NationStates

I set out to make a cards issue, instead I've ended up with an art issue featuring card references? Alternate titles(?): Readymade of Money, Dirty Laundry.

I'm considering adding a couple of additional stances, such as a "who cares about art" option. Admittedly, my brain is kind of fried as I'm writing this, so it's probably better if I revisit this in a couple days and clean it up.

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/ar ... laundering

[validity]Medium or higher culture and black market

[desc]Museum curators, artwork collectors, and cartel bigwigs throughout the nation have historically been well involved in the international artwork trade. However, with the clandestine nature of many artwork trades, combined with easily manipulated artwork valuation system, many government officials have come to you with concerns of large scale money laundering operations being conducted within @@DENOYNMADJECTIVE@@ borders.

[option]"Artwork creates an incredibly easy way for criminals to smuggle funds across borders," claims independent investigator @@RANDOMNAME@@."Common artworks are being overvalued, enabling criminals to easily trade over large sums of illegally acquired funds. We need to seal up the craquelures in the system by closely monitoring all artwork trades, forcing all traders to reveal their identities, and tracking down the origins of their funds to bring shadowy figures into the light. Here's my card, I can set up a Trading Anti-Laundering Service for a generous commission."

[effect]the government acts as a middleman for all rare art trades

[option]"Art is meant to be SEEN!" expresses amateur sculptor Bercusi Branini. "If some rich snobs want to look at art, they can do it in our national museums. Ban private artwork ownership, and nationalize the art market! I'm sure there's a bunch of artwork just lying around waiting to be seized, and you can probably start building some new places to host it."

[effect]the seizure of newly created elementary school drawings are in the cards

[option]"@@LEADER@@, this piece is legendary!" cries Piet Van Dough, on the verge of tears as he inspects the painting hanging above the door. "Surely there is no chance you'll be willing to sell this to a private client of mine? They will pay a fine sum for this work, and it will make a beautiful addition to their private warehou—err, collection. These folks are painting such an a negative light on my work, all I do is identify artistic masterpieces that are second to none! Perhaps the government should give legitimacy to my line of work and leave us alone."

[effect]priceless artwork doesn't even require a signature upon delivery

Noahs Second Country wrote:
[box][validity]Must have 100+ combined buys/sales or top 1% for the international artwork stat, or alternatively, just a high black market

I admire your endeavour to use a new stat. But... this issue may then take in a lot of (possibly even primarily) card-trading puppets.

So, I'm going to suggest the more conventional "medium-high culture and medium-high black market" for the validity.

Option 3- what's to stop money-launderers from opening museums?

ANOTHER issue about art-based money laundering? FuF drafted one about a month ago, and I drafted one about a year ago...

Here's my draft, for the record:

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=462682

Guess its now a three-way competition!

The Free Joy State wrote:

Noahs Second Country wrote:
[box][validity]Must have 100+ combined buys/sales or top 1% for the international artwork stat, or alternatively, just a high black market

I admire your endeavour to use a new stat. But... this issue may then take in a lot of (possibly even primarily) card-trading puppets.

So, I'm going to suggest the more conventional "medium-high culture and medium-high black market" for the validity.

Agreed. 10 minutes into writing this my focus shifted a bit, I think that's kind of obvious. Draft needs some work, I'll try to get some changes in soon. Well, maybe...

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:ANOTHER issue about art-based money laundering? FuF drafted one about a month ago, and I drafted one about a year ago...

Here's my draft, for the record:

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=462682

Guess its now a three-way competition!

How do I approach this? While no published issue exists, there are 2 solid drafts already submitted on the topic.

Is it something I move forward with? Should I be trying to 1-up 2 extremely talented writers?

I do want to immortalize TCALS(and cards as a whole) somewhere in the NS issue-verse... time to find another art based topic?

To be absolutely clear, overlap with drafts is always fine, except for plagiarism of course.

We tend to go for the best quality draft on a subject, if there are multiples. Two additional points apply to that though:

- If all else is equal, then we tend towards older rather than newer drafts, as that person had the idea first.

- Player issues often get de-prioritised over staff issues, if quality is equal, because its good to encourage player authors, and because the tendency of editors is to get most of our edits from the player-submitted pool, not the staff-submitted pool. This is why its always a bit disappointing to me to see my draft topics get covered well, as there's a good chance that means my one gets wasted. FuF is a special case, as a former editor her stuff is treated as player submissions now in terms of what folder they land in, but as a former staff member who can rejoin at any time, publishing her stuff is more or less still viewed as editing staff issues.

From a probity point of view, I'll observe that when I do my 1-in-5 self-edits I do so from the oldest first, so I'm about 150 edits away from just publishing my own issue with myself as editor. That means the decision on what issue to put in the game lies entirely in the hands of whatever other editor picks up one of the three issues.

So basically go ahead, and compete freely -- the best issue will win! Or failing that, yours or FuF's.