[SUBMITTED] Next, Please!

[Candlewhisper Archive]

A policy that I note exists in exactly one issue is the banning of sequels. Gave me an idea.

Current:

Name:

Next, Please!

Description:

A recent two-part patriotic Public Information Video was produced by the National Department of Audiovisual Military Documents and, as usual, went straight to the archives with barely a single viewing. However, an observant former movie director has spotted that the film technically breaks the previously enacted law banning movie sequels.

Validity:

Valid for nations that have banned sequels (440.1)

Options:

[option]"After the Sharknado fiasco, our government heavy-handed regulation of cinema essentially destroyed the movie industry," says Mikaela Bay, the ex-director, as her bankrupt movie studio is explosively demolished behind her against a sunset backdrop. "You've created a populace disconnected from global pop culture: Do Luke and Leia ever marry? Does Harry beat Voldemort? Nobody in @@NAME@@ knows. Repeal the ban on movie sequels, and we can get back into the modern world."
[effect]Mad Max: Returning Again to Barrydrome is this year's unexpected summer blockbuster

[option]"Look, it might be a small restriction on creative freedom, but it is the boundaries of creativity that encourage imagination," offers @@RANDOMNAME@@, an independent filmmaker whose recent arthouse flick The Spirit of the Anthill has just been greenlit. "You owe it to @@DEMONYM@@ culture to stand by the rules you have created: fire the offending film-maker, destroy all copies of the two-parter, and pay the fines."
[effect]the televised Budget Forecast for this year has been cancelled because there was already one last year

[option]"Mea culpa, I broke the rules," says the publically-employed propaganda-writer who penned the offending Public Information Video, sounding not at all remorseful. "Look, @@LEADER@@, rules like these don't apply to the government, do they? Laws are for the people, not for the law-makers. If anyone should be punished, its this dissident Mikaela Bay, who is seeking to undermine your rule."
[effect]propaganda movies are the only cinema productions available to an entertainment-starved public

Original:

Name:

Next, Please!

Description:

A recent two-part patriotic Public Information Video on the topic of @@DEMONYM@@ Military History was produced by the State Department and, as usual, went straight to the archives with barely a single viewing. However, an observant former movie director has spotted that the film technically breaks the previously enacted law banning movie sequels.

Validity:

Valid for nations that have banned sequels (440.1)

Options:

[option]"After the Sharknado fiasco, our government heavy-handed regulation of cinema essentially destroyed the movie industry," says Mikaela Bay, the ex-director, as her bankrupt movie studio is explosively demolished behind her against a sunset backdrop. "You've created a populace disconnected from global pop culture: Do Luke and Leia ever marry? Does Harry beat Voldemort? Nobody in @@NAME@@ knows. Repeal the ban on movie sequels, and we can get back into the modern world."
[effect]Mad Max: Returning Again to Barrydrome is this year's unexpected summer blockbuster

[option]"Look, it might be a small restriction on creative freedom, but it is the boundaries of creativity that encourage imagination," offers @@RANDOMNAME@@, an independent filmmaker whose recent arthouse flick The Spirit of the Anthill has just been greenlit. "You owe it to @@DEMONYM@@ culture to stand by the rules you have created: fire the offending film-maker, destroy all copies of the two-parter, and pay the fines."
[effect]the televised Budget Forecast for this year has been cancelled because there was already one last year

[option]"Mea culpa, I broke the rules," says the publically-employed propaganda-writer who penned the offending Public Information Video, sounding not at all remorseful. "Look, @@LEADER@@, rules like these don't apply to the government, do they? Laws are for the people, not for the law-makers. If anyone should be punished, its this dissident Mikaela Bay, who is seeking to undermine your rule."
[effect]an entertainment-starved public has taken to watching PSA movies to pass the time

[Australian rePublic]

What's a PSA movie and what's a state department?

Also, your validity extremely limits your chances ofngetting the issue. You first have to recieve 440 out of 550+ issues, and then you have to recieve this one out of randomness from 550+ issues. Even though as an editor, you're probably aware of it, but I told you in case you didn't consider. Unless you wanted it to be a niche, or you have some secret code I don't know ablut...

[Candlewhisper Archive]

What's a PSA movie and what's a state department?

Fair enough, I was using the American terms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_se ... nouncement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... t_of_State

Probably the wrong department anyway, I'll make some edits.

Also, your validity extremely limits your chances ofngetting the issue. You first have to recieve 440 out of 550+ issues, and then you have to recieve this one out of randomness from 550+ issues. Even though as an editor, you're probably aware of it, but I told you in case you didn't consider. Unless you wanted it to be a niche, or you have some secret code I don't know ablut...

Well, not so bad in fact. The validity criteria already exists, so many players have already seen 440 at least once. Also, there's no reversal on that criteria so anyone who has picked 440.1 once will have that there in place. I'll run a sample test once its in the editing room, but I suspect it will be over 50% at present.

Once in place, because there'll be "one way in, one way out" of this validity criteria, I expect numbers to remain fairly level, as though it will diminish a little as new players come in, there's also a tendency for people to be consistent in their political directions, so reversal-options are picked more rarely than reinforcement-options.

I'm actually editing another issue at the moment that uses a new validity criteria, with ONE pre-existing issue triggering that validity tag. That meant that it started from a 0% base of validity. However, during the edit process of the last 2 weeks, that's gone up to 2%. That's an issue that will be seen far less often than this one, just because it's a new validity tag, but that doesn't mean it can't go into the pool.

[Australian rePublic]

What's a PSA movie and what's a state department?

Fair enough, I was using the American terms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_se ... nouncement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... t_of_State

Probably the wrong department anyway, I'll make some edits.

Also, your validity extremely limits your chances ofngetting the issue. You first have to recieve 440 out of 550+ issues, and then you have to recieve this one out of randomness from 550+ issues. Even though as an editor, you're probably aware of it, but I told you in case you didn't consider. Unless you wanted it to be a niche, or you have some secret code I don't know ablut...

Well, not so bad in fact. The validity criteria already exists, so many players have already seen 440 at least once. Also, there's no reversal on that criteria so anyone who has picked 440.1 once will have that there in place. I'll run a sample test once its in the editing room, but I suspect it will be over 50% at present.

Once in place, because there'll be "one way in, one way out" of this validity criteria, I expect numbers to remain fairly level, as though it will diminish a little as new players come in, there's also a tendency for people to be consistent in their political directions, so reversal-options are picked more rarely than reinforcement-options.

I'm actually editing another issue at the moment that uses a new validity criteria, with ONE pre-existing issue triggering that validity tag. That meant that it started from a 0% base of validity. However, during the edit process of the last 2 weeks, that's gone up to 2%. That's an issue that will be seen far less often than this one, just because it's a new validity tag, but that doesn't mean it can't go into the pool.

That's interesting, how long is the information of which option was chosen by whom actually stored?