by Manokan Republic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:37 am
by Manokan Republic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:54 am
by Manokan Republic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:03 am
by Australian rePublic » Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:20 am
by Manokan Republic » Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:24 am
Australian rePublic wrote:Please don't submit issues before recieving feedback
by Singapore no2 » Sat Jan 20, 2018 1:10 am
This is a Modern-Tech nation. We only put a satellite and a man into space so far.
We are a Middle power, so if we die, so will some of the global economy.
We have the 8th largest sovereign wealth fund in the world. (RL world)
Pro: Regulations, Military, Law and Order
Anti: Freedom of speech, Discrimination, CHEWING GUM
Just so you know, I don't think like that. That stuff is roleplaying Singapore (itself, the real life nation)
Fauxia wrote:Editors aren’t real people.
by USS Monitor » Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:40 am
by Manokan Republic » Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:49 am
USS Monitor wrote:Singapore no2 wrote:Yes, but the rate of acceptance is significantly lower if you do not pass your draft through the forum for critique.
This was an issue idea that came up in an NSG thread, and I suggested bringing it over here for drafting, but that may have been after Manokan submitted it.
What you said about the acceptance rate is still true. Just thought I'd give some background as to what happened here.
by The Federation of Kendor » Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:54 am
North Korean Russia wrote:"I am God! You are powerless against me! I am so awesome that when I play basketball I always get four points per shot!" -Kim Jong-Putin.
Independant Nations and Guilds wrote:Their founder turned into an eagle and flew into the sun before being burned to death. This is what their flag really means, and any other attempt at explanation of its meaning is ignored in favor of this explanation.
by USS Monitor » Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:24 pm
The Federation of Kendor wrote:You must make the issue effect (the text stating what will happen after submitting a choice) shorter. Also, make the choices more satirical, such as the CEO being evil greedy capitalist (who justify the kids who eat ti pod deserving it because of natural selection)
by Manokan Republic » Mon Feb 19, 2018 10:49 am
USS Monitor wrote:The Federation of Kendor wrote:You must make the issue effect (the text stating what will happen after submitting a choice) shorter. Also, make the choices more satirical, such as the CEO being evil greedy capitalist (who justify the kids who eat ti pod deserving it because of natural selection)
I feel like the natural selection thing would be too blatantly evil coming from the CEO, since he is presumably concerned with the company's public image. Capitalist pig characters need to be a little more subtle and underhanded in their nastiness.
by USS Monitor » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:12 am
Manokan Republic wrote:USS Monitor wrote:
I feel like the natural selection thing would be too blatantly evil coming from the CEO, since he is presumably concerned with the company's public image. Capitalist pig characters need to be a little more subtle and underhanded in their nastiness.
The rationale was more that the CEO wasn't evil, just very hardlined conservative, which blends somewhat in to his political ideology. Most CEO's have political ideologies too, and aren't just in it for the money, although it's always funny how the two blend together. Realistically it's more "well this is a parental issue..." trying to shift blame, which means it has a kernel of truth but is also motivated by their own interest to some degree as well. In a way it's sort of cognitive dissonance. Presumably, all issues have a response that has some kind of kernel of truth to all of them, and your own opinion is what pushes the decision over the edge, rather than one being overtly bad or good.
The main idea is not to make any one of the options obviously good or bad with trade-off's for any of the decisions. Public safety vs. civil rights for example.
by Manokan Republic » Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:33 am
USS Monitor wrote:Manokan Republic wrote:The rationale was more that the CEO wasn't evil, just very hardlined conservative, which blends somewhat in to his political ideology. Most CEO's have political ideologies too, and aren't just in it for the money, although it's always funny how the two blend together. Realistically it's more "well this is a parental issue..." trying to shift blame, which means it has a kernel of truth but is also motivated by their own interest to some degree as well. In a way it's sort of cognitive dissonance. Presumably, all issues have a response that has some kind of kernel of truth to all of them, and your own opinion is what pushes the decision over the edge, rather than one being overtly bad or good.
The main idea is not to make any one of the options obviously good or bad with trade-off's for any of the decisions. Public safety vs. civil rights for example.
What does this have to do with what I said? Next time, maybe check whether I'm criticizing the option as written or an over-the-top suggestion that you didn't use.
I say something is too over the top. You don't use it -- probably because you agreed with me that it's too over the top. Then you give me a lecture on How To Write An Issue 101 as if I've never done it before and tell me how "my opinion" is preventing me from appreciating the subtleties of your writing. Not really your finest moment.
by Australian rePublic » Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:41 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement