NationStates

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 2:44 pm**

Archive.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:13 pm**

Megistos wrote:A band of women formed a group called ‘We Want Boyfriend Shops’ (WWBS) because all of them were single and couldn’t make a man fall in love with them.

Why is government intervention in the free market required to resolve this issue?

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:22 pm**

Tinhampton wrote:
Megistos wrote:A band of women formed a group called ‘We Want Boyfriend Shops’ (WWBS) because all of them were single and couldn’t make a man fall in love with them.

Why is government intervention in the free market required to resolve this issue?

WDYM?

oh, free market. because men don't want to be sold so they want the government to outlaw selling men and convert to socialism so they can't be sold, women want capitalism because they can make companies allowed to sell men to gain money

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:38 pm**

Just a quick glance through the issue sparks a few questions, but the most pertinent of which is; is this basically suggesting slavery, or prostitution? What exactly is the "buying a boyfriend" part of this entailing? You should try and clarify your premise, because right know though I know what you're trying to hit, you don't exactly present it in a way that requires governmental attention and even makes very much sense at all. A situation (lower productivity due to lack of relationship/romantic stimulation, or change in behavior due to aforementioned lacking) that brings the issue to your attention vs. they want to pester you is much more effective in addressing the governmental attention part of the premise. Try to work on this a bit more - it will help you find the problems in the rest of the issue, and make the issue as a whole sturdier.

Also, don't capitalize your effect lines.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 6:25 pm**

Megistos wrote:[title] BoyfriendMart?

The best titles I can think of at the moment would be "Rent-A-Roomie" or "Hubbie Hobbyists Haggle to be Heard." I'm certain someone else can think of something better.

Megistos wrote:[desc] A band of women formed a group called ‘We Want Boyfriend Shops’ (WWBS) because all of them were single and couldn’t make a man fall in love with them. After pestering the government about this, they’ve always decided to do what they do best: annoy you with it

How about "Women Enthusiastically Effecting Boyfriend Shops"? Instead of saying "pestering the government," try to create an amusing incident that brings it to Leader's attention.

Megistos wrote:[option] “It’s great for us women.” Says @@RANDOMNAMEFEMALE@@, the leader of WWBS, while kissing her cardboard stand-up of a hot man. “There is so many people out there in @@NAME@@ who don’t have a partner to love and spend time with!” She continues, “Plus, if you don’t listen to us, that would stir up a controversy of you being sexist.” She says, smiling brightly.

[effect] The first store tourists find in @@NAME@@ is BoyfriendMart

So... is this store selling actual people as boyfriends (in which case it's slavery, probably illegal in a given country, and a really weird thing to write an issue about), or is it selling body pillows?

Megistos wrote:[option] “THIS IS A DISGRACE TO MAN’S RIGHT!” Screams a hyper man, who somehow got past your security. “THEY WANT TO SELL US! WE SHOULD BE SELLING THEM!” He says, upset. “BUT I’M KIND, SO I DEMAND YOU TO TREAT MEN LIKE THEY ARE!” He continues, “And plus,” He begins softly, a shocker to your guards, who just came in the door to your office “We can avoid a war. If men find out that they are cheap, maybe around 1,000 @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, then they’ll fight with the ones that are worth millions of @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@.” He finishes.

[effect] Everyone in @@NAME@@ is treated the same, with anyone who considers them different is thrown into jail

I can't say this option makes too much sense. I would make it very clear in the description that these stores sell fake boyfriends, and not actual people. Even then, it's arguably not suitable for an issue. The options could be presented as: allow fake boyfriends to be sold / ban the selling of fake boyfriends / abolish marriage entirely / use the fake boyfriends to spy on citizens / whatever else you can think of. That being said, I still wouldn't write an issue that's fundamentally about sex toys at best or unironic trafficking at worst.

Megistos wrote:[option] “This raises an interesting issue” Begins the leader of NoRitz, @@RANDOMNAMEMALE@@. “And that is: This wouldn’t have been done and allowed if public protest was allowed.” He says. “So I advise you to ban it, so petty citizens won’t get in your way.” He finishes.

[effect] Women in @@NAME@@ are arrested for protesting about ‘How Boyfriend Shops should be made’

[issue_validity] Not valid for nations who don’t have the public protest policy

So... the solution to a problem caused by a lack of protest is to ban protest? At least, that's how it currently reads. You could definitely make a pretty standard civil rights issue out of this. Again, I would change the topic to something a bit different.

Megistos wrote:[option] “I agree with the leader of WWBS” begins @@RANDOMNAMEFEMALE@@. “But we should take this further. Since @@NAME@@ is capitalist, we, the people who can afford it, can make money out of it, by starting companies that will sell men, we’ll make more money, and plus, we can fund the @@DEMONYM@@ economy with the money we make, if you let us.” She says.

