[MEGATHREAD] Unusual Issue Effects

[The Free Joy State]

I've looked through this thread, and apparently Free Speech counts as a civil right.
And a political freedom.
Also, it turns out that this is not the place to discuss this.
I would really like to know where I can raise this issue, because it's killing two of my nations, this one included. Also, there are a number of issues where it makes sense to only affect one, but it ends up affecting both.

If you want a specific issue, here's "Nazi Sympathizers Plan Rally," option 1: this both decreased civil rights and political freedoms.
Free speech, in the context of a political rally, should only affect political freedom. Doing otherwise is silly.

This is not a thread to discuss how you'd like effects to work. This is a thread to raise unusual effects on issues and receive answers.

With regards to this issue, it gives a strict dichotomy: free speech vs. compelled civilised speech. Restricting free speech (even with cause) will restrict civil rights by various levels depending on where you start. However, it's worth pointing out that your civil rights (both the ones visible to you and the ones visible to me backstage) are still very high, and it won't take long to recover them to previous levels.

The game's simulation of civil rights is basically, the less the government stops you doing what you want to do (going where you want, saying what you want, and marrying who you want) the better your nation's civil rights.

By the way, this is your first time interracting on the forums, so perhaps we got off to a bad start. But dismissing things as "silly" is not the most effective way to get people to help you.

Posting on behalf of someone else in my region.

Emerses just noted that #300 3 ("Why don't you just get rid of these new-fangled licenses and trust a parent's instincts?") failed to remove the Parental Licensing policy.

My own data concurs that it only sometimes removes this policy. In fact, it hasn't been seen removing the policy in a little over two weeks, making me wonder if a recent change to the issue accidentally broke it.

Oh, yep, I think I see how that happened.

Thanks for the report, Trotterdam. I'll get that fixed.

[BigOstan]

(...) it turns out that this is not the place to discuss this.
I would really like to know where I can raise this issue, because it's killing two of my nations, this one included.
(...)

This is not a thread to discuss how you'd like effects to work. This is a thread to raise unusual effects on issues and receive answers.

(...)

It's funny that he not only pointed this out himself, but also asked where should he take the discussion. I'm posting this because I want to second that question. It's directly related to unusual issue effects and you won't answer it. Instead Kwomo gets policed on his language and I get disallowed from bringing up the matter again.

By the way, this is your first time interracting on the forums, so perhaps we got off to a bad start. But dismissing things as "silly" is not the most effective way to get people to help you.

I agree. Calling things 'silly' is a bad way to get help. But I think you'll also agree that dedicating a paragraph to one usage of the word 'silly' is a bad way to give it. We don't want to argue with you or annoy you. We just want an answer to our question, a link to the correct place in the forum would be enough.

[Daroso]

Issue: I Spy a Diplomatic Crisis, #233.
Response: Diplomats in Daroso are furious at constant police surveillance, 3.
Unusual effect: Economic freedom went down. What's the correlation between embassies (a political and international institution) and economic freedom?
Thanks!

[Sanctaria]

Issue: I Spy a Diplomatic Crisis, #233.
Response: Diplomats in Daroso are furious at constant police surveillance, 3.
Unusual effect: Economic freedom went down. What's the correlation between embassies (a political and international institution) and economic freedom?
Thanks!

Also in that option: "We risk all sorts of trade sanctions, true, but it pays to be careful."

[Kwomo]

By the way, this is your first time interracting on the forums, so perhaps we got off to a bad start. But dismissing things as "silly" is not the most effective way to get people to help you.

Right, sorry. I've been fed up with the twin correlation for so long with other alts, so I wrote that more in a fit of rage than with honest intentions. Thank you for keeping a cool head -- it helps to know it's not as arbitrary as it seems. Still frustrating for trying to split left-wing nations from democracies (both ways).

[Daroso]

Issue: I Spy a Diplomatic Crisis, #233.
Also in that option: "We risk all sorts of trade sanctions, true, but it pays to be careful."

Geez, you really have to read the fine print on these. Thanks

[The Free Joy State]

By the way, this is your first time interracting on the forums, so perhaps we got off to a bad start. But dismissing things as "silly" is not the most effective way to get people to help you.

Right, sorry. I've been fed up with the twin correlation for so long with other alts, so I wrote that more in a fit of rage than with honest intentions. Thank you for keeping a cool head -- it helps to know it's not as arbitrary as it seems. Still frustrating for trying to split left-wing nations from democracies (both ways).

It's alright. I understand that players invest heavily in their nations. In the past, I've lost stats I've been working hard to build and it is frustrating. Just to mention that, if the issue (or any issue) comes up again, and you're worried about the effect on your stats, feel free to dismiss.

