Issues don't make sense.

[Lemnos and Agios-Efstratios]

Civil rights and political freedom both fell by 14% for choosing the option to not show a terrorist face and publish his manifesto, which undoubtedly was full of hateful and violent things that only served to inspire further terrorism and cause more harm. Above all that, the issue was never clear cut AND half of the options didn't make logical sense to the issue at hand. It was either treat terrorists as celebrities or treat them as terrorists, and treating them like terrorist somehow lowers your civil rights and political freedom? Above all that, the worst part is, if you pick don't show their face, it says, "genocide is seen as a topic best avoided in history lessons." Nowhere did the issue say anything about genocide, history lessons, or anything relating to the effect.

I have only one question; why? How does that affect civil and political freedom by choosing to not publish a terrorist's hateful manifesto and face? In fact, it affects no one besides terrorist and terrorism. By this issue logic, anyone who won't show a terrorist's face, after he murdered hundreds of people likely, hates civil and political freedoms? Yeah, it doesn't make logical sense. In fact, most of Nationstate issues nowadays don't make any sense and lack any middle ground option (Which they shouldn't because most issues are now just a guessing game of "I wonder if this issue which sounds good will have a completely different effect".

Seriously, my recent will to even want to answer issues is at an all-time low because I continuously think they'll do nothing but harm. Even ones that seem harmless often have the biggest effect on your nation. Like wanting to clear out a slum only gives you four options; let a private company tear it down and keep those who lived in it as slaves, leave it be, paint it, or increase welfare. Not of those options have a middle ground or a logical option simply called, "Tear it down and build new housing paid for by the government." Seriously, it's not that difficult to add a middle ground logical option to issues. I could do it. In fact, I've made and summited issues with a middle ground option.

Anyways, the point of this post is to point out how stupid and senseless issues have become and how their decisions sometimes don't match up with their effects. I want to play Nationstates, not a guessing game.

[Tavok]

Presumably because you've banned the press from publishing the manifesto. Your decision was at the national level, not the newspaper level. If you answer more issues they'll begin having smaller effects.

Also, it's not self-evident that more civil rights and political freedoms is better. If you answer issues the way you think they're properly answered, you'll end up with the level of 'civil rights' appropriate in your ideal nation. I do agree that sometimes the definition of 'civil rights' implied by the effects of certain issues doesn't line up perfectly with my own preferred definition.

[Lemnos and Agios-Efstratios]

Presumably because you've banned the press from publishing the manifesto. Your decision was at the national level, not the newspaper level. If you answer more issues they'll begin having smaller effects.

And that somehow affect civil and political rights somehow? Sure, I banned showing terrorist, who kill, who publish things about killing more people and causing more death. The only other option in the issue was to make them celebrities or let them kill more people. I'd understand if it dropped it by like 1%, but 14%? How? I'm not talking about don't talk about the attack, it was thinking it would ban them from showing his face and publish his hateful speech (Which likely called for violence and more terrorist)

[First American Empire]

Also, this is in the wrong forum. You accidentally posted it in NSG.

[Tavok]

Well yes I guess the idea is that press freedoms are both civil and political. If the government can ban certain speech based on not liking the content, it opens the door to the use of that power to weaken the political opposition.

[Costa Hermosa]

Having no right answer to any given problem is what makes a good issue.

[Lemnos and Agios-Efstratios]

Having no right answer to any given problem is what makes a good issue.

That's probably the least most realistic way of looking at it, but okay. Most issues these days, and in this government, have clear answers. The government doesn't play a random guessing game as we do on Nationstates. They identify the problem and craft a solution that is logical and makes real sense.

[Lemnos and Agios-Efstratios]

Well yes I guess the idea is that press freedoms are both civil and political. If the government can ban certain speech based on not liking the content, it opens the door to the use of that power to weaken the political opposition.

That's the problem. I didn't ban the topic, I banned showing a murderer's face and his book about murdering more people.

[Herald]

Well yes I guess the idea is that press freedoms are both civil and political. If the government can ban certain speech based on not liking the content, it opens the door to the use of that power to weaken the political opposition.

That's the problem. I didn't ban the topic, I banned showing a murderer's face and his book about murdering more people.

Then you did, in fact, restrict them. End of story. Yes, you didn't go further and restrict the story itself, but you did place restrictions on the news media. So freedoms go down.

[Lemnos and Agios-Efstratios]

That's the problem. I didn't ban the topic, I banned showing a murderer's face and his book about murdering more people.

Then you did, in fact, restrict them. End of story. Yes, you didn't go further and restrict the story itself, but you did place restrictions on the news media. So freedoms go down.

Still not sure why it cut both freedoms by 14%. I'd understand and accept if it reduced those freedoms by 1-2%, but 14%? That's pretty big for something very small. And I'm also not sure why says, "genocide is seen as a topic best avoided in history lessons" that part really doesn't make sense. I want to manage a nation, not gamble my chances with what issue is written by someone who doesn't understand how the world works, how government work, and how civil and political freedoms work.

[Gates of Alexander]

Not sure why says, "genocide is seen as a topic best avoided in history lessons" that part really doesn't make sense

Those little issue result sentences are just meant to be funny. Just ignore them, and pay attention to the stats. Just a little touch of humor for a game that is meant to be satirical. They have no impact.

