NationStates

Posted: **Wed Aug 28, 2019 5:20 am**

Here’s an idea that originally occurred to me over a year ago, inspired by some cases that have occurred in RL England, but that I put my original notes on aside while I worked on other projects instead.

~~The cottage was bought jointly by two people. rather than just by one, so that I could simply say "they" and "those-'uns" without having to bother about getting the pronouns' gender correct.~~

The village involved being called ‘Hambridge’ is a reference to ‘Ambridge’ in long-running British radio soap-opera ‘The Archers’, as are the villagers’ spokesman having the surname ‘Bowyer’ [of course…] and the bit about "everyday farming folk".
I think that the name ‘Farmer Giles’ (as used by Tolkien in his story 'Farmer Giles of Ham'...) used to be a traditional nickname for a generic farmer, like ‘Jack Tar’ for a sailor or ‘Tommy Atkins’ for a soldier.

Yes, some of the speakers might be a bit long-winded for some people’s tastes: That’s still well within realistic limits, I think, and to help show the differences between them.

I think that having the bells be just in a belfry, rather than a church, means that no religion-based validity should be needed.

Third Draft

The Bells! The Bells!

[description]@@CAPITAL@@ media personality @@RANDOMNAME_1@@ bought a cottage in the rustic village of Hambridge, recently, for use as a holiday home. After actually spending their first weekend there, however, they complained that "noise" of bell-ringing from the village’s famous belfry was spoiling the peace and quiet that they had expected to find, and was legally a 'nuisance' that must be ended. The legal situation is actually unclear, and both sides in the dispute are asking you for suitable legislation in their own favour.
[validity]The nation must have Capitalism, and enough Income Inequality for wealthy people to buy second homes like that; the nation must have has law-courts.

[option]"It's simple, daahling," says @@RANDOMNAME_1@@. "When I invested in that little refuge away from the hustle and bustle of the city, nothing was said about the scenic belfry being still in use, so I shouldn't have to put up with that racket. The nuisance laws need to be tightened up… and then maybe we can get a few other problems with the village fixed, too.”
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]chicken farmers must rise before the sun every day to gag their cockerels

[option]"Tis proper preposterous," argues villager Giles Bowyer, whose family has farmed there for generations. “Us everyday farming folk in Hambridge have been ringing Changes on our bells here regular since time afore memory. Why should we have to stop now, just-a-cause some danged incomer doesn't like the ~~music~~sweet sound? Let they get they's way over this, and they'd be after us to stop spreading muck on the fields nextly, or even to keep our cocks from cock-a-doodling in the marnings, rot my turnips if they wouldn’t!"
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]families must live in a village for a century before they get any say in how it runs

[option]"I have an alternative solution for this," announces @@RANDOMNAME_2@@, your Minister for Science & Gadgetry. "A team in my department recently came up with a new system for screening buildings from unwanted external sound by generating frequencies internally that cancel it out. We only need a few more — well, okay, better make that quite a few more — @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ in our budget for the R&D."
[validity]Scientific Advancement must be at a reasonably high level
[effect]new houses' External Noise Suppression Systems cost more than all other aspects of those properties put together

[option]"The real problem here isn't just this town-and-country clash of expectations, though." Communities Minister @@RANDOMNAME_3@@ comments, "It's the whole business of well-off city-dwellers people buying extra homes for themselves in places where there isn't even enough new housing available for the younger generations of the local population themselves. We should forbid that."
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]urbanites can only buy rural properties when country-dwellers move into the cities

Changes from second draft
@@RANDOMNAME" replaced by @@RANDOMNAME_1@@, so that it gives the same name in both places where it occurs. Other occurrences of the Macro [re]numbered accordingly, in case using both numbered and un-numbered forms of the Macro in a single issue doesn't work.
"@@HE@@ & "@@HIS@@" replaced by "they" & "their".
Wording & phrasing modified in option 2, which now refers explicitly to ringing Changes" on those bells, and for its effect line.
In option 3, the amounts of funding needed have been changed from rough numbers to he even vaguer "a few more" & "quite a few more".
Effect line for option 3 re-written.
For option 4, change of approach in the speakers' wordings and a new effect line to fit this.

