I said this one before i think, but once i approved an issue that literally said that it allowed divorce, yet i still have the permanent marriage policy
I still think the funniest policy I chose to have was no emigration, that combined with the immigration policy of letting almost anybody in and border security/defense being heavy creates a funny concept
Bestelesnia, Socialist arab states, and Wildwestia
Bestelesnia
Idk
Lizzieland
Useless Tip: multiply your intelligence of your NationStates Nation by 3 to get the IQ of it.
Wildwestia
How I'm in the top 3%(224th) in crime, when my nation is an anarchy? Where are the laws they're breaking?
Oyene
Bestelesnia
I'm guessing international laws
Lizzieland
Oyene
idk,maybe the world census doesn't care if there is law or not and just will say how many times things that in Democracies are considered "crimes" are commited
I believe "crime" refers to actions generally held to be problematic even without a formal legal structure, such as murder, theft, and talking in the theater.
the new WA vote, it's sad to see how sadistic some people are. sacrificing the environment for their own personal economic benefit. truly sad and quite disgusting to see how little people care about our future. what's the point of having industry anyway if the whole world is crumbling because we messed the environment up
Hello lovely Balderans! If you're on the discord, you'll know me as Sarah. I'm excited to announce a Short Story Contest! It's time to get creative and show off your writing skills!
Writing Prompt
Short stories must follow this writing prompt: Following World War III, all the nations of the world agree to 50 years of strict isolation from one another in order to prevent additional conflicts. 50 years later, the United States comes out of exile only to learn that no one else actually went into isolation.
Submissions and Voting
Starting November 25th 2021 at time of posting to December 2nd 2021 10pm est., submit ONE short story to Sarah in private.
Voting will be on our offsite forum from December 3rd 2021, to December 10th 2021. Anyone from any regio may submit a story, however to vote you must be registered on our off site forums.
You can submit your story by DM on discord (to Sarah Bread#7949), a message on the forums, or a TG to A Leaf on the Wind.
Rules
All must be original.
Stories cannot contain hate speech of any kind that disparages others on the basis of their race, gender, sexuality, religion, country of origin or similar circumstances.
curse words are allowed, but no erotica please.
There is no word limit, but remember you want people to read it and have time to vote. So, don’t shoot yourself in the foot.
If you submit more than one story, you will be disqualified.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfY0XIMteYIGsegpFzgisjxHVSc3dd_Giexte8j-vY874z_-Q/viewform?usp=sf_link. Do this form so I can put yall in the alliance.
Sadism had nothing to do with it for me. I absolutely value the environment quite highly and am not keen on just letting corporations do whatever they like. My problem is that the legislation proposed is riddled with flaws and very likely to be quickly repealed if passed. For example, the hotline requirement doesn't make any provisions for prank calls, or for green spaces that don't warrant such hotlines (e.g. wildlife preserves that aren't open to the public to begin with, but still owned by the government). I also don't approve of the requirement that parks be open free of charge--fees for entry are one of the main sources of funds to maintain and protect such areas. The requirement to always use brownfield sites (defined to be places blighted by pollution!) unless it is "unviable" to do so is similarly a problem--it's a universal rule for something that needs contextual solutions.
I want to protect the environment, very much so. I don't want to do it with deeply flawed laws that are both abusable and detrimental to actual conservation efforts.
Latino island
I agree with the parks. It is one of my main reason for voting against it. If legislation like this want to use higher taxations and taking money from government duties then they should have a way to help not take as much money. Requiring parks to be free takes money away. If you had to pay for the parks that would become a way for legislation to help pass, instead of taking money directly from the governments hands, you wouldn’t loose as much. Money will be lost either way but with free parks more money will be lost.
Environmentalism is definitely an important and noble cause, but the proposed Resolution does not adequately address most environmental concerns. The resolution basically says "every park needs to have a phone to report littering and also parks should be free but we can't commit to that." I feel like this is way too narrow a scope to be called "The Environmental Protections Act," as I am sure we can all agree that there are a lot more pressing concerns for environmental wellbeing than littering in parks (though that is by no means good either). The resolution at vote has good intentions but does not have much of an effect in practice.
Bestelesnia
Bestelesnia
I voted against for something along these lines. I think its too much micromanagment for a WA resolution, it covers close to nothing that really matters on a global scale