[DRAFT] Remains of That Day

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

I thought it was fantastic, Free Joy State gave me a premise, and here I am!

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-46944912

Okay... here goes. *prays for success*

[TITLE] Painful Profits OR Crashing Commerce (Better Name?)

[PREMISE]
Today has been a peaceful uneventful day and you are casually browsing the online shopping website Rainforest when you come across the remnants of a car crash selling, and casually scroll by - nothing for you, leader of @@NAME@@ to worry about, right? Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that it was, in fact, @@HIM@@ in the car crash, and @@HE@@ is not too happy with the event.

[OPTION 1]
"Can you believe that website? Can you believe it?" cries your cousin over the phone, "I got hurt in that accident - I even chipped a nail, and this seller is profiting off of my pain - and my luxury car! Whats worse? The website actually allows this to go on. You know what I say? I say no e-commerce website should have the right to profit off pain, and there must be laws to govern that. Not even a company as big as Rainforest should allow such perversion of morality. Products procured from someone else suffering should never be allowed to sell - its disgusting. No profit from pain... especially mine!" with that @@HE@@ violently hangs up the phone with a string of swear words insulting the company and seller.

[FALLOUT] online salesmen find themselves on the black market trying to sell paper they cut their fingers with,

[OPTION 2]
"I have perfect right to sell such things, and it is a perfectly moral enterprise. Who wouldn't want to collect everything in the '@@LEADER@@ & their Family' collection!" says the seller of the crash parts, who you ponder how got in your office. "What would have been done with the car parts and broken glass shards otherwise? They would have been thrown away. I am simply making use of the stuff, recycling if you will. Imagine how happy it will make someone who desperately wants to add the latest @@LEADER@@ related event memorabilia to their collection! Profiting of pain is perfectly plain. Lets expand this business, shall we? Take it out of the legal grey area, and into the light... Besides, that car was luxury, its parts, even broken will sell quite well, and I am sure a well cultured person such as yourself wouldn’t mind a cut of the profits.“

[FALLOUT] Get rich quick schemes often involve selling the dead remains of relatives in accidents back to the families,

[OPTION 3]
Is this necessary? I know third options are now the norm on issues, but I cant think of anything. I you have any ideas, TELL ME! Sorry.

This turned out amazing! I hope you like it too... I have a record of having a different standard.

[OPTION 2]
"I have the right to sell such things, and it is a perfectly moral enterprise. Who wouldn't want to collect everything in the '@@LEADER@@ & their Family' collection!" says the seller of the crash parts, who you ponder how got in your office. "What would have been done with the car parts and broken glass shards otherwise? All trashed. Imagine how happy it will make someone who desperately wants to add the latest @@LEADER@@ related event memorabilia to their collection! Lets expand this business. Take it out of the legal grey area... Besides, that car was luxury, its parts, even broken will sell quite well, and I am sure a well cultured person such as yourself wouldn’t mind a cut of the profits.“

[FALLOUT] get-rich-quick schemes often involve grave-digging, (IDEAS FOR THIS ONE PLEASE?)

[OPTION 3]
Suddenly, a band of socialists rioting from below your office window begins to get antsy, "What do we want?" the leader of the demonstration yells, "Socialism!" the mob cries "When do we want it?" "NOW!". The leader climbs up into your office window and places a paper on your desk. "This is exactly the problem with capitalism, can you see? The free market can not run free without events like this happening. Regulation is the only way out. Now sign this paper, and bring glorious socialism to the masses! Redistribution of wealth! Jobs for everyone! Being able to feed my kids again!" she then looks at you expectantly.

[FALLOUT] Socialism is a remnants of car crashes,

This was a quick redraft, I wont be able to respond until Monday, but tell me what you think!

[TITLE] The Remains of That Day

[PREMISE]
Online e-commerce giant Rainforest became the centre of controversy when it was discovered that one of its top marketplace sellers -- 'DiamondGeezer99' -- has been selling remnants of a car-crash that left one person near-fatally wounded and another with minor injuries, having collected fragments from the roadside.

[OPTION 1]
Suddenly your phone rings, "That was my car!" sobs your cousin over the phone, audibly blowing her nose with a honk. "I got seriously maimed in that injury... Well, the doctor said I sprained my shoulder a little. And that crook is profiting from my pain. And my Vulgari sportscar! You should force ecommerce sites to clamp down on sleaze-merchants who are attempting to profit from someone else's pain -- especially mine!"