[effect] 10 year old’s lemonade stands have been replaced to clear room for men stands.

[issue_validity] Invalid for nations which don’t have the capitalist policy

You have the right idea when it comes to structuring your issue, but I still say the topic needs some adjustment.

Megistos wrote:[option] “WE AIN’T GOING TO BE SOLD BY WOMEN, MUCH LESS CORPORATIONS!” A old man that has walked in you office, banging on your office wall with his metal stick. “SO KILL ANYONE SELLING MEN!” He yells.

[effect] More and more couples are breaking apart in fear of being killed.

[option_validity] Invalid for nations which don’t have the capitalist policy

Wouldn't this be better served by an option banning fake boyfriends? You don't need a special option here just for nations with a market economy.

Megistos wrote:[option] “No! Men aren’t goods!” Yells a civil rights leader, @@RANDOMNAMEFEMALE@@. “They aren’t to be bought and sold! @@LEADER@@, I fully recommend that @@NAME@@ changes to a socialist nation, now!” She yells in your face.

[effect] The @@DEMONYM@@ government stamps out illegal buy-a-man shops

[issue_validity] Invalid for nations which don’t have the capitalist policy

In general, I would say you have the right idea, and you're starting off on the right foot. However, I would advise finding another topic to write an issue about, and cannot in good faith recommend that you stick to this issue in its current form.

Posted: **Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:24 pm**

Megistos wrote:(Note: Before we start, since I'm new to the wanna-be issue authors, instead of pointing out: oh, this is just stupid, point out: this can use some work, and how. New wanna-be Issue Authors ain't going to learn from mistakes if you don't point out how they are making mistakes)

No harm in being new - we all started somewhere

Megistos wrote:A band of women formed a group called ‘We Want Boyfriend Shops’ (WWBS) because all of them were single and couldn’t make a man fall in love with them. After pestering the government about this, they’ve always decided to do what they do best: annoy you with it

I'll start with the description. The premise is presented in an odd manner. Basically, this is written as

People want a thing. They asked the government (presumably to no avail), and then started pestering you about it.

There needs to be more on why they want this thing, and therefore why this is an issue that me, the leader, should care about. I know you've said "because they were single and couldn't make a man fall in love with them", but that doesn't explain why I, the leader, should care. Why is this my problem? They can't find husbands/partners/boyfriends/fiances - that's their problem.

Megistos wrote:[option] “It’s great for us women.” Says @@RANDOMNAMEFEMALE@@, the leader of WWBS, while kissing her cardboard stand-up of a hot man. “There is so many people out there in @@NAME@@ who don’t have a partner to love and spend time with!” She continues, “Plus, if you don’t listen to us, that would stir up a controversy of you being sexist.” She says, smiling brightly.

[effect] The first store tourists find in @@NAME@@ is BoyfriendMart

This is a good option for the premise, it's just that the premise needs work (as I've explained above). However, there's a couple things that could be better (and these things are common across all your options).

You break speech a lot - it's fine for someone to say multiple sentences in the same quote block. It's worth ending the quotes and adding a "she continues" if there's some extra amusing detail that you add as well, but if you're just saying "she continues", you can drop that part from the option.

When a speech fragment ends and goes into description (i.e. "...women.” Says @@RANDOMNAMEFEMALE@@...") you don't need to capitalise the first word after the speech. I explain this in some more detail here. Of note here (that I don't specifically mention in my other post) is that you don't use full stops when the sentence continues - you use commas.

Megistos wrote:[option] “THIS IS A DISGRACE TO MAN’S RIGHT!” Screams a hyper man, who somehow got past your security. “THEY WANT TO SELL US! WE SHOULD BE SELLING THEM!” He says, upset. “BUT I’M KIND, SO I DEMAND YOU TO TREAT MEN LIKE THEY ARE!” He continues, “And plus,” He begins softly, a shocker to your guards, who just came in the door to your office “We can avoid a war. If men find out that they are cheap, maybe around 1,000 @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, then they’ll fight with the ones that are worth millions of @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@.” He finishes.

[effect] Everyone in @@NAME@@ is treated the same, with anyone who considers them different is thrown into jail

Again; closing speech fragments shouldn't be capitalised, and there's too many breaks in the speech. Although, on this option - note that effect lines aren't sentences, they're sentence fragments. Effect lines are supposed to work like this:

Following new legislation in @@NAME@@, <effect line goes here>.

When you substitute your effect line, you get this:

Following new legislation in @@NAME@@, Everyone in @@NAME@@ is treated the same, with anyone who considers them different is thrown into jail.

The capitalised word interrupts the sentence, and the duplicate @@NAME@@ macros just add unnecessary length to the effect line.

Another way effect lines appear is in a sentence with other effect lines like so:

Interest in globalism never flags, a faint smell of body odour can be detected at several miles' distance from the National Science Park, the volume of paperwork used to complete a single environmental assessment defeats the purpose, and shelters struggle to keep up with the endless intake of stray animals.

(from my nation page). These effect lines are formatted as

<Effect line>, <effect line>, <effect line>, and <effect line>.

The game auto-capitalises the first letter of the first effect line, so you don't have to. Although, this does mean you can't start an effect line with quotes. In this format, the comma if your effect line will mess with the flow of the sentence - it's best to leave commas and such out of effect lines.

Megistos wrote:“This raises an interesting issue” Begins the leader of NoRitz, @@RANDOMNAMEMALE@@. “And that is: This wouldn’t have been done and allowed if public protest was allowed.” He says. “So I advise you to ban it, so petty citizens won’t get in your way.” He finishes.

[effect] Women in @@NAME@@ are arrested for protesting about ‘How Boyfriend Shops should be made’

What's "NoRitz"? That needs to be explained in this option. Also; the structure here is very similar (to the point of plagarism) to Issue #0, Option 3. Try and think of new ways to frame options.

As a whole, this option, Option 5, and Option 6 are all very cliche options, advocating for massive governmental change on an issue that's only tangentially related. It's best to keep options relevant to the premise.

Posted: **Wed Jul 08, 2020 3:59 am**

[desc] A band of women formed a group called ‘We Want Boyfriend Shops’ (WWBS) because all of them were single and couldn’t make a man fall in love with them. After pestering the government about this, they’ve always decided to do what they do best: annoy you with it

There's a strong undercurrent of misogyny in the way you've written this premise, and the writing in general heavily hints at you -- the author -- not understanding how relationships and courting works. You can't make people fall in love with you, you can just be the best person you can be, and hope to find the connection that love grows from. Women aren't a group that are there to annoy and frustrate you -- they're fellow human beings with all the complexity that entails.

The rest of the issue doesn't get any better. Grammar fails aside, the crudeness of the character depictions and the attempts to pass these things as satire tells us more about your own worldviews than you might be intending.

I don't think you should take this draft any further.

Much as I hate to discourage new authors, I'm not feeling that there's sufficient maturity to your writing and worldview to be able to create workable issues. Feel free to prove me wrong, but my gut instinct says that you're a young player who is about three years from being ready to present things sufficiently coherently. I reckon at that time you'll look back on this and cringe.

If on the other hand, you're already an adult, then it's time for some serious self-reflection.

The other most optimistic possibility is that you're simply not in command of the English language, and that it's a distant second language for you. If that's the case, then apologies for the judgements, and maybe you can try again on a different topic with a co-author, in order to create something that doesn't come across quite so terribly.

Because this is terrible. The worst draft the forum has seen for months.

Posted: **Wed Jul 08, 2020 5:48 am**

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:
[desc] A band of women formed a group called ‘We Want Boyfriend Shops’ (WWBS) because all of them were single and couldn’t make a man fall in love with them. After pestering the government about this, they’ve always decided to do what they do best: annoy you with it

There's a strong undercurrent of misogyny in the way you've written this premise, and the writing in general heavily hints at you -- the author -- not understanding how relationships and courting works. You can't make people fall in love with you, you can just be the best person you can be, and hope to find the connection that love grows from. Women aren't a group that are there to annoy and frustrate you -- they're fellow human beings with all the complexity that entails.

The rest of the issue doesn't get any better. Grammar fails aside, the crudeness of the character depictions and the attempts to pass these things as satire tells us more about your own worldviews than you might be intending.

I don't think you should take this draft any further.

Much as I hate to discourage new authors, I'm not feeling that there's sufficient maturity to your writing and worldview to be able to create workable issues. Feel free to prove me wrong, but my gut instinct says that you're a young player who is about three years from being ready to present things sufficiently coherently. I reckon at that time you'll look back on this and cringe.

If on the other hand, you're already an adult, then it's time for some serious self-reflection.

The other most optimistic possibility is that you're simply not in command of the English language, and that it's a distant second language for you. If that's the case, then apologies for the judgements, and maybe you can try again on a different topic with a co-author, in order to create something that doesn't come across quite so terribly.

Because this is terrible. The worst draft the forum has seen for months.

looks back
cringes
yea, I'll stop working on it, after the last line (btw, english is my second launguage, maybe even third)

Posted: **Wed Jul 08, 2020 7:48 am**

Well, actually, I've seen some quitely more terribly written albeit amusing issue drafts before. edit: Even within this past month.

But yeah best shelf this one. If you need any ideas for issues to work on, though, feel free to ask around in the writers' block,
or pop into either CWA's or my issue ideas factbooks.