NationStates

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 2:54 pm**

I am also new to this thread, though have posted elsewhere a little bit.

I've written an issue about a botched emergency response and how it made a patient that was thought to be dead get an infection from improper treatment. Is there already something like this?

Also, titled it "9 out of 10 Injections are in Vein!" Is that good?

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 5:19 pm**

Are there any issues about criminal cases where the suspect has committed the crime, but has since lost all memories of it? (From amnesia, or something like that)

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 5:36 pm**

Sedgistan wrote:Player-authored issues remaining in the Pool: 55. We're actually running short of issues to edit - please submit some more!

In that case, is there any chance I can get an update on this draft? It's far more recent than I'd usually like to ask about, but given the small pool, if this hasn't made it, I'd be keen to redraft and resubmit - it's a decent political premise that should be covered in the issue base somewhere...

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 7:31 pm**

Carravere wrote:Are there any issues about criminal cases where the suspect has committed the crime, but has since lost all memories of it? (From amnesia, or something like that)

As far as I could tell, the word "amnesia" has never been used in an issue.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 11:00 pm**

SherpDaWerp wrote:
Sedgistan wrote:Player-authored issues remaining in the Pool: 55. We're actually running short of issues to edit - please submit some more!

In that case, is there any chance I can get an update on this draft? It's far more recent than I'd usually like to ask about, but given the small pool, if this hasn't made it, I'd be keen to redraft and resubmit - it's a decent political premise that should be covered in the issue base somewhere...

Looks like it was deleted.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 11:40 pm**

Sedgistan wrote:
SherpDaWerp wrote:In that case, is there any chance I can get an update on this draft? It's far more recent than I'd usually like to ask about, but given the small pool, if this hasn't made it, I'd be keen to redraft and resubmit - it's a decent political premise that should be covered in the issue base somewhere...

Looks like it was deleted.

Alright, guess I'll try a redraft then. Thanks for the info!

Posted: **Wed Apr 08, 2020 11:44 pm**

I can't seem to find this answer in the FAQ, but it might be answered before.

Regarding validity, is there a list of policies? I'd like to write something that's dependent on a certain policy but as I can only see my own, I don't know what other interesting options there are.

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2020 4:48 am**

Ko-oren wrote:Regarding validity, is there a list of policies? I'd like to write something that's dependent on a certain policy but as I can only see my own, I don't know what other interesting options there are.

It might also be interesting if the list included which policies had already been written about, though not necessarily fully explored.

EDIT: Actually, never mind. It's right here: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=920115

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2020 5:03 am**

Great, thanks!

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:27 am**

Purimgell Hawkwiteri wrote:It might also be interesting if the list included which policies had already been written about, though not necessarily fully explored.

It's hard to say whether a policy has been "fully explored" or not because sometimes players think of unusual issues that we would not have thought of.

Posted: **Thu Apr 09, 2020 12:03 pm**

By that I meant exactly what you said, just that there is always somewhere else you can go with the same topic or policy. I might have phrased it wrong in my previous post. If it was unclear what I meant, I apologize.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 8:04 am**

There's no exhaustive list, and we can check for a lot of things that might not have been checked before or conceptualised yet.

If you need a check for a particular narrative, then suggest it. If we can't make that check, we'll edit accordingly.

Don't feel you have to make validity check suggestions though -- that's not a required part of any issue submission, and will be worked out backstage by editors.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 10:20 am**

About how long does it usually take for issues to get edited after submission? I submitted an issue a while back (and edited it extensively in a "Got Issues?" thread) and was wondering if the issue was definitely rejected (completely understandable) or if there is still a chance it's in the editing pool.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:07 am**

Libertas Omnium Maximus wrote:About how long does it usually take for issues to get edited after submission? I submitted an issue a while back (and edited it extensively in a "Got Issues?" thread) and was wondering if the issue was definitely rejected (completely understandable) or if there is still a chance it's in the editing pool.

Honestly it depends on the editor on how long it can take to get edited.

A good rule of thumb though is if you've heard nothing after 6 months, assume it's been deleted*. We've so few in the Pool right now that there's no significant backlog.

*Unless I'm editing it. I am working on another project, industry reform, so when it comes to editing issues I'm honestly really, really slow cos of time limitations. Sorry in advance to all those authors whose issues I take a shine to.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 12:11 pm**

What I’m hearing is I have a max of one, maybe two issues in the pool. Yikes, there were quite a couple I thought were pretty good.

Oh well, guess it means more writing for me.

Posted: **Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:25 pm**

Sanctaria wrote:
Libertas Omnium Maximus wrote:About how long does it usually take for issues to get edited after submission? I submitted an issue a while back (and edited it extensively in a "Got Issues?" thread) and was wondering if the issue was definitely rejected (completely understandable) or if there is still a chance it's in the editing pool.

Honestly it depends on the editor on how long it can take to get edited.

A good rule of thumb though is if you've heard nothing after 6 months, assume it's been deleted*. We've so few in the Pool right now that there's no significant backlog.

*Unless I'm editing it. I am working on another project, industry reform, so when it comes to editing issues I'm honestly really, really slow cos of time limitations. Sorry in advance to all those authors whose issues I take a shine to.