[FALLOUT] salesmen find themselves unable to sell paper they cut their fingers with as the government labels it 'Profiting off Pain',

[OPTION 2]
"I have the right to sell such things - its enterprise. Who wouldn't want to collect everything in the '@@LEADER@@ & their Family' collection!" says the seller of the crash parts, who you ponder how got in your office. "What would have been done with the car parts and broken glass shards otherwise? All trashed. Lets expand this - take it out of the legal grey area... Besides, that car was luxury, its parts, even broken will sell quite well, and I am sure a well cultured person such as yourself wouldn’t mind a cut of the profits."

[FALLOUT] get-rich-quick schemes often involve grave-digging, (IDEAS FOR THIS ONE PLEASE?)

[OPTION 3]
"What do we want?" "Socialism!" "When do we want it?" "NOW!" yells a mob below. The leader climbs up into your office window and places a paper on your desk. "This is exactly the problem with capitalism, can you see? The free market isn't possible without corruption of the system like this. Regulation is the only way out. Now sign this paper, and bring glorious socialism to the masses! Redistribution of wealth! Jobs for everyone! Being able to feed my kids again!"

[FALLOUT] Socialism is a remnants of car crashes,

I tried to cut out the waffle - even though I like waffles.

[Australian rePublic]

How did Rainforst gain ownership of said car?

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

How did Rainforst gain ownership of said car?

It was an independent salesman. They just picked up some of the broken parts of the crash, and auctioned it on Rainforest.

The idea is that they are trying to sell it to leader & family memorabilia collectors.

Is there any way I can clear up the wording on that?

[Trotterdam]

I find it a little concerning that issue writers in NationStates always gravitate to "corporations are trying to do bad stuff and need to be regulated by the government", even when the real-life story it's inspired by is one where the corporation in question actually was taking the moral option on its own (for the issue's definition of "moral", anyway). I'm no fan of unchecked capitalism, but I don't like the implication that every single thing the private sector ever does is evil, either.

I also find it rather unclear just how severe the car crash was, or what's being put on sale. Clearly my cousin is still alive, and I'm not seeing any mention of injuries or hospitalization. Is the "pain" just referring to the loss of an expensive car?

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

I find it a little concerning that issue writers in NationStates always gravitate to "corporations are trying to do bad stuff and need to be regulated by the government", even when the real-life story it's inspired by is one where the corporation in question actually was taking the moral option on its own (for the issue's definition of "moral", anyway). I'm no fan of unchecked capitalism, but I don't like the implication that every single thing the private sector ever does is evil, either.

I mean, our cousin does sound pretty... impertinent, right? I tried my best, it is just that that type of thing is a little more interesting.

Could I change it in some way?

I also find it rather unclear just how severe the car crash was, or what's being put on sale. Clearly my cousin is still alive, and I'm not seeing any mention of injuries or hospitalization. Is the "pain" just referring to the loss of an expensive car?

I should fix that, on it.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

[TITLE] Painful Profits OR Crashing Commerce (Better Name?)

Shame Market Crash is already used. However, I'd go with something like "The Remains of That Day" or "A Piece of the Action".

[PREMISE]
Today has been a peaceful uneventful day and you are casually browsing the online shopping website Rainforest when you come across the remnants of a car crash selling, and casually scroll by - nothing for you, leader of @@NAME@@ to worry about, right? Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that it was, in fact, @@HIM@@ in the car crash, and @@HE@@ is not too happy with the event.

Too much framing. Get the waffle out, and strip it to it's core premise. Any writing that doesn't transmit useful information should be funny. Anything that is neither funny or needed information is waffle.

[OPTION 1]
"Can you believe that website? Can you believe it?" cries your cousin over the phone, "I got hurt in that accident - I even chipped a nail, and this seller is profiting off of my pain - and my luxury car! Whats worse? The website actually allows this to go on. You know what I say? I say no e-commerce website should have the right to profit off pain, and there must be laws to govern that. Not even a company as big as Rainforest should allow such perversion of morality. Products procured from someone else suffering should never be allowed to sell - its disgusting. No profit from pain... especially mine!" with that @@HE@@ violently hangs up the phone with a string of swear words insulting the company and seller.

Same. Waffle, waffle, waffle. Information or humour, or leave it out.

