NationStates

Australian rePublic wrote:Option 3- near sightedness has always existed, but became a more significant problem since the invention of the printing press. There a was a far greater increase in near sightedness amongst literate non-slaves with the invention of books than there was with the invention of screens. If you wanna ban TVs, you gotta ban books too. In fact, banning books would probably do more good than banning TV, because most people sit far enough away from the TV to atleast stretch their eyes a little, whilst book readers have to remain close to their medium. The exception to this is CRT screens, which actively hurt your eyes in non-nearsightedness ways, but, you'd be hard pressed to find one these days. If you wanted to go down that path, keep in mind that it'd be neglible. The government would need to spend like $60000 to replace the 1500 or so which remain.

Okay, this would also make for a more interesting issue. I’ll see what I can do!

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:

My Nation wrote:So should I change the thread title back to [DRAFT], even though I submitted this issue?

Sure, go ahead.

Also, what is OTT?

Over the top.

How would I make Option 1 less OTT?

Anybody got any more suggestions for this one? I’d still like to work on it!

Can you skip lines between options and fallouts and descriptions and stuff in formatting please? It’s annoying to read as is.

Fauxia wrote:Can you skip lines between options and fallouts and descriptions and stuff in formatting please? It’s annoying to read as is.

Sure, I’ll do it for Draft 6 and will keep in mind for future drafts.

Edit: Liked the new look so much I did it for all the drafts. Thanks for the suggestion!

From Draft 4 onwards we seem to have switched to this being just about laser eye surgery, which feels too niche to be a whole issue. There's thousands of procedures that the medical establishment undertakes, and millions of people who suffer complications. There's no reason that one complication off one procedure should trigger a national issue.

For an issue about a single medical procedure, what you need is a broader context for why things went wrong. As an example, I'll point you towards my issue #1250 @@NAME@@'s Next Top Mohel which talks about circumcisions performed by non-surgeons and has a conflict between religious freedom and surgical standards, which is a RL thing, and thus is an issue.

In this issue you've just got eye surgery going wrong, which might interest ophthalmologists reviewing their success rates, or a compensation lawyer, but is not a national issue.

To make a single procedure complication into an issue there needs to be an inherent conflict. Like, for example, a high risk cosmetic procedure being carried out for no reason other than beauty. Or a life-risking surgery being done on those who can't consent (children, the cognitively impaired) for whatever reason. Or people wanting a procedure done that has no medical benefit because of a folk belief. Or people getting cosmetic procedures on the NHS.

Right now, as a premise, this doesn't sell.

I'd suggest rolling back to draft 3's premise, where eyesight is worsening, and then speculating why.

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:I'd suggest rolling back to draft 3's premise, where eyesight is worsening, and then speculating why.

Done! Draft 7 is now up!

I just have one question about it… can books be banned? If they can, I’d have to add a validity to Option 2, and I might have to add another option so that nations affected by that validity won’t receive a two-option issue.

It’s been several days since the last post on this thread. Anyone got any further suggestions?

Option 1- Books cause just as many issues for eyesight as screens do

Australian rePublic wrote:Option 1- Books cause just as many issues for eyesight as screens do

Isn't that what option 2 says?


As a broader criticism, it seems like you've got a broad premise here, then very limited options.

Eyesight is worsening
1 - Screens are the problem
2 - No, books are the problem.
3 - Neither, it's nutrition.

I suggest transitioning this into a list issue, with each option 1-2 sentences, but having 7-8 options instead. This sort of open ended query doesn't tend to feel satisfying with so few options presented.