[Lemnos and Agios-Efstratios]

Not sure why says, "genocide is seen as a topic best avoided in history lessons" that part really doesn't make sense

Those little issue result sentences are just meant to be funny. Just ignore them, and pay attention to the stats. Just a little touch of humor for a game that is meant to be satirical. They have no impact.

It doesn't tell me what stats are going to fall and rise on the issue. It just says, "A, B, C and sometimes D. All of which don't make sense. Some options might randomly destroy your nation you've worked four years on."

[Gates of Alexander]

It doesn't tell me what stats are going to fall and rise on the issue. It just says, "A, B, C and sometimes D. All of which don't make sense. Some options might randomly destroy your nation you've worked four years on."

No, I was referring to your complaint about seeing "genocide is seen as a topic best avoided in history lessons" after you chose an answer. That's just meant as a funny joke, and has no impact whatsoever on your nation.

[TalAkMaChen]

...
Still not sure why it cut both freedoms by 14%. I'd understand and accept if it reduced those freedoms by 1-2%, but 14%? That's pretty big for something very small. And I'm also not sure why says, "genocide is seen as a topic best avoided in history lessons" that part really doesn't make sense. I want to manage a nation, not gamble my chances with what issue is written by someone who doesn't understand how the world works, how government work, and how civil and political freedoms work.

Percentage changes like down by 14% do not mean much as they relate to the original number. For that reference, better activate the "show more stats" option in settings, then you'll also see the values themselves. Checking your stats, that Civil Rights and Political Freedoms, both dropped by about 4-5 points today (maybe only due to that one issue, I didn't check the outcome of other choices you had). This is fully reasonable and within the range of changes when a nation chooses to "avoid" certain parts of (its) history. So no problem at all. Unexpected perhaps, when prohibiting some other things, but that's part of the fun.

[Chan Island]

As the author of Infamy! Infamy! They've All Got It In For Me! (the issue that seems to have upset you so much at the moment), I hope I might be able to shed some light into why you have gotten this result. Hopefully this should clear up your confusion.

-------------------------------------------

I think a big problem is that you are focussing a lot on the villain of the story, and their bombs killing people in the issue. However, the issue itself isn't really about the terrorist. Instead, the issue is fundamentally one about the media.

The news always wants to report sensational things to the public (I should know, I work in that sector irl), and there is little as tempting and good for ratings as talking about something as dramatic and awful as a terrorist attack. If given the chance, most media bosses will absolutely revel in publicising these things as much as possible, which easily creates hours of content, not to mention the commentary, opinion pieces and shifts in the national conversation that this event will keep generating.

Yet, as you correctly point out, these events happen because hateful people believing in insane rubbish try to force their agenda onto the public, even if that means maiming and murdering innocent civilians, and publicising these views can create stardom for the murderer and boost the popularity of their ideas. Worse, it could influence politicians to pursue laws that actively hurt the nation in the fit of fear and panic.

So what do you tell, not the public, not the terrorists, but the press? Restricting them, as you have, is a violation of their political freedom to engage with any ideas they want and their civil rights to say what they want. Journalists will be denied the opportunity to explore the killer's past, perhaps, to uncover and discuss the deeper motivations that lead to the attacks. Commentators won't have the chance to chat about solutions tailored to the specific problems. Comedians won't be able to make a joke about the killer's ugly nose.

Don't worry though, the other options also have negative consequences. Safety goes down if you pick the first choice, as people get radicalised and inspired by this new ideological ground. So does crime, for the same reasons. The effect line for that one is that the press gives instructions on how to make sarin gas bombs in the name of public interest. This choice will almost certainly lead directly to more such atrocities occurring.

Finally, the percentage isn't a hard and fast rule of how much of a given value you actually have, but one dependant on what your levels already are. Your choice has a mean average value of -3 on your civil rights, but -3 will mean different things between a nation with a 100 civil rights score vs one with 7.

If you want to learn more about the effects of an issue before you answer, here it Trotterdam's cheat sheet for further guidance.

http://www.mwq.dds.nl/ns/results/

---------------

Hopefully that clears some things up. Any other questions about this or any other of my issues I'll gladly give very detailed answers for.

[The Free Joy State]

Unusual Issue Effects should be reported here.

Please read the OP before posting, as it answers many questions.

If you do post, you will need:

• The issue name/number
• The option you picked
• The effect you think is unusual
• The date (if not today)
• The nation (if you answered by a puppet)

Don't report effect lines. We stat for the option, not them.

In this case (option 2 of #592) the effect isn't unusual, so there's no need to report.

You installed mandated censorship of the press, forbidding them reporting on hate-motivated murders, or why they occurred. The option says:

We should have an enforced code of conduct, asking the media to be responsible in reporting. 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.”

Restricting freedom of the press lowered civil rights in your country.

It's worth remembering for the future that civil rights in NS work on a very specific metric: freedom from government control.

• Someone gains permission to marry whoever they like -- you gain rights
• Someone gains permission to walk wherever they like -- you gain rights
• Someone gains permission to say whatever they like -- you gain rights

Sometimes, there will be a balance of freedoms playing off within an option, and sometimes a nation's own stats impact how stat changes impact them -- meaning that different nations can get different results from the same option (otherwise that would not be as interesting a simulator, nor would it be as realistic, if all options changed all nations identically -- regardless of their unique circumstances).

If in doubt about an effect you've received, do ask in the thread linked at the top of this post.

[Tabor-Zion]

It's alright. I've completely given up trying to come up with logical explanations for the results of any decision I choose