The Writers' Block

[USS Monitor]

Are there any issues about stupid laws which are on the books? I'm talling about really stupid stuff, like the law prohibiting getting a fish drunk or the law against having sex with a porcupine?

Silly outdated laws could be a fun issue. But, please, no porcupine-sex.

Then where will our glorious Master Race of porcupine people come from?

[Australian rePublic]

I have a few ideas, don't worry

[Bears Armed]

Outdated laws no one enforces are a thing, or attachments to otherwise decent laws

I fail to see how this would be an issue brought to @@LEADER@@.

I'm not disputing that they're a thing -- rather, I'm questioning why it would be relevant.

People have started using laws passed before the nation was unified, or expanded outwards to reach its present size, as justification for killing people from the lands added later?
(e.g. Scotsmen found within the walls of York after nightfall, or Welshmen crossing the English border in large groups other than to attend a market...).

[Kingdomland]

I have a good description of an issue, but I need help writing its title and options. The following is what I have come up with so far.
A recent theft of your nation's treasury has left your country with very little money. Protesters have gathered outside your government building to discuss this issue.

[Sacara]

I have a good description of an issue, but I need help writing its title and options. The following is what I have come up with so far.
A recent theft of your nation's treasury has left your country with very little money. Protesters have gathered outside your government building to discuss this issue.

Hey Kingdomland, thanks for taking the initiative to post in the Writers' Block! We rarely have new people do that nowadays.

Now, the description is... too naive. No nation has all of their money in one place such as this, and how could a group steal all of that money successfully even if they did? Also, what would the protestors be protesting, other than the lack of security. Note that we have 1100+ issues now, so an idea will have be more specific and have its own niche if it wants to be added. Feel free to discuss other potential ideas, though!

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Yes, I think conceptually it's not really feasible to talk about a national treasury being robbed any more, as almost every nation now operates fiat currency, so the wealth of a government doesn't exist anywhere except for conceptually. As long as good records are kept, you can't really make the government's "treasury" disappear. Indeed, most nations with fiat currency also have significant deficit spending and considerable national debt, so in fact a nation's treasury is a conceptually negative amount.

[Jutsa]

That said, this wouldn't necessarily be the case if you went with the gold standard...

(though they might still use fiat money behind-the-scenes, idk.)

[The Sherpa Empire]

That said, this wouldn't necessarily be the case if you went with the gold standard...

(though they might still use fiat money behind-the-scenes, idk.)

Having a gold heist in a nation that uses the gold standard would be a more reasonable issue than doing it valid for all nations. You could also maybe do something about cyber-criminals stealing a bunch of money in a nation where the economy is largely digital, or embezzlement in a nation with high corruption.

I have not checked to see if any of these already exist.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

That's a good call, and actually going onto the gold standard (as per issue 717) is a major decision that isn't currently tracked. A good issue that reverses that decision and which looks at a consequence of the decision would definitely justify the work to create that policy.

A reversal issue on the gold standard was proposed at one stage, but some editors (ok, by some editors I mostly mean me) felt that the issue didn't really understand what fiat currency was, or what the real life pros and cons of the gold standard are.

[Jutsa]

Eheh, sorry about that.

[USS Monitor]

Eheh, sorry about that.

Some of the editors were sorry to let it go, if it's any consolation.

[Jutsa]

lol it's fine. I kinda had a feeling some of the references would be missed, if I may be so self-assured in myself.

Whatever works best; I'm aware that my lack of research is something that I need work on in general,
so if someone with a bit more knowledge on the subject gets to it, all the better. :3

[Bears Armed]

Does #133, option 3 only cover @@ANIMAL@@, or does it cover all dangerous pets? Is there room for a new issue with the latter, wider scope?

('Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My!')

[Sacara]

Does #133, option 3 only cover @@ANIMAL@@, or does it cover all dangerous pets? Is there room for a new issue with the latter, wider scope?

('Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My!')

"All citizens should be held accountable of their pet's actions as if they had done the act themselves."

Option three requires that all pet owners take responsibility for their pet's actions, no matter if it's @@ANIMAL@@ or not.

[The Seven Seas]

Ahoy! I have been thinking of writing an issue for some time, but haven't really put much thought into it due to my lack of inspiration and writing skills. Recently however I had a basic idea for an issue and wanted to see if it is worth trying to make something out of it.

The issue would be based around the real-world issue (in the UK at least) of an increasing number of high street shops closing down due to factors such as more people shopping online and businesses going bankrupt. I don't know much about what's being done about it IRL, but the options could be something like:

Support starting-up businesses into the unused stores.
Encouraging customers to shop at high street stores with special incentives.
Reusing the empty buildings as housing.
Forget the stores, provide everyone with free internet so they can shop online!

What do you think? Is this a good premise for an issue? Is it something that's already been covered? Thanks!

[Pogaria]

That's a good call, and actually going onto the gold standard (as per issue 717) is a major decision that isn't currently tracked.

Actually, we do track that now (although a nation's policy page wouldn't show it). Two issues have options that implement it, but there's no reversal issue.

[The Free Joy State]

Does #133, option 3 only cover @@ANIMAL@@, or does it cover all dangerous pets? Is there room for a new issue with the latter, wider scope?

('Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My!')

