The Writers' Block

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Quick question - when submitting an issue, can we include bold or italics?

I don't think I have seen any examples of bold font. But italics exists. Logically, bold font should also be possible, but I'd advise against it. UPPER CASE or italics are probably the best ways of emphasizing something, depending on its intensity (and the audacity of the speaker).

[Terrabod]

Quick question - when submitting an issue, can we include bold or italics?

I don't think I have seen any examples of bold font. But italics exists. Logically, bold font should also be possible, but I'd advise against it. UPPER CASE or italics are probably the best ways of emphasizing something, depending on its intensity (and the audacity of the speaker).

I mean is bbcode ok? Because I have a couple of words I want in italics.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

I don't think I have seen any examples of bold font. But italics exists. Logically, bold font should also be possible, but I'd advise against it. UPPER CASE or italics are probably the best ways of emphasizing something, depending on its intensity (and the audacity of the speaker).

I mean is bbcode ok? Because I have a couple of words I want in italics.

Yes, you can use [i][/i]

[Terrabod]

I mean is bbcode ok? Because I have a couple of words I want in italics.

Yes, you can use [i][/i]

That's great, thanks very much!

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

This is a tricky idea, but could there be an issue on zoophilia/bestiality?

On the one hand, it is a not-too-uncommon issue and would be eligible to be debated on; on the other hand I think it is an issue that may make many people uncomfortable (even with an adult tag). We treat pedophilia as a no-go zone in NS, I was wondering if you folks (especially fellow editors) would put zoophilia in the same bin, or could an adult issue be written about it?

If you are wondering about the issue structure, the premise will report that there is a non-negligible number of @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ who have had some form of sexual contact with a non-human animal, and the question is whether this should be criminalized.

The options could be:

1) Yes, it is animal abuse. And it is rape, since non-human animals can by definition not provide consent.
2) No, we should allow it as long as the animals do not suffer bodily harm. (The weird Finnish approach. https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/yes_ ... et/8153974)
3) People should be able to have sex with the animals they own, because animals are humans' property.

Yeah, gross, I know. (I don't like the hits I get on Google when I search for data on the prevalence of bestiality in the world. Academic research is really scant on this issue.) But let me know if you think it is workable.

[Pogaria]

This is a tricky idea, but could there be an issue on zoophilia/bestiality?

I don't think we should do that.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

This is a tricky idea, but could there be an issue on zoophilia/bestiality?

I don't think we should do that.

OK, thanks for the response.

[Valentine Z]

Since we can't have bestiality, I was thinking of something else entirely (nothing to do with animal abuse); I just happened to stumble upon this because they dangerously have the same wording.

Bestiary! Would it cause a scientific (and safety) concern if the nation relied on bestiaries written by different authors? Like, what would happen if one book says that the frog is normal, and then the other book says nope, it's poisonous! Chaos (and unfortunate deaths) ensue when the nation doesn't have an actual scientific naming of animals and relied on these outdated and perhaps rather primitive bestiaries?

"Oh yeah, you abolished the science, so now you have people not being able to distinguish a normal house spider from a venomous one."

Just throwing it out here because I don't think I can write this myself. Feel free if this is legal/SFW and has potential! ♥

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Okay, a different question. How about an issue about unnecessary/harmful use of antibiotics? When I search the issue base, the only issue that is remotely relevant to what I have in mind is #563, but that is basically about giving antibiotics to farm animals.

Before you shake your head to disagree, let me just say that this is an important problem in Turkey. For a long time, the sale of antibiotics was not regulated. They could just be bought over the counter. The non-prescription sales of antibiotics was banned in 2014 (which may sound terribly late, depending on where you are from). I remember my mom just randomly giving me antibiotics as if they were Tylenol when I was sick as a kid. Ordinary people did not really know or care about the problems associated with antibiotic use at the time.

