Balance of issues

[Russ-Ostland]

There are some issues, which unfairly crack down the levels of political and civil freedoms. When I used an app to rally my supporters for the glory if the state I've lost a policy that considers the right if strikes essential and got my freedoms decreased quite seriously. I didn't ban anything, just used what is popular among people (according to the issue). But it was long ago, so I closed my eyes on that.
And today I decided to make a code for the Media, so they won't pay so many attention to terrorist's manifestos, i got minus 8% to political and civil freedoms. And there was an option to ban such news at all. And I wonder then why if i let the media talk about anything they want, I get +<1% to freedoms, but when I try to softly regulate them I get huge minus? And more of it. The event called "Ill Girl" occured today, and it was said that a girl had a mental desiese, not the one it was known about, so I chose to put her to the mental clinic, so they will treat her illness. And for that I got -1% to civil freedoms. Why? What's wrong about getting cured?
I ask for revision of balance of certain issues, so they won't have such unfair debuffs.

[The Free Joy State]

If you think issues' effects are unusual, the best place to ask is the Unusual Effects Thread in Got Issues.

We need the name of the issue and the option you picked, and the date, if it wasn't today.

For "Ill Girl", you are forcibly detaining her against her will, which is where the loss of civil rights comes in.

I believe you're talking about "Infamy! Infamy! They've All Got It In For Me!", where you enforced censorship on the media, preventing them freely reporting on terrorism-motivated crimes:

"After all, publicising an agenda of hate is the same as promoting it. Consign these killers and their whack-job thoughts to the oblivion of history where they belong."

This increased your censorship, and reduced civil rights. On a nation that already had high censorship of the media, it would not have had the same effect.

In NS, civil rights are firmly defined: how much freedom a person or organisation has from government control.

[Russ-Ostland]

If you think issues' effects are unusual, the best place to ask is the Unusual Effects Thread in Got Issues.

We need the name of the issue and the option you picked, and the date, if it wasn't today.

For "Ill Girl", you are forcibly detaining her against her will, which is where the loss of civil rights comes in.

I believe you're talking about "Infamy! Infamy! They've All Got It In For Me!", where you enforced censorship on the media, preventing them freely reporting on terrorism-motivated crimes:

"After all, publicising an agenda of hate is the same as promoting it. Consign these killers and their whack-job thoughts to the oblivion of history where they belong."

This increased your censorship, and reduced civil rights. On a nation that already had high censorship of the media, it would not have had the same effect.

In NS, civil rights are firmly defined: how much freedom a person or organisation has from government control.

The thing is that she IS ill, she is not a dissedent I want to shut. That's completely different things.
And the "Infamy" event is just ridiculous. Why there should even be a ban option if regulation and prohibition are just the same?

[The Free Joy State]

If you think issues' effects are unusual, the best place to ask is the Unusual Effects Thread in Got Issues.

We need the name of the issue and the option you picked, and the date, if it wasn't today.

For "Ill Girl", you are forcibly detaining her against her will, which is where the loss of civil rights comes in.

I believe you're talking about "Infamy! Infamy! They've All Got It In For Me!", where you enforced censorship on the media, preventing them freely reporting on terrorism-motivated crimes:

"After all, publicising an agenda of hate is the same as promoting it. Consign these killers and their whack-job thoughts to the oblivion of history where they belong."

This increased your censorship, and reduced civil rights. On a nation that already had high censorship of the media, it would not have had the same effect.

In NS, civil rights are firmly defined: how much freedom a person or organisation has from government control.

The thing is that she IS ill, she is not a dissedent I want to shut. That's completely different things.
And the "Infamy" event is just ridiculous. Why there should even be a ban option if regulation and prohibition are just the same?

With "Ill Girl", it's still taking away her right to choose treatment, and imposing treatment on her. It's that imposition that impacts civil rights.

And with "Infamy", regulation and prohibition are not treated the same. The stats for prohibition are much more severe. It was only because you had no regulation that you showed such strong effects. Someone who already had regulation may not have registered a change at all.

And calling things "ridiculous" does not make people feel very inclined to help you, just as a hint for the future.

[Russ-Ostland]

The thing is that she IS ill, she is not a dissedent I want to shut. That's completely different things.
And the "Infamy" event is just ridiculous. Why there should even be a ban option if regulation and prohibition are just the same?

With "Ill Girl", it's still taking away her right to choose treatment, and imposing treatment on her. It's that imposition that impacts civil rights.

And with "Infamy", regulation and prohibition are not treated the same. The stats for prohibition are much more severe. It was only because you had no regulation that you showed such strong effects. Someone who already had regulation may not have registered a change at all.

And calling things "ridiculous" does not make people feel very inclined to help you, just as a hint for the future.