"All citizens should be held accountable of their pet's actions as if they had done the act themselves."

Option three requires that all pet owners take responsibility for their pet's actions, no matter if it's @@ANIMAL@@ or not.

I'd say that's still only in context of the issue (FTR, 133 is "When @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ Attack" -- please don't confuse a poor IE like that ), which is talking about @@ANIMAL@@; as are the first two and last options.

Bears Armed, in this IEs opinion, at least, there could be call for a wider-scope issue. Backstage, we once discussed how pet dinosaurs could lead to the passing of a Dangerous Dino act, for example.

But, of course, how you worded it to avoid overlap could still be tricky.

Ahoy! I have been thinking of writing an issue for some time, but haven't really put much thought into it due to my lack of inspiration and writing skills. Recently however I had a basic idea for an issue and wanted to see if it is worth trying to make something out of it.

The issue would be based around the real-world issue (in the UK at least) of an increasing number of high street shops closing down due to factors such as more people shopping online and businesses going bankrupt. I don't know much about what's being done about it IRL, but the options could be something like:

Support starting-up businesses into the unused stores.
Encouraging customers to shop at high street stores with special incentives.
Reusing the empty buildings as housing.
Forget the stores, provide everyone with free internet so they can shop online!

What do you think? Is this a good premise for an issue? Is it something that's already been covered? Thanks!

High street shops closing could be a good premise. IIRC, part of the reason more stores are closing in the UK is due to high business rates.

UK business rent is also fairly high IIRC on a place with decent footfall. In fact, relief on business rates has been suggested as solutions to the closure of high street shops

I'd suggest you scrap the housing option. It doesn't add and is more of a diversion.

Also, before you draft, I suggest you read this BBC article (and similar) about causes and suggested ways to revitalise the UK high street, to give your draft a solid grounding.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Speaking of UK news, this is an interesting one:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/f ... 81461.html

Interesting question here about whether being horrifyingly tasteless ought to be a crime.

[Bears Armed]

"All citizens should be held accountable of their pet's actions as if they had done the act themselves."

Option three requires that all pet owners take responsibility for their pet's actions, no matter if it's @@ANIMAL@@ or not.

I'd say that's still only in context of the issue (FTR, 133 is "When @@ANIMALPLURAL@@ Attack" -- please don't confuse a poor IE like that ), which is talking about @@ANIMAL@@; as are the first two and last options.

Bears Armed, in this IEs opinion, at least, there could be call for a wider-scope issue. Backstage, we once discussed how pet dinosaurs could lead to the passing of a Dangerous Dino act, for example.

But, of course, how you worded it to avoid overlap could still be tricky.

Thank you. I'll think further about this.

[Hediacrana]

Say, I wondered whether this has been done: people bringing their guns to the polling station, leading to complaints of armed intimidation (for nations with very free gun rules)?

[Sacara]

Say, I wondered whether this has been done: people bringing their guns to the polling station, leading to complaints of armed intimidation (for nations with very free gun rules)?

Nope. That hasn't been covered.

[Palos Heights]

Couple ideas for issues that I have and I want to spitball to you guys before I get going on them:

1. Wanted fugitives fleeing to tribal lands, somehow work in the issue being, tribal sovereignty cannot be violated by sending a military force but this is a terrible person who must be brought to justice.
I'm curious if this would be something worthy of an issue, and also what validities might be required here?

2. Exotic animal escapes zoo, becomes invasive species, but because exotic species your hands are tied from dealing with them.
I had a crack at it before, and thought it was good enough for an issue, but apparently it didn't make the cut. I know between the Rhea in Germany and Pablo Escobar's hippos that there are real world equivalents here, but I really, really, really, want to salvage my Navy seals trained in the art of gorilla warfare joke more than anything.

3. For countries that do not recognize AI as citizens, one where a country that does recognize them as citizens finds itself overthrown by an AI/cyborg warlord. How does your nation react to a seemingly non-person, one with considerable moral failings and a litany of war crimes to answer for, coming to power in a rival nation?

4. Arctic sea ice no longer appearing year-round, what does your nation do as the rest of the world rushes to claim the considerable natural resources underneath the frigid waters?

Thoughts?

[Hediacrana]

Say, I wondered whether this has been done: people bringing their guns to the polling station, leading to complaints of armed intimidation (for nations with very free gun rules)?

Nope. That hasn't been covered.

Thanks!

[Trotterdam]

3. For countries that do not recognize AI as citizens, one where a country that does recognize them as citizens finds itself overthrown by an AI/cyborg warlord. How does your nation react to a seemingly non-person, one with considerable moral failings and a litany of war crimes to answer for, coming to power in a rival nation?

Honestly, that doesn't sound like much of a dilemma, since it's just confirming what your nation already believed about AIs anyway.

[Palos Heights]

3. For countries that do not recognize AI as citizens, one where a country that does recognize them as citizens finds itself overthrown by an AI/cyborg warlord. How does your nation react to a seemingly non-person, one with considerable moral failings and a litany of war crimes to answer for, coming to power in a rival nation?

Honestly, that doesn't sound like much of a dilemma, since it's just confirming what your nation already believed about AIs anyway.

How does that confirm what your nation believed about AIs? Isn't that something determined by player agency?