The Bells! The Bells!

[issue]@@CAPITAL@@ media personality @@RANDOMNAME@@ bought a cottage in the rustic village of Hambridge for use as a holiday home. After actually spending @@HIS@@ first weekend there, however, @@HE@@ complained that "noise" of bell-ringing from the village’s famous belfry was spoiling the peace and quiet that @@HE@@ expected to find, and was legally a 'nuisance' which must be ended. The legal situation is actually unclear, and both sides in the dispute are asking you for suitable legislation in their own favour.
[validity]Capitalism, and enough Income Inequality for wealthy people to buy second homes like that; nation must have law-courts.

[option]"It's simple, dahling," says @@RANDOMNAME@@. "When I invested in that little refuge away from the hustle and bustle of the city, nothing was said about the scenic belfry being still in use, so I shouldn't have to put up with that racket. The nuisance laws need to be tightened up… and then maybe we can get a few other problems with the village fixed, too.”
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]chicken farmers must rise before the sun every day to gag their cockerels

[option]"Tis proper preposterous," argues villager Giles Bowyer, whose family has farmed there for generations. “Us everyday farming folk in Hambridge have been ringing they bells regular since time afore anybody now remembers, so why should we have to stop just a'cause a danged incomer don't like the music? Let 'un get @@HIS@@ way over this, and @@HE@@’d be after us to stop spreading muck on the fields nextly, or even to keep our cocks from cock-a-doodling in the marnings, rot my turnips if @@HE@@ wouldn’t!"
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]nobody has any say in a village's affairs unless their family has lived there for at least a century

[option]"I might have an alternative solution for this," announces @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Minister for Science & Gadgetry. "A team in my department recently came up with a new system for screening buildings from unwanted external sound by generating frequencies internally that cancel it out. We only need a few million — well, okay, better make that tens of millions — more @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@s in our budget for the R&D."
[validity]Scientific Advancement at a reasonable level
[effect]the most expensive parts of new houses are their External Noise Suppression Systems

[option]"The real problem isn't just this town-and-country clash of expectations, though." Communities Minister @@RANDOMNAME@@ comments, "It's the whole business of people buying extra homes for themselves in places where there isn't even enough new housing available for the younger generations of the local population themselves. We need a major programme to expand rural housing stocks."
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]most 'country-folk' live in sprawling suburbs

Changes from first draft
Introduction and first option both shortened slightly.
New effect line for option three.

The Bells! The Bells!

[issue]Socially-prominent @@CAPITAL@@ residents @@RANDOMNAME@@ and @@RANDOMNAME@@ purchased a cottage in the rustic farming village of Hambridge together last year, as a 'second home' for use at weekends. After actually spending their first weekend there, however, they complained that "noise" from the village’s famous belfry was spoiling the peace and quiet that they had expected to find, so that the bell-ringing was legally a 'nuisance' which must be ended. The legal situation is actually unclear, and both sides in the dispute have approached you to request suitable legislation in their own favour.
[validity]Capitalism, and enough Income Inequality for wealthy people to buy second homes like that; nation must have law-courts.

[option]"It's simple, dahling," says @@RANDOMNAME 1@@. "When we invested in our little retreat, so that we could relax away from the hustle and bustle of the city, we were told nothing about the scenic belfry being still in use, so we shouldn't have to put up with that racket. The nuisance laws need to be tightened up… and then maybe we can get a few other problems with the village fixed, too.”
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]poultry-keepers must rise before the sun every day to gag their cockerels

[option]"Tis proper preposterous," argues the villagers' spokesman Giles Bowyer, whose family has farmed there for generations. “Us everyday farming folk in Hambridge have been ringing they bells regular since time afore anybody now remembers, so why should we have to stop just a'cause a couple of danged incomers don't like the music? Let those-'uns get their way over this, and they’d be after us to stop spreading muck on the fields, nextly, or even to keep our cocks from cock-a-doodling in the marnings, rot my turnips if they wouldn’t!"
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]nobody has any say in a village's affairs unless their family has lived there for at least a century

