. Besides, chickens would do the same to us if they had the chance."


2. "These Liberationists are highlighting an important issue," pleads Randy Falopian. "Too often, animals are put through needless cruelty, just to make their flesh taste a little more deliciously succulent. I'm sure we could ban the more horrific abuses without putting too much of a dent in our national obesity figures. Couldn't we?"


3. "Animals have feelings too!" yelled protestor Freddy Spirit, before being set upon by hungry passers-by. "Free the animals! Ban meat-eating!"


4. Economist Billy-Bob Broadside has an alternative. "You don't need to take away the people's right to choose. You just need to build the costs of animal suffering into the price. A tax on meat-eating, in proportion to the amount of cruelty involved, would do the trick. Plus think of the benefit for the national coffers! Of course, poor people wouldn't be able to afford meat, but that's just more incentive for them to get jobs."


so my question is really wich one too choose.....im thinking of either 2 or 3 as my responce the quetion is what happpen.

Depends on how you'd like your nation run, Citadel.
Nobody can tell you otherwise.

I don't honestly see a difference between 1 and 3 except maybe the overall effect it has political freedoms, because opinion 3 is being said by a radical protester.

So should we put our issues here when they are accepted?

Todd McCloud wrote:So should we put our issues here when they are accepted?

You may, yes, buit obviously there's no requirement to do so. Issues posted here can be added to the list. If not posted here, they'll be added only when I receive them myself in one of my nations.

Ballotonia

Added:

#253: How Much Democracy Is Too Much? [Kandarin; ed:Kandarin]

#252 so far remains a mystery...

Ballotonia

#255: Welfare Programs Not Faring Well

A recent lull in legislation has sparked the fires of some bored politicians. After reviewing the back-log of constituent complaints, they've come to your desk demanding welfare reform.
The Debate

1. "The process ought to be made easier," says Inga Matthews, picking the grime out of her dirty fingernails. "It's so difficult convincing welfare administrators that I am actually a poor, helpless vagrant on the brink of homelessness! When you finally do, you get tangled up in all the red tape, and you're lucky to see a dime. The government should just trust my word and fork over the @@CURRENCY@@s I need to survive."


2. "The current system is not very efficient, I'll admit," says Konrad @@RANDOMNAME@@, a local welfare administrator and esteemed bureaucrat. "But we can't trust these bums to manage their welfare aid. How are we supposed to help them help themselves if they waste their benefits on things like trashy clothes and cheap alcohol? We need more authority over how the aid is spent, it's the only way we can be assured that it is used responsibly."


3. "Get the free-loaders off the government teat!" shouts conservative activist, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "The free-market system says that those who work hard will succeed. If these so-called 'needy people' would roll their sleeves up, lift a finger, and earn an honest living, we wouldn't be bankrupting our country helping them! The only sensible solution is to abolish all welfare programs, and let the natural, capitalist process take place."


4. "He has a point," says popular political pundit @@RANDOMNAME@@. "There are a lot of people in the system, and some of them don't really need to be there. The government should be finding these people jobs, so that our welfare system can survive and meet the needs of the truly impoverished. Of course, we're going to have to spend a few @@CURRENCY@@s to achieve this goal. But, what's a little tax hike if it means saving our dying welfare programs and the people who depend on them?"


5. "Capitalism is the very reason why we need welfare in the first place. Laissez-faire policies would only make the problem worse," argues political activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "If the government would ensure that all employers pay their employees the amount they need to live – no more, no less – then the problem of providing for the poor would disappear."


Issue by: The Commonwealth of Glen-Rhodes
Editor: Glen-Rhodes

Added:
#257: @@LEADER@@ Assassinated... Almost [Hessinator; ed:Responsible]


I'm noticing something peculiar... I seem to not be getting any of the new even numbered issues. Here are the recent additions to the list:
#249: Particle Accelerator Sparks High Energy Debate [Milostein; ed:Sirocco]
#250: ?
#251: The Trouble With Hobos [Responsible; ed:Sirocco]
#252: ?
#253: How Much Democracy Is Too Much? [Kandarin; ed:Kandarin]
#254: ?
#255: Welfare Programs Not Faring Well [Glen-Rhodes; ed:Glen-Rhodes]
#256: ?
#257: @@LEADER@@ Assassinated... Almost [Hessinator; ed:Responsible]

Could be coincidence, I guess, but I'm not checking with just my one nation... I got a bunch of them. Is anyone else getting these even numbered ones at all? (not counting the authors themselves, ofcourse)

Ballotonia

And ofcourse, the day after posting the above, I get:
#256: Easter Egg: Suburbs Are Out Of This World [Scolopendra; ed:Sirocco]

So, perhaps we got a whole load of easter eggs?


Also, I FINALLY (!) received issue "#203 Suffer The Starving Children?" on one of my nations. It's not even an easter egg, but if it's this hard to get it it IMHO should qualify as one
I noticed option 1 (still novel-sized, only outdone by option 4 of "#238: We Need A Few Good Men Who Like Men?") had been rewritten since that issue was found by someone else, but now it contains an error. "everday" should be "every day".

Ballotonia

Added:
#258: What's In A Name? [Zombitosis; ed:Sirocco]


Error in option 1: "I don't know why my folks were thinking" should be "I don't know what my folks were thinking"

Also, the end of option 3 "Who could make fun of a child named Six-Eight-Four?" is more funny if it were "Who could make fun of a child named Sixty-Nine?"

Ballotonia

I thought that I'd got a new one, but this ('Jennifer Government Censorship Row') actually turned out to be #46!
How on Earth have I never had that one before, in four years of play during which I've normally had several nations a a time active?!? Does anybody here know what its 'eligibility' conditions are?

Ballotonia wrote:Also, the end of option 3 "Who could make fun of a child named Six-Eight-Four?" is more funny if it were "Who could make fun of a child named Sixty-Nine?"

Ballotonia

Reverse 684 and you might know what there is to make make fun about. I mean, I liked my first 'real' computer with a 486 processor... but maybe I am just a nerd...

Ballotonia wrote:Added:
#258: What's In A Name? [Zombitosis; ed:Sirocco]


Error in option 1: "I don't know why my folks were thinking" should be "I don't know what my folks were thinking"

Also, the end of option 3 "Who could make fun of a child named Six-Eight-Four?" is more funny if it were "Who could make fun of a child named Sixty-Nine?"

Ballotonia

Not really. I would see that as rather corny, actually.

I actually loved this issue though because one of my pet peeves is some of the stupid names parents come up with for kids these days. Kudos to Zombitosis for a great issue.

Is there an Issue that lets you name a national language?

Holyter wrote:Is there an Issue that lets you name a national language?

There are only three known issues which add a new setting. They're religion, capital city, and leader name.

Ballotonia

What's In A Name?


A man by the name of &%*\@# Smith hit the headlines yesterday when he had his first name legally changed to 'John', citing the ridicule and stress he suffered because of his given name. Mr Smith publicly commented afterwards that there should be more restrictions on what parents can name their children.
The Debate

1. "People do so love to be different," says Insert Name Here, with a heavy sigh. "I don't know why my folks were thinking when they named me. Probably about how 'novel' and 'with it' they were being, but I didn't get a say in it did I? Growing up in my neighbourhood with the first name 'Insert' wasn't fun at all I can tell you! The government should set up a registry of recognised names that are clean, sensible, and non-teasable. Kids deserve better."


2. "It's none of the government's business what I name my daughter," says Follicle Rainbow Gooseknob, cradling [expletive deleted] in her arms. "Are you going to tell us what to think next? Where to go? Who to love? I don't want some grey-faced bureaucrat deciding what name is appropriate for my child! What kind of country hates personal freedom so much you can't even choose your own name?"


3. "Names? Names are so inefficient!" Says Five-Oh-Three McGoohan, counting beads. "Who can honestly tell one Tobias Silk from another? That name's so popular now, I met three people at the mall with it just last week! Face it! Names are old-hat! Everyone ought to go by a government-allocated ID number instead, much more practical. Who could make fun of a child named Six-Eight-Four?"

Added:
#254: Freedom Comes At A Price [Responsible; ed:Responsible]


Ballotonia

Ballotonia wrote:Added:
#254: Freedom Comes At A Price [Responsible; ed:Responsible]

Hr'rmm, isn't the main point of "editing" to spot any problems that the original author might have mised? It seems to me that, generally speaking, having that each new issue edited by somebody other than its actual writer might be a good idea...

It's just the three Issue contest issues. Sirocco said he'd be adding those verbatim. And Responsible never makes mostakes...

Responsible wrote:It's just the three Issue contest issues. Sirocco said he'd be adding those verbatim. And Responsible never makes mostakes...

Okay. (I'd seen Glenn-Rhodes' one, too, but didn't get around to posting here about that...)

Bears Armed wrote:I thought that I'd got a new one, but this ('Jennifer Government Censorship Row') actually turned out to be #46!
How on Earth have I never had that one before, in four years of play during which I've normally had several nations a a time active?!? Does anybody here know what its 'eligibility' conditions are?

Yes, I believe I do. And, furthermore, they are easy to deduce after you've gotten it a couple of times, and they're very apropos. I don't plan to spoil it, because figuring it out is one of the few honest thrills you can get from the issues once you've gotten to where you can recognize them all on sight.

As for hard to get issues, my current goal in life^H^H^H^HNationStates is to somehow qualify for issue # 65 (Martial Law), and the pizza-loving aliens Easter egg (# 80).

- nsh -

Responsible wrote:It's just the three Issue contest issues. Sirocco said he'd be adding those verbatim. And Responsible never makes mostakes...

There's a bit more to it than that. Back when the issue editing system got started a lot of issues were already in the queue and lots of people were jumping up and down in excitement to see their own submissions 'finally' get into Nationstates. The first issue that was entered into the game through the editing system was:
#39: Scandal Rocks @@NAME@@'s Government! [The SLAGLands; ed:The SLAGLands]
A mod had selected his own issue, edited it, and pushed it into the game. This is when a total shitstorm broke out with accusations of mods using their special powers to favor their own writings above others. It got quite ugly. Since that event, no issue had been edited by its author until the recent three... more about them later.

After a while Sirocco became the editor of close to all new issues, so when he wrote a new issue another mod stepped in to be its editor:
#127: Aging Concerns in @@NAME@@ [Sirocco; ed:Reploid Productions]
thus avoiding repeat accusations of mod bias.

With these:
#241: A Capital City For @@NAME@@? [Sirocco]
#242: Follow The Leader [Sirocco]
#243: A Question Of Faith [Sirocco]
we saw something rather unusual happening (last occured for issues #31-#38). These issues have no editor mentioned at all. From what I understand the concept of adding the new settings was approved by [violet] (or Max, I still can't tell them apart ) and with new settings to be happy about apparently nobody even thought about the whole 'mods selecting their own writings to be issues above user-written issues' problem. At least, I haven't heard a peep about it from anyone, and I'm surely not gonna complain either

And this takes us to these recent additions:
#253: How Much Democracy Is Too Much? [Kandarin; ed:Kandarin]
#254: Freedom Comes At A Price [Responsible; ed:Responsible]
#255: Welfare Programs Not Faring Well [Glen-Rhodes; ed:Glen-Rhodes]
So now we once again have issues edited by their own authors... Time for a shitstorm again? I personally don't see the problem in this specific case: the issues were selected by someone else: Sirocco. These people hence got their issue into the game because they very well earned it, not because of an ability to just handpick their own writings. Someone else approved the issues (the most experienced mod in issue editing no less), and considered these issues to be good enough to be in the game. End of story, as far as I'm concerned.

Keep in mind though: don't go using your new editing powers to edit your own issues into the game. Before you know it users who submitted issues might consider that to be bad form...

Ballotonia