[FALLOUT] online salesmen find themselves on the black market trying to sell paper they cut their fingers with,

Doesn't fit the "direction" of the option. You regulate against a market, and that market becomes a feature of your nation's front page? Instead, think about ways to take the decision ad absurdiam in the same direction as the choice made, or to state an unexpected but poetic twist on the decision's outcomes.

[OPTION 2]
"I have perfect right to sell such things, and it is a perfectly moral enterprise. Who wouldn't want to collect everything in the '@@LEADER@@ & their Family' collection!" says the seller of the crash parts, who you ponder how got in your office. "What would have been done with the car parts and broken glass shards otherwise? They would have been thrown away. I am simply making use of the stuff, recycling if you will. Imagine how happy it will make someone who desperately wants to add the latest @@LEADER@@ related event memorabilia to their collection! Profiting of pain is perfectly plain. Lets expand this business, shall we? Take it out of the legal grey area, and into the light... Besides, that car was luxury, its parts, even broken will sell quite well, and I am sure a well cultured person such as yourself wouldn’t mind a cut of the profits.“

Same again. Lose half the words.

[FALLOUT] Get rich quick schemes often involve selling the dead remains of relatives in accidents back to the families,

Too unwieldy.
Bleakness and darkness is fine if it's black humour. However black non-humour is just grimness for it's own sake.
Too much a description of what has just been decided.

I suggest redraft this one - it's a good topic, but the execution is currently marred by unwieldiness and lack of clarity.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Okie dokie CW. This is in redraft.

Also, is it a good idea to write it in a way that presents your cousin as the one trying to sell the crash debris? TFJS idea.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

[MOVED TO TOP POST]

[Trotterdam]

For reference, here's the previous thread. It's generally considered better to keep things in one thread rather than starting a new one for every rewrite of the same concept.

[Australian rePublic]

Under normal circumstances, please keep one thread per post

[Candlewhisper Archive]

The guys are right here: put this version on the original thread, so people can see the process that got to this point.

Edit it into the first post of the thread, and put the previous version behind a spoilerblock.

[Kyrusia]

Threads merged.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Okay - I redid the format of the thread! Shoot some suggestions at me!

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Why is no one looking at this thread? I redrafted and posted the old version behind a spoiler block, so the format is fine.

I just need advice on the content to make this shape up.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Okay, sure, let's see the premise.

[PREMISE]
The online commerce website Rainforest has recently become the center of controversy, as one of its associates has been selling the remnants of a car crash. Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that it was, in fact, @@HIM@@ in the car crash, and @@HE@@ is not too happy with the event dragging you into the storm.

Now let's get rid of the picture frame and see the picture.

Someone is selling your cousin's car crash remnants on Amazon.

That's nowhere near being a dilemma of any sorts. Strip out the fluff, and reexamine the core premise. Where's the controversy? Where's the question? Make it so that it is absolutely clear by premise end what the question being asked is.

Of course, some experienced authors get very good at layering on more narrative and information as the options expand, but you always need a strong foundation to build on.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Okay, sure, let's see the premise.

[PREMISE]
The online commerce website Rainforest has recently become the center of controversy, as one of its associates has been selling the remnants of a car crash. Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that it was, in fact, @@HIM@@ in the car crash, and @@HE@@ is not too happy with the event dragging you into the storm.

Now let's get rid of the picture frame and see the picture.

Someone is selling your cousin's car crash remnants on Amazon.

That's nowhere near being a dilemma of any sorts. Strip out the fluff, and reexamine the core premise. Where's the controversy? Where's the question? Make it so that it is absolutely clear by premise end what the question being asked is.

Of course, some experienced authors get very good at layering on more narrative and information as the options expand, but you always need a strong foundation to build on.

Okay, I think I made it better - does it need more or less, or did I just miss the point?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Better, but it's now extremely waffly. See if you can cut the opening description and each of the options by a third each.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Better, but it's now extremely waffly. See if you can cut the opening description and each of the options by a third each.

Okay! I cut some unnecessary sentences and adjectives.

Is there anything else that looks like it should be cut? I am trying to be conservative.

[The Free Joy State]

Better, but it's now extremely waffly. See if you can cut the opening description and each of the options by a third each.

Okay! I cut some unnecessary sentences and adjectives.

Is there anything else that looks like it should be cut? I am trying to be conservative.