Contrary to longstanding rumour, dismissing an issue will not effect your nation's stats in any way. There is no penalty to your nation for dismissing issues.

In fact, there are some issues that I dismiss because there is no option that works for the way I choose to play my nation.

[Leporidaeland]

Issue: A Nude Day, A New Awakening
Response: T-shirts displaying a photo of Leader performing the Full-Monty are selling out.
Unusual Effect: I gained the State Surveillance policy.

[Phydios]

Issue: A Nude Day, A New Awakening
Response: T-shirts displaying a photo of Leader performing the Full-Monty are selling out.
Unusual Effect: I gained the State Surveillance policy.

I believe you should read the fourth spoiler in the first post of this thread.

[Omnistria]

- Omnistria
- 2018-05-10
- Reclaim The Streets! (102)

I chose option 3 and enacted the No Automobiles policy. Moreover the Bike Lane banner and the Railworks banner were unlocked.

What happened is tht Public Transport fell by 0,11%. Does not seem ok to me since I now have no cars on the streets.

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

---

Deleted by The Marsupial Illuminati on Sun May 32, 2008 13:11 pm, deleted 1 time in total.

[Omnistria]

- Omnistria
- 2018-05-10
- Reclaim The Streets! (102)

I chose option 3 and enacted the No Automobiles policy. Moreover the Bike Lane banner and the Railworks banner were unlocked.

What happened is that Public Transport fell by 0,11%. Does not seem ok to me since I now have no cars on the streets.

Yeah, those stats are definitely screwed up. Thank you for the helpful report; I will bring this up backstage.

Thanks a bunch!

[The Marsupial Illuminati]

---

Deleted by The Marsupial Illuminati on Sun May 32, 2008 13:11 pm, deleted 1 time in total.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Honestly, I'm not sure now why I took it off in the first place. Ah well, fixed now.

[Dungeon]

Hello, I don't usually post about unexpected results, but I received an outcome that seemed precisely opposite of the expected results, so I thought I'd post in case there was something going on.

Issue #988
Highway Robbery by the Book

Nation: Dungeon

Date: May 10

I chose the 4th option:
“Daddy, who let the poors out onto the front lawn?” questions Richard Kensington-Wellington III, whose famed millionaire misanthropic father is currently turning on the garden sprinklers. “The working classes should have never been allowed to study in the first place. I mean, what good does it do them? It only fills them with ridiculous aspirations above their natural station. It’s quite obvious after all that only the elite of society should be educated. All of my friends and their daddies say so! The common folk would be happier doing something useful with their lives!”

The outcome was a 13% decrease in wealth gaps, and an attendant rise in income equality.

I apologize if there's some simple explanation for this being rational outcome, that I'm just overlooking. I'd be interested to learn what that may be.

Thanks you for you time and patience.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Hello, I don't usually post about unexpected results, but I received an outcome that seemed precisely opposite of the expected results, so I thought I'd post in case there was something going on.

Issue #988
Highway Robbery by the Book

Nation: Dungeon

Date: May 10

I chose the 4th option:
“Daddy, who let the poors out onto the front lawn?” questions Richard Kensington-Wellington III, whose famed millionaire misanthropic father is currently turning on the garden sprinklers. “The working classes should have never been allowed to study in the first place. I mean, what good does it do them? It only fills them with ridiculous aspirations above their natural station. It’s quite obvious after all that only the elite of society should be educated. All of my friends and their daddies say so! The common folk would be happier doing something useful with their lives!”

The outcome was a 13% decrease in wealth gaps, and an attendant rise in income equality.

I apologize if there's some simple explanation for this being rational outcome, that I'm just overlooking. I'd be interested to learn what that may be.

Thanks you for you time and patience.

Thanks for the report.

I agree that it is entirely against the story of the issue for wealth gaps to decrease.

However, the explanation is basically that the simulation is limited.

Wealth gaps are worked out primarily as a function of how free your economy is. Any measure that reduces economic freedom (for example restricting the education market to a specific group of people, and creating an environment where economic mobility is denied by statute, as in this issue) will reduce the wealth gap, even if the specific story of how economic freedom falls isn't consistent with a drop in wealth gaps. We've got no tools to directly move wealth gaps - it's a knock-on calculation from other changes.

So unfortunately this unexpected effect will remain as it is.

[Dungeon]

Hello, I don't usually post about unexpected results, but I received an outcome that seemed precisely opposite of the expected results, so I thought I'd post in case there was something going on.