Today, despite the law, antibiotic overconsumption and resistance is still at a very high level.

link to an article

Among the OECD countries, Turkey has the highest rate of resistance, in fact. (38.8%)

After years of reliance on (and veneration of) antibiotics, many patients do not accept being prescribed anything else. Their doctor might say that they have a viral infection and antibiotics will be useless, but many ignorant but obstinate patients will argue with the doctor to get their beloved antibiotics. Most of the time, the doctors just give in and prescribe an antibiotic, just to have some peace of mind. They choose to humor their patients over being principled. (Though considering some incidents of violence committed against health care workers by some barbarians, I cannot really blame them.)

Anyway, so much for Turkey. All this was an attempt to argue for why this issue may have a place here.

The premise I am thinking of is: high-ignorance country, people use too many antibiotics, what should be done? I am more inclined towards starting with the assumption that over-the-counter antibiotics are banned to begin with, as I feel this is gonna be easier. So the main narrative point will be that doctors humor their entitled patients who came into the examination room knowing that they WILL leave with a prescription with antibiotics. How does that sound?

[Trotterdam]

Bestiary! Would it cause a scientific (and safety) concern if the nation relied on bestiaries written by different authors? Like, what would happen if one book says that the frog is normal, and then the other book says nope, it's poisonous! Chaos (and unfortunate deaths) ensue when the nation doesn't have an actual scientific naming of animals and relied on these outdated and perhaps rather primitive bestiaries?

It seems extremely unlikely to me that a modern nation, even a very low-tech one, would still be using medieval-style bestiaries.

The premise I am thinking of is: high-ignorance country, people use too many antibiotics, what should be done? I am more inclined towards starting with the assumption that over-the-counter antibiotics are banned to begin with, as I feel this is gonna be easier. So the main narrative point will be that doctors humor their entitled patients who came into the examination room knowing that they WILL leave with a prescription with antibiotics. How does that sound?

That sounds backwards. According to your own explanation, the only reason patients act that way in Turkey is because the nation had more antibiotic-supportive laws in the past. It seems unlikely to happen "ex nihilo" as the first event in the story.

Overall the question of over-the-counter medicine is pretty worthwhile on its own. I can see freedom-oriented arguments in favor of letting people buy the medicine they believe they need without needing a doctor's approval. (Yes, trained doctors probably know better than average people, but they are still fallible, and there is an argument to be made for letting people make their own mistakes rather than being at the mercy of someone else's. When nothing is certain, who has the final decision on which risks are worth taking?) But, of course, left to their own devices, many people would make pretty stupid medical decisions. Like this one, which has the added problem of being dangerous for people besides just the one being stupid (since the antibiotic-resistant bacteria can go on to infect other people).

I can understand people who don't understand the risks of antibiotic resistance having an attitude of "I'm not sure if what I have is a bacterial disease or not, but I might as well take an antibiotic just in case". But still insisting on antibiotics after they've been tested and what they have being confirmed as not bacterial? That's a seriously worrying level of ignorance.

Then there's the ethical questions surrounding a doctor dodging the issue by handing over a placebo and just claiming it's what the obnoxious patient asked for...

[The Free Joy State]

Quick question - when submitting an issue, can we include bold or italics?

I don't think I have seen any examples of bold font. But italics exists. Logically, bold font should also be possible, but I'd advise against it. UPPER CASE or italics are probably the best ways of emphasizing something, depending on its intensity (and the audacity of the speaker).

What FuF said. With the added note that you can do bold and underline, but -- as FuF says -- probably shouldn't, and the bbcode doesn't work in the effect lines.

Okay, a different question. How about an issue about unnecessary/harmful use of antibiotics? When I search the issue base, the only issue that is remotely relevant to what I have in mind is #563, but that is basically about giving antibiotics to farm animals.

Antibiotic resistance, due to overuse and misuse, is stated to be one of the major future problems the world is facing.

I think writing an issue about over-prescribing of antibiotics(I would agree with working on the assumption that they are not available OTC is best) would be a good issue.