[option]"I might have an alternative solution for this," announces @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Minister for Science & Gadgetry. "A team in my department recently came up with a new system for screening buildings from unwanted external sound by generating frequencies internally that cancel it out. We only need a few million — well, okay, better make that tens of millions — more @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@s in our budget for the R&D."
[validity]Scientific Advancement at a reasonable level
[effect]many new houses are now constructed with built-in 'white noise' generators

[option]"The real problem isn't just this town-and-country clash of expectations, though." Communities Minister @@RANDOMNAME@@ comments, "It's the whole business of people buying extra homes for themselves in places where there isn't even enough new housing available for the younger generations of the local population themselves. We need a major programme to expand rural housing stocks."
[validity]unrestricted
[effect]most 'country-folk' live in sprawling suburbs

Posted: **Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:06 am**

I really like the issue and it's incredibly well-written. The dialogues feel authentic and are very amusing to read! I don't mind that they're on the longer side, personally I really like characterization of that sort!

The issue reminds me of a court case we had in the Netherlands. A group of villagers had complained about church bells (I think every country has a similar story in their history of lawsuits) and the court judges ruled that the bells could ring only at specific times for a designated amount of minutes. While it's not necessary to include it - because the draft is already incredibly good as it is - perhaps you could offer up an option like that as a compromise?

The option could say something along the lines of: "what if we drastically limit for how long the bells can ring? That way the villagers can preserve their traditions and newcomers don't have to listen to the bells all the time." And then the effect line could be something like "people in town go crazy as the bells ring for one second every minute"

Posted: **Thu Aug 29, 2019 5:10 am**

But didn't they know they'd be livinhg near a clock tower? Didn't they sus out the town before buying there?

Posted: **Thu Aug 29, 2019 5:16 am**

Daarwyrth wrote:I really like the issue and it's incredibly well-written. The dialogues feel authentic and are very amusing to read! I don't mind that they're on the longer side, personally I really like characterization of that sort!

Thank you.

Daarwyrth wrote:The issue reminds me of a court case we had in the Netherlands. A group of villagers had complained about church bells (I think every country has a similar story in their history of lawsuits) and the court judges ruled that the bells could ring only at specific times for a designated amount of minutes. While it's not necessary to include it - because the draft is already incredibly good as it is - perhaps you could offer up an option like that as a compromise?

The option could say something along the lines of: "what if we drastically limit for how long the bells can ring? That way the villagers can preserve their traditions and newcomers don't have to listen to the bells all the time." And then the effect line could be something like "people in town go crazy as the bells ring for one second every minute"

That's a possibility. Adding a fifth option might be a bit too much, but maybe it could replace the current third one. I'll think further about this.
(I'm in England.)

Australian rePublic wrote:But didn't they know they'd be livinhg near a clock tower? Didn't they sus out the town before buying there?

They knew there was a bell-tower but apparently they didn't realize that it was still in use rather than just a "quaint" landmark... or, at least, didn't realize that it would be used at weekends -- when they were trying to relax in peace and quiet there -- rather than in the working week. Alternatively, they did realize this, but thought that saying it was unexpected meant that they'd have a better chance of getting it silenced.
There really have been cases like this...

Posted: **Thu Aug 29, 2019 5:31 am**

Bears Armed wrote:
Daarwyrth wrote:I really like the issue and it's incredibly well-written. The dialogues feel authentic and are very amusing to read! I don't mind that they're on the longer side, personally I really like characterization of that sort!
Thank you.

Daarwyrth wrote:The issue reminds me of a court case we had in the Netherlands. A group of villagers had complained about church bells (I think every country has a similar story in their history of lawsuits) and the court judges ruled that the bells could ring only at specific times for a designated amount of minutes. While it's not necessary to include it - because the draft is already incredibly good as it is - perhaps you could offer up an option like that as a compromise?

The option could say something along the lines of: "what if we drastically limit for how long the bells can ring? That way the villagers can preserve their traditions and newcomers don't have to listen to the bells all the time." And then the effect line could be something like "people in town go crazy as the bells ring for one second every minute"

That's a possibility. Adding a fifth option might be a bit too much, but maybe it could replace the current third one. I'll think further about this.
(I'm in England.)

