by Dopestan » Fri Aug 07, 2020 3:03 pm
by Awesomeland012345 » Fri Aug 07, 2020 6:12 pm
☆ All hail the Holy Awesomeness of Awesomeland012345! ☆ Cheddar ☆
☆ The founder and delegate of Cheddar ☆ Dispatches ☆ alllll haiillll the tunaaaa ☆ Become a dual citizen today! ☆ Join Cheddar! :) pls pls pls ☆ Take a poll! ☆ shh... secret easter eggs!☆
by Trotterdam » Fri Aug 07, 2020 11:24 pm
by Dopestan » Sat Aug 08, 2020 4:14 pm
Trotterdam wrote:These aren't just real-life sex dolls under debate
by Awesomeland012345 » Sat Aug 08, 2020 4:46 pm
Dopestan wrote:you end up with 4 Radical options 1)ban2)cyberpunk3)cyberpunk4)ban, seems like a no win situation to me.
☆ All hail the Holy Awesomeness of Awesomeland012345! ☆ Cheddar ☆
☆ The founder and delegate of Cheddar ☆ Dispatches ☆ alllll haiillll the tunaaaa ☆ Become a dual citizen today! ☆ Join Cheddar! :) pls pls pls ☆ Take a poll! ☆ shh... secret easter eggs!☆
by The New California Republic » Sat Aug 08, 2020 4:49 pm
Dopestan wrote:i just want to say there is no reason here for extreme solutions only
by Daarwyrth » Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:24 pm
by Dopestan » Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:37 pm
Daarwyrth wrote:There literally is an alternative to answering the issue, but you're simply choosing not to take it.
by The New California Republic » Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:45 pm
Dopestan wrote:Daarwyrth wrote:There literally is an alternative to answering the issue, but you're simply choosing not to take it.
There literally is much better alternative as to change option#2 because #2 and #3 are basically the same now and all 4 are excessively drastic for such a simple situation
by Daarwyrth » Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:49 pm
Dopestan wrote:Daarwyrth wrote:There literally is an alternative to answering the issue, but you're simply choosing not to take it.
There literally is much better alternative as to change option#2 because #2 and #3 are basically the same now and all 4 are excessively drastic for such a simple situation
by Dopestan » Mon Aug 10, 2020 3:06 pm
Daarwyrth wrote:So, an issue should be changed just because 1 person doesn't like one of the issue options? Yeah, no, I don't see the issue editors doing that. You have a Dismiss Button. If you don't like the issue, use it.
by Daarwyrth » Mon Aug 10, 2020 3:11 pm
Dopestan wrote:Daarwyrth wrote:So, an issue should be changed just because 1 person doesn't like one of the issue options? Yeah, no, I don't see the issue editors doing that. You have a Dismiss Button. If you don't like the issue, use it.
got it, must keep me shut because 2 persons like it. dont you realize this is what oppressive editors do to keep us common users away from their issue fun?
anyway "If you think a rewrite is needed on an existing issue, then discuss it in The Writer's Block first viewtopic.php?f=13&t=159868 and see what the community makes of the idea." are you that deciding community or should i address my concerns to like the author
by Westinor » Mon Aug 10, 2020 3:16 pm
Dopestan wrote:Daarwyrth wrote:So, an issue should be changed just because 1 person doesn't like one of the issue options? Yeah, no, I don't see the issue editors doing that. You have a Dismiss Button. If you don't like the issue, use it.
got it, must keep me shut because 2 persons like it. dont you realize this is what oppressive editors do to keep us common users away from their issue fun?
anyway "If you think a rewrite is needed on an existing issue, then discuss it in The Writer's Block first viewtopic.php?f=13&t=159868 and see what the community makes of the idea." are you that deciding community or should i address my concerns to like the author
by The New California Republic » Mon Aug 10, 2020 3:19 pm
Dopestan wrote:Daarwyrth wrote:So, an issue should be changed just because 1 person doesn't like one of the issue options? Yeah, no, I don't see the issue editors doing that. You have a Dismiss Button. If you don't like the issue, use it.
got it, must keep me shut because 2 persons like it. dont you realize this is what oppressive editors do to keep us common users away from their issue fun?
Dopestan wrote:anyway "If you think a rewrite is needed on an existing issue, then discuss it in The Writer's Block first viewtopic.php?f=13&t=159868 and see what the community makes of the idea." are you that deciding community or should i address my concerns to like the author
by Dopestan » Mon Aug 10, 2020 3:47 pm
by Drasnia » Mon Aug 10, 2020 3:57 pm
Dopestan wrote:wow guys one by one please thanks for answers
1)sure editors arent thats easy joke
2)so whos editor in charge?
3)my suggestion stands in the first post: remove legalizing from #2 because it basically duplicates #3 now with little to no difference in variety of products offered, while on the other hand #1 and #4 despite being similar too represent voices of different groups say "feminists" and "luddites" with different outcome that is ban of branch / ban of industry
4) glad no one cares
by The New California Republic » Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:03 pm
Dopestan wrote:so whos editor in charge?
Dopestan wrote:my suggestion stands in the first post: remove legalizing from #2 because it basically duplicates #3 now with little to no difference in variety of products offered
by The New California Republic » Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:25 pm
by Daarwyrth » Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:31 pm
by Dopestan » Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:48 pm
The New California Republic wrote:https://nsindex.net/wiki/NationStates_Issue_No._539#Issue_outcomes
by Drasnia » Mon Aug 10, 2020 5:07 pm
Dopestan wrote:The New California Republic wrote:https://nsindex.net/wiki/NationStates_Issue_No._539#Issue_outcomes
first this and http://www.mwq.dds.nl/ns/results/ better be made more noticeable in FAQ section in case they provide coorect information, overlooked it my fault
maybe change section "Is there a list with all the statistical effects of the issues?" to
"No. These are kept secret deliberately. partial info can be seen here and there"
by The New California Republic » Mon Aug 10, 2020 5:14 pm
Dopestan wrote:The New California Republic wrote:https://nsindex.net/wiki/NationStates_Issue_No._539#Issue_outcomes
first this and http://www.mwq.dds.nl/ns/results/ better be made more noticeable in FAQ section in case they provide coorect information, overlooked it my fault
maybe change section "Is there a list with all the statistical effects of the issues?" to
"No. These are kept secret deliberately. partial info can be seen here and there"
by Trotterdam » Tue Aug 11, 2020 2:10 am
Worth noting is that my site is designed to be "fail-broad": while glitches might cause it to report something can happen when in fact it can't happen or is only very rare, it is much less likely for it to report that something can't happen when in fact it can happen, even if only in relatively outlying nations. Most issue options have hundreds of data points, meaning that the probability of any nation getting a result that is outside of the listed range is extremely low, and the probability of being more than a tiny fraction of a point outside of the listed range is even lower.The New California Republic wrote:But then again the issue effects often can and do vary depending on the nation that has the issue, so the issue effect on the third party sites are there as a rough guide, they aren't intended to be totally accurate in terms of what will happen stats-wise.
Not always. Some of the listed policies are psuedo-policies that you get for having a numerical stat within a certain range, so an issue option will only sometimes assign/remove those policies depending on how close you were to the threshold before. My site also aims to accuracy list this variance by describing the policy changes in question as "sometimes" happening, and still tries to apply the fail-broad principle here, although there is somewhat more risk of it failing by something that can theoretically happen not being reported due to being rare enough to have never been sighted (for example, the site does not currently report #6 3 as removing the Theocracy policy even though it is known to do that, because it is nearly unheard of for theocratic nations to choose this option to begin with). Stats, which have a range of effects rather than being all-or-nothing, suffer less from this.The New California Republic wrote:The only thing that can be said with any reliability is what policies an option will enable or disable, as those are set in stone.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement