[DRAFT]Satanism Riots (Abandoned)

[The Free Joy State]

I would personally suggest aiming for an issue that doesn't portray such a storybook portrayal of a group, of which there is a likelihood that some NS players (now or in the future) will most likely be members.

If the OP does not think they can portray the group in a more realistic and nuanced manner (the Church of Satan -- also known as Satanists -- do not worship Satan; they are atheistic and by definition cannot worship a being they don't believe in), I would suggest they consider another subject and begin a new, monochrome draft.

Theistic satanists are a thing, the Church of Satan is one group.
They also differ in ideology from left-wing like Lucien Greaves to far-right like some white supremacist satanists.

The Church of Satan are atheistic. Here is their own website.

Pretending that the majority of Satanists are the "horror movie" kind portrayed in the OP risks offending the majority and brings the draft to total irrelevance. A nuanced portrayal is needed, especially when portraying views different to your own.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Theistic satanists are a thing, the Church of Satan is one group.
They also differ in ideology from left-wing like Lucien Greaves to far-right like some white supremacist satanists.

The Church of Satan are atheistic. Here is their own website.

Pretending that the majority of Satanists are the "horror movie" kind portrayed in the OP risks offending the majority and brings the draft to total irrelevance. A nuanced portrayal is needed, especially when portraying views different to your own.

I never said the Church of Satan wasn't athiestic.
I said it was only one group

[The Free Joy State]

The Church of Satan are atheistic. Here is their own website.

Pretending that the majority of Satanists are the "horror movie" kind portrayed in the OP risks offending the majority and brings the draft to total irrelevance. A nuanced portrayal is needed, especially when portraying views different to your own.

I never said the Church of Satan wasn't athiestic.
I said it was only one group

That's an issue with your punctuation:

Theistic satanists are a thing, the Church of Satan is one group.

Which reads as "Theistic Satanists are a thing, and the Church of Satan is one such group".

You see?

[Trotterdam]

"Satanism" is a name independenty chosen by several unrelated groups solely for the purpose of annoying Christians. It's really pointless to talk about anyone being a "true" Satanist, since the name predates anyone at all actually self-identifying as one.

[The Free Joy State]

"Satanism" is a name independenty chosen by several unrelated groups solely for the purpose of annoying Christians. It's really pointless to talk about anyone being a "true" Satanist, since the name predates anyone at all actually self-identifying as one.

The debate is uninteresting, I agree.

The important point is to be wary of shallow portrayals.

A perfect issue format has a question that a real-life leader could face and two or three sensible options and, possibly, a crazy options.

[Bakanu]

Do y'all at LEAST like the subject?!

[Bakanu]

And you still haven't got rid of the coloured text, some of which is eye-scorching.

In my defense, y'all DID say it was a bare skeleton, soooooo.

[The New California Republic]

And you still haven't got rid of the coloured text, some of which is eye-scorching.

In my defense, y'all DID say it was a bare skeleton, soooooo.

...where in any of the comments did anyone say that you could improve the draft by posting it in gaudy colours? I'll save you some time: nowhere, that's where.

[Bakanu]

In my defense, y'all DID say it was a bare skeleton, soooooo.

...where in any of the comments did anyone say that you could improve the draft by posting it in gaudy colours? I'll save you some time: nowhere, that's where.

Oh well, I got rid of the colors.

[Bakanu]

Welcome to Got Issues.

Please remove all colours from your drafts. Black text only, please.

Drafts should never be eligible for only one nation or one region. There's a @@REGION@@ tool; use it (please see this post for the list of available macros)

Please format your draft like this:

[title] My Title

[validity] if necessary, validities would be placed here

[description] This is the incident or problem that incited this issue. It's best if the issue is something specific.

[option] "This is option one," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, as @@HE@@ does something amusing. "And this is my idea."
[effect] and this is how you format the effect line

[option] "This is option two," says Minister @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME@@ Exampleson, also doing something vaguely entertaining. "Here is my idea, which is different to the first, yet still relevant to the topic."
[effect] and here is the amusing effect line for this option

[option] "This is option three!" screams @@RANDOMNAME@@, being very dramatic. "It's nearly the end of the issue. It's best if issues are three to four relevant options in length."
[effect] and this is one final effect line

Before proceeding further, I recommend you see this guide to writing issues for NS.

EDIT: Also other issues:

• The issue is very thin and the premise and options need a lot of work (the last two are basically the same and the second is unfeasible; issues need equally workable pro- and con- positions)
• I think this basically misrepresents the Church of Satan, which doesn't go around murdering and pillaging
• We already have an issue about believers being threatened (Save Our Souls), so avoiding overlap is important
• 'The deliberate misspellings in the last option are just painful and add nothing
• the effect lines basically just describe the decision (we try to avoid that)

I'm not saying ALL satanists are this way, this is a violent group, oh well, I already have another issue draft, sooo.

[Authoritaria-Imperia]

I'm not saying ALL satanists are this way, this is a violent group, oh well, I already have another issue draft, sooo.

That's absolutely your call if you'd like to close this draft and work on a different one. If that's the case, could you please change the "[DRAFT]" in the title to "[ABANDONED]"? It's another Got Issues? tradition that lets people know if they should be providing further feedback.