I apologise for being rude, salty and inpolite. I have just waited so long, trying to give more freedom and then the slightest regulation of info about murders just ruins everything. I'm really sorry. I see your point and it seems fair to me.
And I don't remeber that first issue I've talked about. Everything I can recall is that there appeared a mainstream for different apps, that allow people to gather in large numbers almost instantly, and when i decided to create an app for my supporters i got a huge debuff. Hope you can help me with this one...

[The Free Joy State]

With "Ill Girl", it's still taking away her right to choose treatment, and imposing treatment on her. It's that imposition that impacts civil rights.

And with "Infamy", regulation and prohibition are not treated the same. The stats for prohibition are much more severe. It was only because you had no regulation that you showed such strong effects. Someone who already had regulation may not have registered a change at all.

And calling things "ridiculous" does not make people feel very inclined to help you, just as a hint for the future.

I apologise for being rude, salty and inpolite. I have just waited so long, trying to give more freedom and then the slightest regulation of info about murders just ruins everything. I'm really sorry. I see your point and it seems fair to me.
And I don't remeber that first issue I've talked about. Everything I can recall is that there appeared a mainstream for different apps, that allow people to gather in large numbers almost instantly, and when i decided to create an app for my supporters i got a huge debuff. Hope you can help me with this one...

I understand that people put a lot of work into their nations.

Does this issue look like the one you answered: 543: Flash, Aaaaaargh!. I can see you answered it, and it seems to match your description.

[Russ-Ostland]

I apologise for being rude, salty and inpolite. I have just waited so long, trying to give more freedom and then the slightest regulation of info about murders just ruins everything. I'm really sorry. I see your point and it seems fair to me.
And I don't remeber that first issue I've talked about. Everything I can recall is that there appeared a mainstream for different apps, that allow people to gather in large numbers almost instantly, and when i decided to create an app for my supporters i got a huge debuff. Hope you can help me with this one...

I understand that people put a lot of work into their nations.

Does this issue look like the one you answered: 543: Flash, Aaaaaargh!. I can see you answered it, and it seems to match your description.

It seems like that... And it looks like I've misunderstood the 4th variant... But still I think that hit a little too hard.

[The Free Joy State]

I understand that people put a lot of work into their nations.

Does this issue look like the one you answered: 543: Flash, Aaaaaargh!. I can see you answered it, and it seems to match your description.

It seems like that... And it looks like I've misunderstood the 4th variant... But still I think that hit a little too hard.

If you answered the fourth option, it's giving the leader the ability to "manipulate the flow of information to control the country", as well as tracking down people deemed troublemakers and "changing their activities to suit [the government's] needs, which is quite heavy censorship and control.

My fellow editor, Candlewhisper Archive is currently working through a major review of stats and it is possible that he may want to tweak this issue when he reaches it. That said, any changes might be fairly small, as they're pretty in-line with similarly scaled restrictions on other issues.

Any changes wouldn't amend any of your stats, as stats are not changed retroactively when issues are.

If it's any comfort, you're far from the first person to make an error when choosing an option. That's how, many moons ago, I accidentally became communist, an option that suited my nation better, so which I ultimately kept. I was irritated when it happened, though.

EDIT: To reduce the number of errors, I suggest you turn on: "Require confirmation before passing legislation" in your Settings, if you haven't yet done so. Also, I suggest you turn on "Show More Stats" in your settings, because some changes that seem quite large in percentage points are actually very small when you look at the raw numbers.

[Russ-Ostland]

It seems like that... And it looks like I've misunderstood the 4th variant... But still I think that hit a little too hard.

If you answered the fourth option, it's giving the leader the ability to "manipulate the flow of information to control the country", as well as tracking down people deemed troublemakers and "changing their activities to suit [the government's] needs, which is quite heavy censorship and control.

My fellow editor, Candlewhisper Archive is currently working through a major review of stats and it is possible that he may want to tweak this issue when he reaches it. That said, any changes might be fairly small, as they're pretty in-line with similarly scaled restrictions on other issues.

Any changes wouldn't amend any of your stats, as stats are not changed retroactively when issues are.

If it's any comfort, you're far from the first person to make an error when choosing an option. That's how, many moons ago, I accidentally became communist, an option that suited my nation better, so which I ultimately kept. I was irritated when it happened, though.

EDIT: To reduce the number of errors, I suggest you turn on: "Require confirmation before passing legislation" in your Settings, if you haven't yet done so. Also, I suggest you turn on "See More Stats" in your settings, because some changes that seem quite large in percentage points are actually very small when you look at the raw numbers.

Thank you for your help and sorry again for my behaviour. I wonder if I can help with smth to you