Australian rePublic wrote:But didn't they know they'd be livinhg near a clock tower? Didn't they sus out the town before buying there?

They knew there was a bell-tower but apparently they didn't realize that it was still in use rather than just a "quaint" landmark... or, at least, didn't realize that it would be used at weekends -- when they were trying to relax in peace and quiet there -- rather than in the working week. Alternatively, they did realize this, but thought that saying it was unexpected meant that they'd have a better chance of getting it silenced.
There really have been cases like this...

Right, forgot to factor in human stupidity. Okay, carry on

Posted: **Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:32 pm**

Australian rePublic wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:Thank you.

That's a possibility. Adding a fifth option might be a bit too much, but maybe it could replace the current third one. I'll think further about this.
(I'm in England.)

They knew there was a bell-tower but apparently they didn't realize that it was still in use rather than just a "quaint" landmark... or, at least, didn't realize that it would be used at weekends -- when they were trying to relax in peace and quiet there -- rather than in the working week. Alternatively, they did realize this, but thought that saying it was unexpected meant that they'd have a better chance of getting it silenced.
There really have been cases like this...

Right, forgot to factor in human stupidity. Okay, carry on

It's not so much human stupidity as ignorance at the scope of things. Somehow people really do expect church bells/bells in general to be a thing of the past and not to be rung anymore, when they move in to a new village/town/city. Usually they will visit the place or check out their new home during the periods that the bells are not rung and so their expectations are falsely confirmed. The premise as the author handled it is very sound and solid in my opinion, because I have studied cases exactly like this one during my time in law school

Posted: **Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:53 pm**

Daarwyrth wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:Right, forgot to factor in human stupidity. Okay, carry on

It's not so much human stupidity as ignorance at the scope of things. Somehow people really do expect church bells/bells in general to be a thing of the past and not to be rung anymore, when they move in to a new village/town/city. Usually they will visit the place or check out their new home during the periods that the bells are not rung and so their expectations are falsely confirmed. The premise as the author handled it is very sound and solid in my opinion, because I have studied cases exactly like this one during my time in law school

Fine, church bells may only ring once, which means they should ring during your pre-purchase visit, but church bells ring every week, so it's entierly possible to visit without knowing the church bells

Posted: **Fri Aug 30, 2019 1:54 am**

Good work as always.

If I were to edit this, I'd likely cut the opening description by a half and each option by a quarter. Maybe do that yourself to retain control of the cuts?

Posted: **Sun Sep 01, 2019 3:57 am**

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Good work as always.

Thank you.

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:I were to edit this, I'd likely cut the opening description by a half and each option by a quarter. Maybe do that yourself to retain control of the cuts?

I'll think about ways of doing that without destroying its character.
(I'll also hope that an editor who's happier with the length expresses an interest...)

Posted: **Sun Sep 01, 2019 4:02 am**

Good issue, though I agree that the opening description could do with a little nip-tuck.

I'd also like to see a new effect line on #3 ("many new houses are now constructed with built-in 'white noise' generators"), as that seems to be a little of a restating the option effect.

EDIT: And I have to say how much I like the Farmer Giles character!

Posted: **Sun Sep 01, 2019 4:52 am**

While the issue is a bit on the longer side, I'd personally find it a pity if part of its amazing characterization would be lost due to shortening and cutting. While I understand that in many cases it's fluff that isn't necessary, in this particular case the extra characterization adds to the entirety and I feel too many cuts might actually work detrimentally. There are fairly lengthy issues out there, after all

Posted: **Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:32 am**

Include what is needed, and no more. If the length is needed, then keep it.

Posted: **Thu Sep 05, 2019 9:48 am**

Second draft posted.

Introduction and first option both shortened slightly.
New effect line for option three.

Posted: **Thu Sep 05, 2019 10:14 am**

I would rewrite this sentence:

After actually spending @@HIS@@ first weekend there, however, @@HE@@ complained that "noise" of bell-ringing from the village’s famous belfry was spoiling the peace and quiet that @@HE@@ expected to find, and was legally a 'nuisance' which must be ended. The legal situation is actually unclear, and both sides in the dispute are asking you for suitable legislation in their own favour.

