NationStates Jolt Archive

Maybe the questions for us to base our policies could be a bit more like the real world and a whole lot less like the "black or white", "for us or against us" drivel of an undereducated leftist. I refer, specifically, to the book burning Harry Potter question and the Uranium v. Rainforest question that followed.

Maybe the question's author could reframe a question attacking Muslim censorship (Which tends to result in Fatwas and murder.) if he/she has the stones to do it.

:upyours:

It's a game, okay? Issues are intentionally weird, funny, extreme, and full of unintended consequences. You're deliberately forced to choose the "least worst" option (as real governments often have to). Often it's "do nothing" -- ie, dismiss -- which is another thing real governments do with flair and aplomb.

Check out this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7032957&postcount=2) and this thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=338362&page=8).

Note these bits particularly:
One of the key factors of NationStates is that no matter what you decide, there will be a lot of people unhappy with your decision. Every option should be wrong in some way, and there should NEVER be a case where one option is 'right' and another 'wrong', because that's not what NationStates is about. Playing the 'right' way would imply that NationStates is a game with a way to win and this is not the case. NS is not a game you should be able to 'win' in any sense. Anyway: your idea must be an argument with differing points of view. That's what an issue is.

... try to aim for an issue which, when a recipient decides on it, leaves a lingering feeling that the wrong one has been made and ends with a very biased statement ...

If you want a different sort of issue on censorship, why not try writing it yourself? That's encouraged, once you've got the feel of the game.

(BTW, while "leftist" may well describe many NS issue writers, "uneducated" is not the epithet of choice. Say that on the discussion forums and you'll be smothered in sheepskins. :tongue:)

Your educated use of the up yours smiley noted... MonkeyButte.

The smiley is a symbol, make of it what you will.

Jung and I won't mind.

If you want a different sort of issue on censorship, why not try writing it yourself? That's encouraged, once you've got the feel of the game.

Are these even checked over any more though?

And what about issues that were submitted but the nation ceased to exist would they still be placed into the game?

I ask because a couple of my old nations I submitted some rather good issues (if I do say so myself) but if they aren't done anymore is it worth the time.

To be honest, I dismiss nearly all issues just because they are wacky/totally unreal. It may be a game but the questions/answers can be too childish.

Are these even checked over any more though?

And what about issues that were submitted but the nation ceased to exist would they still be placed into the game?

I ask because a couple of my old nations I submitted some rather good issues (if I do say so myself) but if they aren't done anymore is it worth the time.

I'm sure that they're being worked on, you have to remember that the mods have a life outside of NS.

It's in the spirit of this game to get a few wacky issues. It wouldn't be any fun otherwise. And there's nothing wrong with dismissing a few issues that you don't want to deal with.

I'm sure that they're being worked on, you have to remember that the mods have a life outside of NS.

A life outside of NS you say. I refuse to believe that how can the Mods be omnipotent and not be on here all the time?

But the question about retired nations submitted issues still stands.

All issue submissions are considered whether or not the author's nation has ceased to exist.

k cheers Sirocco.