Issue #988
Highway Robbery by the Book

Nation: Dungeon

Date: May 10

I chose the 4th option:
“Daddy, who let the poors out onto the front lawn?” questions Richard Kensington-Wellington III, whose famed millionaire misanthropic father is currently turning on the garden sprinklers. “The working classes should have never been allowed to study in the first place. I mean, what good does it do them? It only fills them with ridiculous aspirations above their natural station. It’s quite obvious after all that only the elite of society should be educated. All of my friends and their daddies say so! The common folk would be happier doing something useful with their lives!”

The outcome was a 13% decrease in wealth gaps, and an attendant rise in income equality.

I apologize if there's some simple explanation for this being rational outcome, that I'm just overlooking. I'd be interested to learn what that may be.

Thanks you for you time and patience.

Thanks for the report.

I agree that it is entirely against the story of the issue for wealth gaps to decrease.

However, the explanation is basically that the simulation is limited.

Wealth gaps are worked out primarily as a function of how free your economy is. Any measure that reduces economic freedom (for example restricting the education market to a specific group of people, and creating an environment where economic mobility is denied by statute, as in this issue) will reduce the wealth gap, even if the specific story of how economic freedom falls isn't consistent with a drop in wealth gaps. We've got no tools to directly move wealth gaps - it's a knock-on calculation from other changes.

So unfortunately this unexpected effect will remain as it is.

I see, that makes sense now. Thank you for the clarification, it was very helpful, and I now understand much better how that stat, and others like it, function.

I appreciate the response.

[Dwarfpolis]

Should 860.4 decrease cheerfulness, or was it because of charmlessness rising?

[Ransium]

Should 860.4 decrease cheerfulness, or was it because of charmlessness rising?

Working as intended, the editor’s exact reasoning was: “People don't typically enjoy blowing up, and this option needs a downside.” And not much else fit.

[First Nightmare]

After answering issue 61, option 1, I gained the Feudalism policy.
Now I have both the Feudalism policy... and the Socialism policy.

[Ab Humanitatis Scientiam]

After answering issue 61, option 1, I gained the Feudalism policy.
Now I have both the Feudalism policy... and the Socialism policy.

**adjusts red turtleneck**

I believe feudal socialism is discussed by Marx in Chapter 3 of the Manifesto, although critically. The gist is that the French aristocracy tried appealing to the masses with various promises in order to head off the threat of its imminent displacement by the rapidly rising bourgeoisie. Probably not "socialism" is the truly egalitarian sense, but of a sort.

At any rate, the concept exists and is valid. Apparently you've stumbled upon its NS-Verse manifestation.

... not necessarily for the workers' benefit...

Yup.

[Trotterdam]

After answering issue 61, option 1, I gained the Feudalism policy.
Now I have both the Feudalism policy... and the Socialism policy.

"Socialism" in NationStates really just means "planned economy", not necessarily for the workers' benefit...

[Trotterdam]

Today, I want to talk about the relationship between feudalism and emigration.

When looking at my list, I was surprised to find that #605 1 is one of the only two options in the game that removes No Emigration, despite the issue actually saying nothing about that, the option's primary purpose being to remove Feudalism.

On closer inspection, I found that #61 1, the sole option to give the Feudalism policy, also gives No Emigration. So, this gives the impression that the Feudalism is interpreted as automatically implying No Emigration, and so the latter is gained and lost with the former even when the issue doesn't explicitly talk about it.

However, there are two problems with this.

First, I disagree that Feudalism should actually imply No Emigration. Yes, serfs had little freedom of movement, but a feudal society doesn't consist only of serfs. Nobles and yeomen were also important parts of medieval society, and they generally had somewhat more mobility. Even serfs often had some sort of recourse, though it tended to involve paying their lord through the nose for the priviledge of leaving his service.

Second, the other options which remove Feudalism (#710 4, #894 3, #940 5) don't affect No Emigration, so this policy, whether I agree with it or not, is not applied consistently.

Hello?

[Yahlia]

I just received an answered Issue 358 - Not Another Teen Pregnancy: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88#358
I chose to go with option 6, which resulted in prioritized sex education, free contraception, and abortions on demand, and my social conservatism rose. That sounds like a mistake to me, unless I'm missing something

[Ab Humanitatis Scientiam]

I just received an answered Issue 358 - Not Another Teen Pregnancy: https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88#358
I chose to go with option 6, which resulted in prioritized sex education, free contraception, and abortions on demand, and my social conservatism rose. That sounds like a mistake to me, unless I'm missing something

Read the description of "social conservatism" very carefully. In the NS-verse, social conservatism simply means "tending to intervene in citizens private lives." Which is what #358.6 does -- it establishes a government program (sex ed, contraception, abortion-on-demand) designed to intervene and stop (young) citizens from doing something.

That it does so with means frequently ideologically associated with the political "left" IRL (sex ed, contraception, abortion-on-demand) is delightfully sneaky, but also probably legit.