Like this:

However, after actually having spent @@HIS@@ first weekend there, @@HE@@ complained that the bell-ringing "noise" from the village’s famous belfry was spoiling the peace and quiet @@HE@@ expected to find, and therefore considers it a 'nuisance' which should be ended by law. Yet as the legal situation is quite unclear, both sides in the dispute are asking you for suitable legislation, each seeking to favour their own.

Otherwise, I very much like the changes and am happy to see the characterization of the characters in the issue was not lost

Posted: **Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:59 am**

*<rings bells to bump this>*

Posted: **Mon Sep 09, 2019 8:57 am**

I'd cut the opening down to this:

[issue]@@CAPITAL@@ media personality @@RANDOMNAME@@ bought a holiday home in the rustic village of Hambridge, but is now complaining that "noise" of bell-ringing from the village’s famous belfry was spoiling the peace and quiet.

Posted: **Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:00 am**

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:I'd cut the opening down to this:

[issue]@@CAPITAL@@ media personality @@RANDOMNAME@@ bought a holiday home in the rustic village of Hambridge, but is now complaining that "noise" of bell-ringing from the village’s famous belfry was spoiling the peace and quiet.

Dropping the reason why this problem has landed on @@LEADER@@'s desk?

Posted: **Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:16 am**

What I'm wondering about is why they're ringing the bells to begin with?

I get that you wanted to keep it vague for the sake of religious versus secular nations, but to be fair, secular bell towers would exist even in religious nations, but it's not obvious what they'd be used for.

Before watches were invented, or when they were still expensive enough most people couldn't afford them, clock towers ringing their bells every hour was an important public service so people would know what time it is. But even in a backwards rural village, it's obvious nobody is going to care about that anymore.

Nowadays, the secular bell towers most likely to still be rung on a regular basis are the ones containing musical bells, because they make for a good tourist attraction / cultural heritage, but people are also less likely to complain about those. I guess there could also be a more practical use in school bells or announcing a farmer's market or something, something that actually alerts people of something they should know. There's probably other reason I have no idea of, but there should be some more reason for people to ring the bell than "because it's there".

Posted: **Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:00 pm**

Trotterdam wrote:announcing a farmer's market

This would sound as a really good reason for the bell ringing. It fits with the theme of the setting and the village's image

Posted: **Tue Sep 10, 2019 3:40 am**

Based on the characterisation in the issue, farmer's markets a clear choice imo. All things considered, I would probably add a medium 'primitiveness' value or a medium 'agriculture' industry enough that this is a plausible scenario. Right now my nation qualifies for this issue, but realistically, with top 1% scientific advancement and a -5.29 agriculture industry, this sort of scenario isn't likely to happen...

Also:

Bears Armed wrote:Let 'un get @@HIS@@r way over this, and @@HE@@’d be after us to stop spreading muck on the fields nextly, or even to keep our cocks from cock-a-doodling in the marnings, rot my turnips if @@HE@@ wouldn’t!"

Let 'un seems off, even for the 'rustic' speech pattern you're going for. Maybe remove the space? Or change to "Lettin"?
"@@HIS@@r" would produce "hisr" and "herr", which are both a bit weird too.

Posted: **Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:07 am**

Trotterdam wrote:What I'm wondering about is why they're ringing the bells to begin with?

I get that you wanted to keep it vague for the sake of religious versus secular nations, but to be fair, secular bell towers would exist even in religious nations, but it's not obvious what they'd be used for.

Before watches were invented, or when they were still expensive enough most people couldn't afford them, clock towers ringing their bells every hour was an important public service so people would know what time it is. But even in a backwards rural village, it's obvious nobody is going to care about that anymore.

Nowadays, the secular bell towers most likely to still be rung on a regular basis are the ones containing musical bells, because they make for a good tourist attraction / cultural heritage, but people are also less likely to complain about those. I guess there could also be a more practical use in school bells or announcing a farmer's market or something, something that actually alerts people of something they should know. There's probably other reason I have no idea of, but there should be some more reason for people to ring the bell than "because it's there".

Why they are ringing those Bells?