But I don't think high ignorance is the right validity. It's possible for perfectly intelligent people to feel sure they have a bacterial infection (based on personal history), and if a patient has a history of serious bacterial infections (including the immunosuppressed) they may be prescribed a short course antibiotics even before any culture comes back. This is not due to ignorance, but because -- for some patients -- the potential benefit of treatment outweighs the potential cost of being untreated for the few extra days.

I would recommend your validity include some healthcare spending, just so nations are likely to have facilities to over-prescribe antibiotics.

[Valentine Z]

On the topic of BIU (Bold, Italic, Underline), yeah I have not seen anything with Bolding. But yes, there is Italic, and in one issue, there actually is an italics+underline!

#1361: Fundamental Rights

1. "I don't want homeschooling to be associated with these irresponsible ideologues who brainwash their credulous kiddos!" huffs homeschooling mother @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, stopping you to shove a science text in your face, open at a page depicting a purple dinosaur doing a backstroke and titled How the Real Nessa Lake Creature Disproves Evilution. "Register us all centrally, vet us regularly and send all kids whose parents fail back to school. Test our children in all academic subjects, even critical thinking. People will soon see that many homeschoolers are competent."

It seems extremely unlikely to me that a modern nation, even a very low-tech one, would still be using medieval-style bestiaries.

That is actually a fair point, though then again, there are nations that tried to make dragons and stuff, so... ahh, I am just putting this out there. I can't and probably not writing this one.

[The Free Joy State]

RE: Fundamental Rights, the italic and underline was used in-title to emphasise in the italics (primary because I've seen instances of similarly second-rate texts underlining words like "real" in such contexts).

As with all writing rules, there are times when it may be appropriate to bend it. But the key is to know what rule you're breaking and why.

[Trotterdam]

But I don't think high ignorance is the right validity. It's possible for perfectly intelligent people to feel sure they have a bacterial infection (based on personal history), and if a patient has a history of serious bacterial infections (including the immunosuppressed) they may be prescribed a short course antibiotics even before any culture comes back. This is not due to ignorance, but because -- for some patients -- the potential benefit of treatment outweighs the potential cost of being untreated for the few extra days.

Come to think of it, something like this actually happened to my brother.

He got scarlet fever, and because it wasn't the first time he'd gotten scarlet fever, my mother recognized the symptoms immediately and asked for antibiotics. However, the doctor who had been assigned to us insisted it's "just flu" and he'd be fine with some bedrest, and due to the laws here, it simply wasn't possible to go around the doctor and order the antibiotics directly, or even to ask for another doctor's opinion. As a result, the disease remained untreated until it got worse, by which point simple medication was no longer enough and he needed to be hospitalized.

I was very young at the time, so I wasn't paying much attention. This is how I've heard it happened, though. Don't worry, he's fine now

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

How about different rates of taxation for single vs. married people (or child-free people vs. parents)? Is there already an issue on this? Even if there is, I'd like to write a follow-up issue to an option that says married/child-ed people should pay less money in taxes.

[Trotterdam]

How about different rates of taxation for single vs. married people (or child-free people vs. parents)?

We have issues about government-funded childcare support. I don't recall any of them being about taxation, specifically, but it's a similar design space.

I'm pretty sure we don't have anything about special treatment simply for being married, though. Similarly, there shouldn't be anything about other types of family relationships, or people who are living as roommates simply to keep housing costs down.

[Lelscrep]

An issue discussing the naming of a newly discovered dinosaur genome?

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

An issue discussing the naming of a newly discovered dinosaur genome?

Optimistic of you to think such a niche topic could have been covered

No, but we have similar naming issues, I think. The most prominent one I can remember is how a newly-discovered element should be named. But are genomes typically given "names" anyway? I mean, except for confusing names that scientists may give them, which may be transparent to them but make little sense to laypeople?

[Lelscrep]

An issue discussing the naming of a newly discovered dinosaur genome?

