[DRAFT] NO COLLABORATION!

[United States of Natan]

Validity: Holds elections

Recent reports in the @@CAPITAL@@ Times outline potential claims of cooperation between the government of Brancaland, and officials from your campaign during the last election. The @@NAME@@ Bureau of Investigation has opened an inquiry into the matter.

"This investigation is a sham and a warlock hunt!" Decries your brother, who worked on your campaign and who is currently trying to get permits to build a hotel in Brancaland's capital, in a social media post. "The public knows that @@LEADER@@ would never work with foreign officials to steal an election! Clearly, the @@NAME@@ Bureau of Investigation has it out for @@LEADER@@! They probably voted for the other party's nominee! If you ask me, The entire @NAMEINITIALS@@BI should be purged and investigated for disloyalty! #NOCOLLABORATION!"

Effect: "#Impeach@@LEADER@@" is trending on social media.

"@@LEADER@@, your best move would be to let this play out," claims Jeff Meetings, your Attorney General. "If you're really innocent, I'm sure you'll be cleared by the @@NAMEINITIALS@@BI. But I suppose there is the risk of a conflict of interest, so how about you let me appoint an independent prosecutor? Besides, then nobody can accuse you of influencing the investigation."

Effect: Whenever a government official from @@LEADER@@'s party is investigated, the government hires independent prosecutors.

"Why not take a third option," asks your Secretary of Third Options, Roger Boulder, who's already been subpoenaed by prosecutors, asks. "A sitting leader cannot be indicted. So the solution is simple: Declare a national emergency, like issues at the border or something, and use your emergency powers to make yourself Dictator-for-life, or at least until the statute of limitations runs out. Better yet, use this "emergency" to distract the public from the investigation! It's a win-win! And while you're at it, why don't you extend those protections to your closest advisors as well?"

Effect: Every time investigators look into @@LEADER@@, a "border crisis" is declared.

[Australian rePublic]

What evidence is there?

[United States of Natan]

What evidence is there?

I'm not sure evidence is relevant to the story. It's supposed to be a little vague, because you don't know if there was actually any "collaboration" or not. Hell, the first option could be entirely correct about the lack of it. But generally issues offer over-the-top, potentially unnecessary solutions or solutions which go too far.

[United States of Natan]

Anyone else have comments/suggestions?

[Australian rePublic]

What evidence is there?

I'm not sure evidence is relevant to the story. It's supposed to be a little vague, because you don't know if there was actually any "collaboration" or not. Hell, the first option could be entirely correct about the lack of it. But generally issues offer over-the-top, potentially unnecessary solutions or solutions which go too far.

Well there'd have to be some kind of evidence. The police can't just investigate every crackpot conspuracy theory

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

I see a problem within the text: “ "The public knows that @@LEADER@@ would never work with foreign officials to steal an election! Clearly, the @@NAME@@ Bureau of Investigation...” the problem is that, in the second sentence, those of us with ‘the’ in their name, it ends up weird: for me it would show up as “Clearly, the The World Capitalist Confederation Bureau of Investigation....” which makes zero sense. It should be fixed. I would remove the The in there.

[United States of Natan]

I see a problem within the text: “ "The public knows that @@LEADER@@ would never work with foreign officials to steal an election! Clearly, the @@NAME@@ Bureau of Investigation...” the problem is that, in the second sentence, those of us with ‘the’ in their name, it ends up weird: for me it would show up as “Clearly, the The World Capitalist Confederation Bureau of Investigation....” which makes zero sense. It should be fixed. I would remove the The in there.

Well then it's weird for countries that DON'T have "The". Mine would be "Clearly, United States of Natan Bureau of Investigation..." that makes zero sense as well. I think the default of "the" is fine, but if an issue editor issues an opposing opinion, I'll defer to it.

[United States of Natan]

I'm not sure evidence is relevant to the story. It's supposed to be a little vague, because you don't know if there was actually any "collaboration" or not. Hell, the first option could be entirely correct about the lack of it. But generally issues offer over-the-top, potentially unnecessary solutions or solutions which go too far.

Well there'd have to be some kind of evidence. The police can't just investigate every crackpot conspuracy theory

The implication is that there is sufficient evidence for an investigation.