Well, that probably indicates that my issue draft was discarded. Thank you for the information. Oh well, back to the drawing board.

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 11:29 am**

Are there any issues on "good samaritan" laws?

Posted: **Sat Apr 11, 2020 12:34 pm**

Libertas Omnium Maximus wrote:Are there any issues on "good samaritan" laws?

#564
#1280

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:10 am**

Issue #1116 should not have the "joke" about used tissues being thrown into stews.

That just changed. The change is impressively offensive with a pandemic going around, but moreover it suggests a wholly false causality. No society with communal stews - which are a friendly community experience, especially but not exclusively in farm communities - would ever LET that happen. There should almost always be someone directly watching over the stew pot to guard what goes into it. The stewpot may share ingredients of widely varying quality, but it won't contain anything that is nakedly unhygienic.

Furthermore, throwing a used tissue into a stew pot requires homicidal intentions. It isn't just fun. Even if someone is basically evil, nobody has much fun in a community where it all slows down for sickness. By the time people are old enough to look over the top of a communal stewpot, they should be old enough to understand that. If a child throws a used tissue into a stew pot they can't see over, they won't get away with it, and they're likely to become very much the center of attention.

Where people are unhygienic enough to attempt such things, the communal stew is likely to get them caught, improving the community's hygiene thereafter.

Posted: **Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:19 am**

Glaervin wrote:Issue #1116 should not have the "joke" about used tissues being thrown into stews.

That just changed. The change is impressively offensive with a pandemic going around, but moreover it suggests a wholly false causality. No society with communal stews - which are a friendly community experience, especially but not exclusively in farm communities - would ever LET that happen. There should almost always be someone directly watching over the stew pot to guard what goes into it. The stewpot may share ingredients of widely varying quality, but it won't contain anything that is nakedly unhygienic.

Furthermore, throwing a used tissue into a stew pot requires homicidal intentions. It isn't just fun. Even if someone is basically evil, nobody has much fun in a community where it all slows down for sickness. By the time people are old enough to look over the top of a communal stewpot, they should be old enough to understand that. If a child throws a used tissue into a stew pot they can't see over, they won't get away with it, and they're likely to become very much the center of attention.

Where people are unhygienic enough to attempt such things, the communal stew is likely to get them caught, improving the community's hygiene thereafter.

Firstly, the change was made before the COVID-19 pandemic. The editing team do not have a crystal ball and could not have predicted it.

Secondly, the issue is not aimed only at farming communities -- we cannot be that specific.

The joke in the line was not about homicidal intentions but on the idea of what would happen if people forgot to bring something (as everyone, according to the option, would have to bring something to put in the pot).

It is unfortunate that you were offended. While effect lines aim to amuse, there are times when individuals will not care for individual lines.

Posted: **Wed Apr 15, 2020 12:16 pm**

Do you think an issue could be written about the departure of some people from a royal family (like Harry and Meghan did) for a nation ruled with monarchy?

Posted: **Thu Apr 16, 2020 3:08 am**

Frieden-und Freudenland wrote:Do you think an issue could be written about the departure of some people from a royal family (like Harry and Meghan did) for a nation ruled with monarchy?

It could be a very interesting issue. My one piece of advice would be to be careful about placing them at a specific point in the line of succession, to respect player autonomy.

Posted: **Thu Apr 16, 2020 11:51 am**

The Free Joy State wrote:
Frieden-und Freudenland wrote:Do you think an issue could be written about the departure of some people from a royal family (like Harry and Meghan did) for a nation ruled with monarchy?

It could be a very interesting issue. My one piece of advice would be to be careful about placing them at a specific point in the line of succession, to respect player autonomy.

Yes, my idea was to actually say that they are not in the immediate line of succession. Or maybe not even in the succession line at all.

Posted: **Thu Apr 16, 2020 1:57 pm**

Just a quick comment noting we are on page 250 on the Writer's Block thread, meaning we are 50% of the way through it.

And something like 70% of it has only been posted since 2016.

Posted: **Fri Apr 17, 2020 8:50 am**

I don't really have time to work on issues right now (schoolwork, other projects), but I want to drop an idea in here for potentially someone else to work with.

Imagine if there was a disease circulating around the world (a real stretch right now, I know), and there was a drug that treated that disease. For PR reasons, the manufacturer of the drug set the price of that drug to 0. The drug which treats the disease circulating around the world also treats another disease which is scarier within @@NATION@@. So the minister of health makes a recommendation: take advantage of the pandemic afflicting other nations to over-order as much of that drug as the manufacturer will give you, so you can treat that other disease in @@NATION@@.

This would be a kind of benevolent corruption. It's diverting necessary medicines from other nations, but only to improve health in your own. It obviously would have an excellent opportunity for a pro-integrity counterproposal, to not do that, which would also be benevolent. The issue would thus pose a kind of compassionate corruption vs compassionate integrity dilemma which might make nations more polite.

It should probably have at least one more option, and maybe two, but I don't have ideas for how to fill out the rest of the slots on the issue idea. I do hope someone else runs with this!

EDIT: If anyone does this, send me a telegram. I wouldn't mind collaborating.

NationStates

The Writers' Block