Firstly, of course, even in a nation with an overtly-secular government there might still be communities (perhaps especially small, rural communities like this one?) where religious belief remained and “tradition” was used as an excuse to continue such behaviour…

Anyway, with regard to your various suggestions:
I agree that it probably isn’t necessary for telling people the time (although the town hall clock here in Worthing, Sussex, England [population c.100’000] was still sounding out the hours only a few years ago…).
I agree that “musical” bells might be rung as a tourist attraction, although in that case not only might people be less inclined to complain (as you said when raising this possibility) but they would presumably be more likely to have found out about this before moving in to the village.
Announcing a farmers’ markets might work, although I suspect that a village wouldn’t have one of those unless it attracted people from larger settlements to shop there in which case — again — the new residents would be more likely to have heard about it in advance.

The reason that I actually had in mind, though, was “recreation, with perhaps an element of competition against other villages”: I was thinking in terms of the fine old art of ‘Change ringing’, sessions of which can continue — with quick substitutions of replacement ringers as necessary — for hours… or even days! Is this so little-known outside of Britain that I should include the term (so that players who wondered about the reason would be able to google it) in the issue’s opening?

SherpDaWerp wrote:Based on the characterisation in the issue, farmer's markets a clear choice imo. All things considered, I would probably add a medium 'primitiveness' value or a medium 'agriculture' industry enough that this is a plausible scenario. Right now my nation qualifies for this issue, but realistically, with top 1% scientific advancement and a -5.29 agriculture industry, this sort of scenario isn't likely to happen...

A good enough Agriculture rating for farming villages that don’t already consist mainly of city-dwellers’ holiday homes probably would be a good idea, yes.
Primitiveness, though, no: NOT needed. As I explained above, this sort of bell-ringing happens — and receives occasional complaints from newcomers to the villages — in RL in modern-day England.

SherpDaWerp wrote:Also:
Bears Armed wrote:Let 'un get @@HIS@@r way over this, and @@HE@@’d be after us to stop spreading muck on the fields nextly, or even to keep our cocks from cock-a-doodling in the marnings, rot my turnips if @@HE@@ wouldn’t!"

Let 'un seems off, even for the 'rustic' speech pattern you're going for. Maybe remove the space? Or change to "Lettin"?
"@@HIS@@r" would produce "hisr" and "herr", which are both a bit weird too.

The ’un wasn’t supposed to be part of the verb, it was supposed to be a pronoun… probably as a contraction of “That one”... a more ‘rustic’ equivalent of ’em. As there’s confusion, I’ll think about changing it.
Thank you for pointing out the surplus “r”: That was actually unintentional, simply left behind accidentally when I replaced “their” with @@HIS@@ after cutting the number of people involved. Fixed.

Posted: **Sun Sep 15, 2019 11:41 pm**

Trotterdam wrote:What I'm wondering about is why they're ringing the bells to begin with?

I get that you wanted to keep it vague for the sake of religious versus secular nations, but to be fair, secular bell towers would exist even in religious nations, but it's not obvious what they'd be used for.

Before watches were invented, or when they were still expensive enough most people couldn't afford them, clock towers ringing their bells every hour was an important public service so people would know what time it is. But even in a backwards rural village, it's obvious nobody is going to care about that anymore.

My Council area has a clock tower that chimes every half hour so I think it is reasonable that the belfry could also be used to mark the time.

My suggestion is, if you wanted to keep the issue secular and also to resolve any issue about why the bells are ringing in the first place, you could change 'belfry' to 'clock tower'.

Posted: **Sun Sep 15, 2019 11:44 pm**

By the way, I think this issue is really good. I would probably get rid of the last option though, because the issue is about a public nuisance, and the last option seems to relate to housing affordability, which is a bit separate.

Posted: **Thu May 20, 2021 2:34 am**

I am now able to be back on NS again on a reasonably frequent basis, and intend resuming work on this draft soon.
Does anybody have anything else to say about the current version?

Posted: **Wed Jun 30, 2021 7:39 am**

Third draft now posted, in the opening post, with notes following about its differences from the second one.

NationStates

[ACCEPTED] The Bells! The Bells!

[ACCEPTED] The Bells! The Bells!