Regional Issues: Another thought

[Kandarin]

(I know the title is very similar to this, but this is a different idea and I'd rather not have multiple ideas competing for the same thread unless that thread is the Big Unified List)

With the new system of region listing, it's become apparent that the system does track regional World Census trends - most beautiful, godless, etc. I didn't know that until now, nor of course do I know how, but that and the previously raised subject of regional issues gives me an idea. Within the existing Issues system, without adding any glaringly new Issues model (i.e. it'd still pop up in your normal Issues bin), would it be possible to make regional World Census rankings an issue trigger?

I realize that it's not an idea that is easy to explain, so here's an example. Suppose you're a Moralistic Democracy in a region with a relatively high ranking of Nudest. In addition to the issues you're already eligible for, this makes you eligible for an issue where your moralistic government has to tackle the question of how to protect their citizens from seeing those shameful, sinful displays of flesh in neighboring nations (Likely options: A) Censor the foreign press, B) Tone down the moralism, C) Build up the military! Show those heathens who's boss!). Or if you're a poor but well-educated nation in a wealthier region, you'd get an issue where your government has to confront the problem of brain drain, etc.

Is this technically feasible to do? If it is, is it an appealing idea?

[Marcuslandia]

I'm starting to groove on this general subject.

Ommmmm. Hmmmm. (Clearing my thoughts.) Ommmmm.

Format: The question has to do with surrounding events and how they match up (or not) with internal social workings. "What do we _here_ do about that _there_?"

Trigger: Clear regional rankings IN THE WORLD. That is, just because your nation is the Nudest in the region doesn't mean diddly if the entire region is made up of prudes and you all appear in the bottom 10% of the world list. BUT, if your nation ranks high internationally, while the rest of the region is way down there....Different story. Or vice versa. Basically, there's some kind of sharp contrast between your nation and everybody else in the region. The awareness brought on by a recent "Most" listing.

Choices: Though the obvious choice may be "We should move," most choices should be like regular issues which simply tweak the national character factors.

Issue construction and implementation: There's something like 239 issues available at the moment. No one nation will ever get all of those as certain issues aim only at certain kinds of nations. Similarly, there should be a large number of these before they're brought on line, just so it doesn't work out that 35% of the nations don't qualify to get any of them, or something like that. It would probably be best if there was more than one editor to review each issue, to make sure that something whacko isn't likely to occur. Something like, "We sent this issue to 29 nations, and of those, 27 immediately moved out of their region. [You do NOT want to have some Founder ranting, "You're driving all the players out of my region with that issue!"] I'd suggest a panel of 3-5 editors with unanimous agreement before activating any given issue.

Them's my thoughts so far.

[Zemnaya Svoboda]

(I know the title is very similar to this, but this is a different idea and I'd rather not have multiple ideas competing for the same thread unless that thread is the Big Unified List)

With the new system of region listing, it's become apparent that the system does track regional World Census trends - most beautiful, godless, etc. I didn't know that until now, nor of course do I know how, but that and the previously raised subject of regional issues gives me an idea. Within the existing Issues system, without adding any glaringly new Issues model (i.e. it'd still pop up in your normal Issues bin), would it be possible to make regional World Census rankings an issue trigger?

I realize that it's not an idea that is easy to explain, so here's an example. Suppose you're a Moralistic Democracy in a region with a relatively high ranking of Nudest. In addition to the issues you're already eligible for, this makes you eligible for an issue where your moralistic government has to tackle the question of how to protect their citizens from seeing those shameful, sinful displays of flesh in neighboring nations (Likely options: A) Censor the foreign press, B) Tone down the moralism, C) Build up the military! Show those heathens who's boss!). Or if you're a poor but well-educated nation in a wealthier region, you'd get an issue where your government has to confront the problem of brain drain, etc.

Is this technically feasible to do? If it is, is it an appealing idea?

That is an intriguing idea. I would just like to beg and plead that before anything like this is implemented, the effect on nations in very very large regions, like mine and Kandarin's, is taken into account!

[Kandarin]

That is an intriguing idea. I would just like to beg and plead that before anything like this is implemented, the effect on nations in very very large regions, like mine and Kandarin's, is taken into account!

For it to work at all, it'd have to be. You'll notice that the top thousand or so nudest/most godless/most taxed/etc. regions are microregions, usually with one person. So are the the bottom thousand or so. I suppose that this is because there are only one or two members to take into account, whose stances are more likely to be extreme than an average of the stances of a large and diverse populace. So my example wouldn't work if the Moralistic Democracy was required to be in one of the nudest regions of all, but perhaps it would if it was required to be in the nudest third of regions, or to be in a region with greater than a certain aggregate nudeness...I don't know how the stats are calculated.