Optimistic of you to think such a niche topic could have been covered

No, but we have similar naming issues, I think. The most prominent one I can remember is how a newly-discovered element should be named. But are genomes typically given "names" anyway? I mean, except for confusing names that scientists may give them, which may be transparent to them but make little sense to laypeople?

Yep, you're right about genomes - I meant to use the word genus, whoops.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Optimistic of you to think such a niche topic could have been covered

No, but we have similar naming issues, I think. The most prominent one I can remember is how a newly-discovered element should be named. But are genomes typically given "names" anyway? I mean, except for confusing names that scientists may give them, which may be transparent to them but make little sense to laypeople?

Yep, you're right about genomes - I meant to use the word genus, whoops.

I see. I do not remember a dinosaur-naming issue. The first thing to keep in mind will be whether this issue is intended for a nation with dinosaurs or not. For the former, there could be a new genetically engineered species of dinosaur and people could be looking for a name for it. For the latter, a new dinosaur species could be identified from a set of newly-discovered fossils. This decision will probably affect how you present the story.

[SherpDaWerp]

Is there a generally-accepted way to write technology for computer-free nations on semi-tech-related issues?

Should I just follow conventional NS guidelines for tech level (approximately now, plus or minus 20 years), and assume it's a government prohibition on otherwise internationally commonplace goods, should I write it as if the nation in question simply predates computers, or is it up to the author? For example, an idea just popped into my head about No Computers nations regressing to turing-complete mechanical computers (similar to Charles Babbage's never-completed Analytical Engine), and whether those should also be considered computers.

Additionally, what level of other technology goes along with these policies? Is having a film and video projector largely compatible with countries lacking computers?

[Trotterdam]

Should I just follow conventional NS guidelines for tech level (approximately now, plus or minus 20 years), and assume it's a government prohibition on otherwise internationally commonplace goods, should I write it as if the nation in question simply predates computers, or is it up to the author? For example, an idea just popped into my head about No Computers nations regressing to turing-complete mechanical computers (similar to Charles Babbage's never-completed Analytical Engine), and whether those should also be considered computers.

That one.

If there are people using analytical engines or whatever, it's due to them deliberately trying to find loopholes in the law.

Additionally, what level of other technology goes along with these policies? Is having a film and video projector largely compatible with countries lacking computers?

Weren't film projectors invented before computers? That should be fine.

[Terrabod]

Have any of you seen that meme about a famous male historical figure sending a letter saying "I love you" to a guy and historians saying "Yes, they loved each other like Best Friends"?

I want to write an issue about reappraisals of LGBT+ figures in history. What do you folks think? I haven't been able to find any similarities to existing issues but I'm also interested to know what you think of the idea.

[Trotterdam]

I'm definitely familiar with the hobby some people have of finding "evidence" that such-and-such historical figure was homosexual or not. I find it a pretty silly exercise: these people lived hundreds or thousands of years ago and any evidence we have of them is pretty flimsy, and anyway does it really matter? It's just tawdry celebrity gossip. Also, the people who do this seem to keep forgetting the possibility that those people might just have been bisexual.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Have any of you seen that meme about a famous male historical figure sending a letter saying "I love you" to a guy and historians saying "Yes, they loved each other like Best Friends"?

I want to write an issue about reappraisals of LGBT+ figures in history. What do you folks think? I haven't been able to find any similarities to existing issues but I'm also interested to know what you think of the idea.

I remember CWA drafting an issue on whether an esteemed composer in @@NAME@@ (who is deceased) was gay or not (based on some recently recovered writings or so). It was inspired by the homophobic Russian government debating whether Tchaikovsky was really gay or not. I don't think that issue got published, but it must be somewhere in the pile of staff issues, so if you write an issue in the same thematic area, you will be competing with him, I guess. It is not a problem to do so, and if your issue has at least equal merit, it may be prioritized over a draft written by an editor (because players > editors), but it will not be easy.