I'm a moderator for the IGDB database there. I know what the criteria are even if the language you used is slightly different.
The language I used was copy-pasted from the rules you are supposed to be enforcing.
Yes. If you spent 1/10 the time playing the game that you do trying to bad-mouth it, you'd know that. And, again, it's not just how I "want to word it," it's how the rules you supposedly know actually do word it.
When we were writing the rules I re-wrote this one myself. I know what it says and exactly what it means better than literally anyone. Why don't we do something less reductive like explain how ponds work to ducks?
I'm actually very curious about the choices you think are meaningful in the current version of the game. What choices do the player make that significantly impact the content in an event, or results in the creation of a branching path? Only one I can think of, that was alluded to previously in the changelogs, was the choice to not start with big breasts requiring nip piercings to later work in the bar.
Your memory is worse than you thought. You forgot that nine posts above I say explicitly that "the game doesn't give meaningful choices yet." Could you clarify (before your post and mine become tears in rain) why you claim my position to be the exact opposite of the one I have stated?
Irony is not just the opposite of wrinkly.
I'm not sure why you are hung up on defining "lasting choice" when no one here is arguing that the game features them yet. I suppose pedants must pedant.
-screenshot-
Alright, you have me baffled. Are you sure that you are not suffering from a stroke or something? Interactions in the game have lasting effects. The player interacts with game to decide the outcome of the arms dealer arc (or even if it happens), for ionstance. This has the lasting effect of having the agent send porno pictures to their intelligence service. The player interacts with the game to get the agent a job at the Hard Cock Cafe, and that has lasting effects on the game. That's just another of many interactions like that. These are not meaningful choices, IMO, because the player doesn't change the trajectory of the story with these interactions. They are, however, "some player interaction that will have lasting effects" which isn't even a standard here, but which you appear to be fixated on.
There is somewhere written a rulebook of Internet discussions, which state exactly what someone should say and when they should say it when inclined to disagree. This tells people when to, for instance, claim to be a war veteran to support an unrelated point (because war veterans are always right), when to use people's phrases against them for no gain, or when and how to answer questions. I have not found this rulebook yet, but I know it must exist because certain people follow it step-by-step in every Internet conversation.
Today's and yesterday's posts were bound for the memory hole anyways, which is much more relevant than what you mentioned. Of course, when you're on a bender like this, relevancy is exactly what you avoid. I'm sure that The First Rule of Holes guides your every action, of course, since you have demonstrated so well, previously, that you know exactly when to stop. I suggest that you might want to write it on your computer screen so that you stop forgetting it.
There we go, that's all I wanted to know.
I'm glad you could finally discover that the game had lasting effects from player interaction, though I'm astonished that you "tried to replay each choice whilst going through the new version" and never discovered this.
It's even getting funny. Every Sunday, read a new reason for the word "week".
Let's hope that in three months the author has written more than two scenes..No, and the new version will be released at least in May. God grant him good health. 
