Issues too extreme!

[Idealismania]

I notice I dismiss many issues simply because all of the action plans are all too extreme. For example this is the issue I got tonight:

The Issue
After a recent left-wing broadsheet exposé of agricultural practices, an outburst of public paranoia has stirred up the organic foods debate.

The Debate
1."I just can't stomach it any more," rants concerned parent Zeke Longbottom. "My children's future is being put at risk by irresponsible corporate practices. We must outlaw the use of pesticides and additives by farmers and food producers."

2."I've heard enough of this treehugging, lefty nonsense," argues corporate spokesman Anne-Marie Hamilton. "The agricultural industry needs to use the most advanced technology available, it's the only way to keep Idealismania competitive in food production. Besides, the studies we have commissioned prove that only a very small number of child deaths are due to our products, and surely that's an acceptable rate in the name of progress?"

3."Stop torturing Mother Earth!" yells outraged environmental extremist Tobias Jefferson. "Are we prepared to sacrifice our planet and our souls for the sake of a few extra pebbles? If we hope to live in harmony with the environment that nurtures and protects us, we must ban all industries that pollute our world. Let us return to the trees, my brothers!"

The Government Position
The government is preparing to dismiss this issue.


I just wish there were more moderate stances we could take. Like I would approve the use of agricultural technology if it was deemed to be safe by blind and unbiased testing. So my choice would be somewhere between one and two, but I wouldn't pick one or two (and definately not 3) because they are too extreme. I get a lot of issues like this with only extreme choices that I simply dismiss, but I would like to answer more issues to develop the "personality" of my nation more. Is there anything that can be done to add more moderate options to the issues?

[Verlan]

1. Wrong forum. Go to Gameplay.

2. Read the FAQ. From any screen you can just move your eyeballs leftward and see that you can be there in one click.

3. Stop being a wuss. Pick a side, we're at war.

But, really. The point of the issues is for you to establish what is important in your nation. Environment or economy? conservative values or civil rights? The options are extreme for a reason.

[Kruplyan]

From the FAQ:

I don't agree with any of the options on this issue!

Dismiss it, then. This is the equivalent of ignoring an issue until people stop talking about it and there's not so much pressure to do something. If you were a real government, you'd do this all the time, of course, but in NationStates it's more interesting if you respond to issues by actually making decisions.

My decision had unintended consequences!

Yep, that'll happen. For one thing, see "Why is my nation so weird?" above. For another, pretty much every decision you make will involve a trade-off of some kind. It's kind of an exercise in choosing the best of a bunch of bad options. You might find this frustrating, especially if you're the kind of person who thinks the solutions to all the world's problems are obvious.

[Idealismania]

lol thanks for the fast reply and for being so polite about it

[Xsyne]

The options are all supposed to be ridiculous.

[Pope Joan]

The fun thing is that whatever option you choose, you usually get screwed. Taxes go up, GNP goes down, violet taps your phone.

[Milograd]

The fun of the game is seeing how you can manage to balance out all the crazy options and still make an effective government...besides forum at least.