[DRAFT] Formula None!

by **MilkyWay Republic** » Wed Apr 20, 2022 6:30 pm

The Issue:
After an incident in last week’s Formula @@ANIMAL@@ Grand Prix that led to the death of world-renowned driver Barry Air, the tally has been raised to 11 major crashes this season, breaking the previous record by a long shot and leaving only 9 drivers available for next week’s race. The @@DEMONYM@@ Motorsport Committee, under heavy pressure from the public, have asked for the government’s input on the matter.

The Debate:
Option One: “Could a sport be more deadly!?” Screams your minister of health, Caesar Ace, bursting your eardrums in the process. “So many young, innocent souls lose their lives racing these death traps around the same circuit 50 times over. The sport needs more safety regulations in place and I have just the idea!” He exclaims while shoving a 48 page list of potential extreme safety precautions into your hands. “Have a heart @@LEADER@, everything will be so much safer when we impose a 60mph speed limit on all races even if it means losing more than 60% of the sport’s fan base.”
Effect: Formula @@ANIMAL@@ drivers often lose races after being pulled over for speeding.

Option Two: “You can’t simply ruin Formula @@ANIMAL@@ like that!” Objects a representative from the @@DEMONYM@@ Motorsport Committee, Lex Drive, as he sprints full-speed into your office without a care for anyone else. “Formula @@ANIMAL@@ is the peak of entertainment - exhilarating races, fierce rivalries and best of all, insane crashes!. We do understand however that these crashes might not be everyone’s cup of tea, I know that we can make the cars more reliable and durable to prevent further crashes, they’ll be basically indestructible… IF you could perhaps supply us with a sizeable amount of funding.” He stretches his arms outwards to a comical degree before giving you a sheepish smile.
Effect: Formula @@ANIMAL@@ cars can survive being crushed by the ridiculous weight of the entire budget of the sport.

Option Three: “Perhaps I have a slightly cheaper way to solve this dilemma.” Suggests Emma Culat, CEO of shady technology conglomerate Noflaw, as she gestures towards Lex who lets out a huge sigh. “Let my company replace all the weak, fragile drivers with our state-of-the-art artificial intelligence. Every single car will be driven to perfection without any human error to get in the way, not a single mistake will slip through. You have to admit that this is simply the safest way to continue the sport while keeping all the high-speed action.” She smiles ominously before giving Lex a glare. “Just don’t listen to him about how my AI will ruin the essence of the sport, I’m certain the fans won’t get bored watching perfection week in week out.”
Effect: The Formula @@ANIMAL@@ podium has enough room to fit 20 drivers on the top spot.

Option Four: Just as the discussion starts to come to a close and it seems you can finally have a moment of peace, one last person enters your office. “Wait! Why do we even have cars in the first place?” Asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, a concerned parent of one of the drivers who walked @@HIS@@ entire journey here. “Road accidents account for the largest amount of deaths in @@NAME@@ yet we still let people drive. We most abolish cars in order to keep everyone safe, especially my son. How could you not agree with that?” @@HE@@ pleads before starting the long 2 and a half hour long journey back to @@HIS@@ house.
Effect: People often wear pillows on their walk to work to avoid getting hurt incase they bump into someone else.

by **Outer Sparta** » Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:23 pm

I assume you're a newcomer, but you certainly have a workable initial draft. Now it's time to refine your angle and options.

Option one says "Not only is it absurd to endanger the lives of these drivers," but I don't think crashes due to the recklessness of other drivers are a problem (unless you have a race full of Pastor Maldonados or Nikita Mazepins). Largely it's down to mechanical fault with the car (in the case of Ayrton Senna and his steering wheel column failure), the circuit (sometimes bad design can lead to crashes), accidents with other drivers (which are not due to driver maleficence), or that the cars themselves are not strong enough to withstand crashes or lack safety features to protect drivers.

Option 2 could be improved upon, but I feel it's too similar to the dismiss button. Make sure to distinguish the point of those in the pro-motorsports camp.

Option 3 is interesting, but isn't it essentially a monster truck derby? Seems like those would already exist.

Option 4 is an interesting take especially as it relates to motorsport safety by applying it with a broad brush to actual road safety, and I suggest you keep that.

I would also work on your effect lines as they either aren't that interesting or don't fit with your options well. Make sure to give your speakers some character instead of just having them be generic @@RANDOMNAME@@ people.

by **Verdant Haven** » Thu Apr 21, 2022 6:03 am

I'm not sure I fully believe the circumstance being presented as the issue. Would a single crash, causing a single injury, lead to street protests against a sport's existence? Is banning the sport what this issue should be about, or should it be focused instead on government regulation of sport, with banning as just a single very extreme option?

Examples: Romain Grosjean's dramatic F1 crash in Bahrain 2020 got lots of attention because of the visually terrifying results (and the impressive fact that he wasn't killed), but I'm not aware that it led to anything more than people being more accepting of the Halo and other safety equipment improvements. The 2001 death of Dale Earnhardt in a NASCAR crash at Daytona didn't lead to protests or calls to ban the sport – just investigations, better safety equipment, etc.

Try to include all relevant information about the circumstance within the issue text itself, while leaving the options for peoples' responses to that circumstance. If this is the tenth time this year somebody has been horribly maimed or killed in a professional racing crash, include that in the issue, not just in the option text. Currently the issue tells us that one person was injured, but the first option is somebody complaining about how countless people are dying.

Once all the information is presented, consider who would be coming forward with suggestions/demands, and the manner in which they would do it. Street protests might not make sense here, but perhaps a meeting with your minister of sport, or your occupations health and safety regulators, consulting with industry professionals and fan associations, might be a good platform. Currently we're told there is a protester, another protester, a streamer, and some unknown person who runs away crying. They seem largely faceless. That can work as a specific choice, especially for a single individual, but less so when it's just generic.

One final suggestion – try to make sure the effects follow from the decisions in a logical manner that is hinted at in the text. It doesn't have to be/shouldn't be the "obvious" result, but it shouldn't leave people scratching their heads. Illegal races after a ban make sense, but streaming on the dark web comes out of left field a bit (and remember, not all nations have internet!). Not banning races leads to… robots? I can see where the inspiration lies, but try to make sure the results follow from the decisions.

by **MilkyWay Republic** » Thu Apr 21, 2022 3:12 pm

Thank you Outer Sparta and Verdant Haven for the feedback, I’ll get to work on an updated draft.

by **MilkyWay Republic** » Thu Apr 21, 2022 6:19 pm

MilkyWay Republic wrote:Thank you Outer Sparta and Verdant Haven for the feedback, I’ll get to work on an updated draft.

Updated draft has been added