Don't be conservative. Cull anything that doesn't work or doesn't add anything and show no mercy.

Add humour instead of waffle. Drafts should be lean and mean, rough and tough, funny sonsovbitches -- as appropriate (while every rule has exceptions, this doesn't come across as one of them).

So, beef up the characterisation -- more humour in the characterisation: descriptions, speech patterns, expressions.

The online commerce website Rainforest has recently become the center of a media controversy, as one of its associates has been selling the remnants of a near fatal car crash that left one person seriously inured and another with minor injuries, and pocketing the money for them self rather than helping the victims of the crash with it. Barely managing to avoid the public outcry you hide in your office. Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that @@HE@@ was one of the two in the car crash, and not too happy with the event, finally dragging you into the storm.

That can be almost cut in half. The first option says the cousin's on the phone and unhappy. You can add that they were in the car crash and "finally dragging you into the storm" is pure waffle.

Basically, a lot needs cutting. And it really needs to be funnier.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Okay! I cut some unnecessary sentences and adjectives.

Is there anything else that looks like it should be cut? I am trying to be conservative.

Don't be conservative. Cull anything that doesn't work or doesn't add anything and show no mercy.

Add humour instead of waffle. Drafts should be lean and mean, rough and tough, funny sonsovbitches -- as appropriate (while every rule has exceptions, this doesn't come across as one of them).

So, beef up the characterisation -- more humour in the characterisation: descriptions, speech patterns, expressions.

Can you help with that? I really am having trouble making it funny.

The online commerce website Rainforest has recently become the center of a media controversy, as one of its associates has been selling the remnants of a near fatal car crash that left one person seriously inured and another with minor injuries, and pocketing the money for them self rather than helping the victims of the crash with it. Barely managing to avoid the public outcry you hide in your office. Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that @@HE@@ was one of the two in the car crash, and not too happy with the event, finally dragging you into the storm.

That can be almost cut in half. The first option says the cousin's on the phone and unhappy. You can add that they were in the car crash and "finally dragging you into the storm" is pure waffle.

Basically, a lot needs cutting. And it really needs to be funnier.

Help? I need to know what is bad, and what is not.

[The Free Joy State]

[TITLE] The Remains of That Day / Crashing Commerce

Crashing Commerce is not a good title. Get rid of it as an alternative.

"Remains of That Day" is a really good one.

Or I can suggest "Crashes to Cashes" (a play on Ashes to Ashes)

[PREMISE]
The online commerce website Rainforest has recently become the center of a media controversy, as one of its associates has been selling the remnants of a near fatal car crash that left one person seriously inured and another with minor injuries, and pocketing the money for them self rather than helping the victims of the crash with it. Barely managing to avoid the public outcry you hide in your office. Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that @@HE@@ was one of the two in the car crash, and not too happy with the event, finally dragging you into the storm.

The generic "one of its associates" is rather bland, and associate is too specialist to Amazon. I suggest changing that to the more public term "marketplace" and giving the seller a name. Perhaps something sleazy-sounding.

And shorter. Much shorter.

Online ecommerce giant Rainforest became the centre of controversy when it was discovered that one of its top marketplace sellers -- 'DiamondGeezer99' -- has been selling remnants of a car-crash that left one person near-fatally wounded and another with minor injuries, having collected fragments from the roadside.

Nothing more needed here.

[OPTION 1]
"Can you believe that website? Can you believe it?" cries your cousin over the phone, "I got hurt in that accident - I even dislocated my shoulder, and this seller is profiting off of my pain - and my luxury car! Whats worse? The website actually allows this to go on. I say no e-commerce website should have the right to profit off of someone else's pain, and there must be laws to govern that... it's... it's perversion of morality! No profit from pain - especially mine!" with that @@HE@@ violently hangs up the phone with a string of swear words targeting both company and seller.

Once you cut the waffle this will say everything that it needs to say.

"That was my car!" sobs your cousin over the phone, audibly blowing her nose with a honk. "I got seriously maimed in that injury... Well, the doctor said I sprained my shoulder a little. And that crook is profiting from my pain. And my Vulgari sportscar! You should force ecommerce sites to clamp down on sleaze-merchants who are attempting to profit from someone else's pain -- especially mine!"

I'm not going to rewrite your whole draft. But you get the idea. Look where the same idea is repeated twice, and cut it.

If you can add a joke instead, do.