On the other end of the regional scale, it'd make sense for being entirely alone in one's region to disqualify a nation from any issue that involved responding to the stances of its neighbors. If you're alone, you don't have any neighbors whose effects on the political climate in your region would put Issues on your desk. But then, isolation might reasonably spawn some issues of its own.

[Marcuslandia]

[quote="Zemnaya Svoboda"

That is an intriguing idea. I would just like to beg and plead that before anything like this is implemented, the effect on nations in very very large regions, like mine and Kandarin's, is taken into account![/quote]

Good point.

Triggers are based on international placement, with placement in top or bottom 10%. First filter.

Next, placement within region. Candidate nation must be in top or bottom 10%. Second filter.

The other 90% of the region must NOT be in the same upper or lower 10% of the world for the subject matter. Final filter.

Using Nudism as an example.
Your nation is the Nudest in region. BUT the entire region is in the mid-range in the world. Nothing happens
Again, the same. BUT there's several of your region in the top 10%, accounting for about 25% of the region's members. Nothing happens.
Again, the same. You're in the world's top 10%, the only representative of your region. Event triggers. "What are we going to do, being we are surrounded by prudes?"

When put in terms of percentages, it's easier to note which nations are skewing the bell curve. And regional issues are more of a factor when there's somebody odd catching attention. When the quirky news story about the oddball in your region pops up, you WILL arrive at some conclusion -- and that conclusion will help define who you are.

[Given the numbers of low-pop regions quirking the distribution, maybe a better number would be 20%.]

[Bears Armed]

I realize that it's not an idea that is easy to explain, so here's an example. Suppose you're a Moralistic Democracy in a region with a relatively high ranking of Nudest. In addition to the issues you're already eligible for, this makes you eligible for an issue where your moralistic government has to tackle the question of how to protect their citizens from seeing those shameful, sinful displays of flesh in neighboring nations

You seem to be assuming that every 'moralistic' regime will share the same single code of morality, which won't necessarily be the case...

[TannerFrankLand]

I realize that it's not an idea that is easy to explain, so here's an example. Suppose you're a Moralistic Democracy in a region with a relatively high ranking of Nudest. In addition to the issues you're already eligible for, this makes you eligible for an issue where your moralistic government has to tackle the question of how to protect their citizens from seeing those shameful, sinful displays of flesh in neighboring nations

You seem to be assuming that every 'moralistic' regime will share the same single code of morality, which won't necessarily be the case...

That is true, but by definition in this game, it's a gov't style with low personal freedom, which obviously clashes with the nudity issue which requires high personal freedom.

[Bears Armed]

I realize that it's not an idea that is easy to explain, so here's an example. Suppose you're a Moralistic Democracy in a region with a relatively high ranking of Nudest. In addition to the issues you're already eligible for, this makes you eligible for an issue where your moralistic government has to tackle the question of how to protect their citizens from seeing those shameful, sinful displays of flesh in neighboring nations

You seem to be assuming that every 'moralistic' regime will share the same single code of morality, which won't necessarily be the case...

That is true, but by definition in this game, it's a gov't style with low personal freedom, which obviously clashes with the nudity issue which requires high personal freedom.

Why? What if a nation's people have fur, so that nudity simply isn't an issue there, for example? Or what if the 'low personal freedoms' include compulsory nudity?

[TannerFrankLand]

Yes yes. Agreed in real life, talking about how the game is programed though. And I'm pretty sure a moralistic is low personal freedom, and Nudity is defined by high personal freedoms.

[Marcuslandia]

Why? What if a nation's people have fur, so that nudity simply isn't an issue there, for example? Or what if the 'low personal freedoms' include compulsory nudity?

We may allow that helicopters can pick up an entire nation and move it. But aside from that, I've always been of the impression that national populations are still comprised of human beings.

[TannerFrankLand]

Why? What if a nation's people have fur, so that nudity simply isn't an issue there, for example? Or what if the 'low personal freedoms' include compulsory nudity?

We may allow that helicopters can pick up an entire nation and move it. But aside from that, I've always been of the impression that national populations are still comprised of human beings.

Some nations are on different planets... so I guess not.

[Marcuslandia]

Some nations are on different planets... so I guess not.

Eh? How can they be the target of an inter-regional invasion?

Oooo. Now there's a thought. Regions that want to opt out of the invader/defender game simply get moved to a different planet.

[Kandarin]

You seem to be assuming that every 'moralistic' regime will share the same single code of morality, which won't necessarily be the case...

Nudity vs. Moralistic is an example to show the sort of thing I had in mind. The example is not the point here, but if you find it unsatisfactory you can probably think of many other issues that could be triggered by regional criteria.

[Bears Armed]

Why? What if a nation's people have fur, so that nudity simply isn't an issue there, for example? Or what if the 'low personal freedoms' include compulsory nudity?

We may allow that helicopters can pick up an entire nation and move it. But aside from that, I've always been of the impression that national populations are still comprised of human beings.

Well, this nation's population consists mainly of Ursines (i.e. anthropomorphic Bears) and neither my regional neighbours nor most of the other nations with which I'm involved in Sports RP have any problem with the fact...

[Kandarin]

Why? What if a nation's people have fur, so that nudity simply isn't an issue there, for example? Or what if the 'low personal freedoms' include compulsory nudity?

We may allow that helicopters can pick up an entire nation and move it. But aside from that, I've always been of the impression that national populations are still comprised of human beings.

Well, this nation's population consists mainly of Ursines (i.e. anthropomorphic Bears) and neither my regional neighbours nor most of the other nations with which I'm involved in Sports RP have any problem with the fact...

RP can and does recognize that, but Issues are another matter. The sheer variety of possible RPed concepts prevents most of them from being supported by issues. Much as I'd like one, I can't reasonably expect to see an issue that accommodates my RPed stance that my nation is an underground magical conflux half-populated by ruthless and inscrutable dark elves. Ditto for a lot of the weirder approaches.

[Marcuslandia]

Well, this nation's population consists mainly of Ursines (i.e. anthropomorphic Bears) and neither my regional neighbours nor most of the other nations with which I'm involved in Sports RP have any problem with the fact...

Well then, given that a human being wearing furs would NOT be considered nude, it follows that any being has a pelt permanently attached would not be considered nude, unless the fur was removed, e.g., by shaving it off.

Now, public indecency involving showing off one's genitalia....Different story.

[Tanaara]

I've always been of the impression that national populations are still comprised of human beings

Sorry Marcuslandia, but a sizeable percentage of my nation is not human at all, and nothing in the game reguires it to be. Even the best WA resolutions take that variance into account and say nothing about what species they apply towards. Supposing that we all must be humansis very speciest of you and seems to show that you don't have much idea what other nations are really like.

[Marcuslandia]

"Over 2 million served!"

You betcha I haven't looked at the broad spectrum of species inhabiting this game. Is it even safe to say that the large majority are human?

[Kandarin]

RP recognizes the possibility of bazillions of sapient races. The present set of Issues don't. Issues presume that the population of a nation is human and don't go into the unique cultural and political ramifications of having a non-human race around (with the sole exception of AIs). I can see why it would be difficult to do otherwise, much less match non-human RP settings; most non-human species in RP are one-off races that are only RPed by a single poster. Matching their needs with Issues would involve an extraordinary amount of new Issues with a very, very small audience. It'd please RPers, but would also detract from the political sim aspect of the game if nudity issues had to address whether a nation was furry, automobile issues had to address whether citizens could just fly with wings, etc.

[Tired Goblins]

For me, one of the fun things about NS is working issues that are geared for MT (modern Tech) humans into a land that isn't. Though I guess goblins aren't as far out as many species. At least we have 2 arms & 2 legs.

[Tanaara]

It's true that I haven't looked at many of the recent resolutions, but there was a time when it was pretty much not done to try an make things purely human centric - I remember seeing many a post where the poster brought up points of comment that "Well not all species are mature at X age", or "That doesn't take into account that such and such does not provide for races that have xx life spans" and other such.

I also remember many a debate about what is a sapient species and what isn't for the bill of rights...

[Marcuslandia]

Just consider the range of possibilities for just purely humans:
Amazonian tribesmen
Amish
Australian aborigines
Bushmen
Cargo Cult tribesmen of New Guinea
Eskimos
Mennonites


That's just a quick sketch. Factor in history to look at racial and tribal societies like the myriad of different tribal types in North America or the mass migrations across Europe and the variety is practically endless.

And yet people had to go look for non-terrestrial species for inspiration?

Anybody try the Borg yet?

[Sirocco]

When editing/writing, I have to assume issues are about modern-day humans because that's what's expected. To suggest issues should be written to reflect otherwise is just silly. Not that that's what this thread's about! Stay on topic, people.

[[violet]]

Suppose you're a Moralistic Democracy in a region with a relatively high ranking of Nudest. In addition to the issues you're already eligible for, this makes you eligible for an issue...
<snip>
Is this technically feasible to do? If it is, is it an appealing idea?

It is a clever idea! It's mostly feasible. Currently there is no tracking of what each region (or nation) used to be ranked, so in the above example, it would only work if today's World Census report happened to be on "Nudest." But assuming that, then yes, it can be done.