[Far Tholk]

I see a problem within the text: “ "The public knows that @@LEADER@@ would never work with foreign officials to steal an election! Clearly, the @@NAME@@ Bureau of Investigation...” the problem is that, in the second sentence, those of us with ‘the’ in their name, it ends up weird: for me it would show up as “Clearly, the The World Capitalist Confederation Bureau of Investigation....” which makes zero sense. It should be fixed. I would remove the The in there.

Well then it's weird for countries that DON'T have "The". Mine would be "Clearly, United States of Natan Bureau of Investigation..." that makes zero sense as well. I think the default of "the" is fine, but if an issue editor issues an opposing opinion, I'll defer to it.

How about 'the national investigation bureau?'

[United States of Natan]

Well then it's weird for countries that DON'T have "The". Mine would be "Clearly, United States of Natan Bureau of Investigation..." that makes zero sense as well. I think the default of "the" is fine, but if an issue editor issues an opposing opinion, I'll defer to it.

How about 'the national investigation bureau?'

I considered that, but it didn't work very well.

[United States of Natan]

So does anyone else have anything to say about This? Any issue editors?

[Jutsa]

I'll take a look at this today, probably. Gotta do some other stuff first, though.

[USS Monitor]

I feel like I saw this premise already, but I can't remember for sure if that was an actual issue or another draft or if I am just confused. I'm also kind of bored of Trump-related issues, but that might be a personal problem on my end. Maybe there's a viable issue in here, but it would be more timeless if you NSified it a little more rather than staying so close to what is going on with Trump. There's probably room for another government scandal issue of some kind, but I'm just not in love with this one in its current form.

In terms of the actual writing, I don't think the phrase "warlock hunt" works well, because that's not something people actually say.

Effect lines are not complete sentences. They should not be capitalized or end with a period, and if you can make them a little shorter and funnier, that would be nice. Try to keep the grammatical structures in effect lines as simple as possible so that it is easy to parse when they are put together in the same sentence with effects from other issues.

[United States of Natan]

I feel like I saw this premise already, but I can't remember for sure if that was an actual issue or another draft or if I am just confused. I'm also kind of bored of Trump-related issues, but that might be a personal problem on my end. Maybe there's a viable issue in here, but it would be more timeless if you NSified it a little more rather than staying so close to what is going on with Trump. There's probably room for another government scandal issue of some kind, but I'm just not in love with this one in its current form.

In terms of the actual writing, I don't think the phrase "warlock hunt" works well, because that's not something people actually say.

Effect lines are not complete sentences. They should not be capitalized or end with a period, and if you can make them a little shorter and funnier, that would be nice. Try to keep the grammatical structures in effect lines as simple as possible so that it is easy to parse when they are put together in the same sentence with effects from other issues.

Ok, so how would you suggest I "NSify" the issue? I'd still like to stick to the general premise, because the title after all, is "NO COLLABORATION!" As for "warlock hunt", I wanted to use "witch hunt", but I felt that was phrase was a little worn out so I wanted to change it up a bit.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Validity: Holds elections

Recent reports in the @@CAPITAL@@ Times outline potential claims of cooperation between the government of Brancaland, and officials from your campaign during the last election. The @@NAME@@ Bureau of Investigation has opened an inquiry into the matter.

This premise was covered pretty well by Max himself, in a much subtler way, but then he is a professional author, so we do expect high quality stuff of him .

See Issue 1000.

[United States of Natan]

Validity: Holds elections

Recent reports in the @@CAPITAL@@ Times outline potential claims of cooperation between the government of Brancaland, and officials from your campaign during the last election. The @@NAME@@ Bureau of Investigation has opened an inquiry into the matter.

This premise was covered pretty well by Max himself, in a much subtler way, but then he is a professional author, so we do expect high quality stuff of him .

See Issue 1000.

Perhaps validity could be based on your answer in 1000, then? He covered the social media aspect, but not so much the criminal aspect...

[Jutsa]

Eh, sorry Natan, but between that issue, 961, and in particular 923, I'm afraid this topic's not got much room for more groundcover.
You could get technical about it, but overall I'm of the mindset that this issue's probably not going to pass. Sorry.

I could of course be wrong, if you wanted to continue to pursue this, but I'd personally recommend trying your hand at another issue.
You could ask if an issue idea sounds good or has been covered over in the Writers' Block.
Good luck, whatever you choose to do.