EDIT:

Question: Where does socialism come in? Your options are:

--> Restrict the practise
--> Encourage the practise (and take a cut)
--> Bring in socialism

Do you see how this seems out of place.

Your first option is regulation, your second option makes your leader into a crook (by giving @@LEADER@@ a cut) and your third is completely unrelated).

Whatever your next edit is, it needs a whole new third option. One related to the plot.

[USS Monitor]

Barely managing to avoid the public outcry you hide in your office.

This is worded in a way that makes it feel like you're intruding on player autonomy. Tell the player what @@LEADER@@ is experiencing, not how @@HE@@ is reacting. Saying @@LEADER@@ is in @@HIS@@ office is fine. Saying @@HE@@ went there to "hide" is more problematic.

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

[TITLE] The Remains of That Day / Crashing Commerce

Crashing Commerce is not a good title. Get rid of it as an alternative.

"Remains of That Day" is a really good one.

Or I can suggest "Crashes to Cashes" (a play on Ashes to Ashes)

[PREMISE]
The online commerce website Rainforest has recently become the center of a media controversy, as one of its associates has been selling the remnants of a near fatal car crash that left one person seriously inured and another with minor injuries, and pocketing the money for them self rather than helping the victims of the crash with it. Barely managing to avoid the public outcry you hide in your office. Suddenly, you receive a call from your cousin telling you that @@HE@@ was one of the two in the car crash, and not too happy with the event, finally dragging you into the storm.

The generic "one of its associates" is rather bland, and associate is too specialist to Amazon. I suggest changing that to the more public term "marketplace" and giving the seller a name. Perhaps something sleazy-sounding.

And shorter. Much shorter.

Online ecommerce giant Rainforest became the centre of controversy when it was discovered that one of its top marketplace sellers -- 'DiamondGeezer99' -- has been selling remnants of a car-crash that left one person near-fatally wounded and another with minor injuries, having collected fragments from the roadside.

Nothing more needed here.

[OPTION 1]
"Can you believe that website? Can you believe it?" cries your cousin over the phone, "I got hurt in that accident - I even dislocated my shoulder, and this seller is profiting off of my pain - and my luxury car! Whats worse? The website actually allows this to go on. I say no e-commerce website should have the right to profit off of someone else's pain, and there must be laws to govern that... it's... it's perversion of morality! No profit from pain - especially mine!" with that @@HE@@ violently hangs up the phone with a string of swear words targeting both company and seller.

Once you cut the waffle this will say everything that it needs to say.

"That was my car!" sobs your cousin over the phone, audibly blowing her nose with a honk. "I got seriously maimed in that injury... Well, the doctor said I sprained my shoulder a little. And that crook is profiting from my pain. And my Vulgari sportscar! You should force ecommerce sites to clamp down on sleaze-merchants who are attempting to profit from someone else's pain -- especially mine!"

I'm not going to rewrite your whole draft. But you get the idea. Look where the same idea is repeated twice, and cut it.

If you can add a joke instead, do.

EDIT:

Question: Where does socialism come in? Your options are:

--> Restrict the practise
--> Encourage the practise (and take a cut)
--> Bring in socialism

Do you see how this seems out of place.

Your first option is regulation, your second option makes your leader into a crook (by giving @@LEADER@@ a cut) and your third is completely unrelated).

Whatever your next edit is, it needs a whole new third option. One related to the plot.

All I can say is Jesus! Thanks!

It has been revamped, and the socialist option is now justified (kind of)!

[Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar]

Okay, so what does it look like now? Decent condition to the point where all I have to do is make a couple more tweaks, or a long way to go?

[The Free Joy State]

Okay, so what does it look like now? Decent condition to the point where all I have to do is make a couple more tweaks, or a long way to go?

You hardly appear to have touched options #2 or #3 at all.

What I wrote were examples of how ruthless you have to be with the rest of your draft. I didn't leave the rest of the draft because I thought it was done.

You still have @@LEADER@@ "pondering" -- that breaches player autonomy. You cannot have someone else's character think or feel anything. Ever.

And the socialism option just does not work.

It's still:
--> Ban
--> Be sleazy
--> Socialism

A more balanced issue might be:
--> Ban outright
--> Allow items to be sold while bringing in a process where those personally affected by tragedies can request sales to be withdrawn
--> "Free market rules" and/or be sleazy

Or something else. But what you have now does not work.