NationStates

Cyclist? More like Cycle-pest!

Validity: not No Automobiles

Description: In recent weeks, a plethora of cyclists have descended upon the streets of @name@@. Traffic is at a standstill, even mothers walking with prams are caught up in the congestion.

Option 1: "I have had enough!" exclaims the increasingly irritated TV Automotive journalist @@randomname@@. "These Cycle-pests are terrorising our fair streets, they don't follow the rules of the road and think I should be the one to stop my car to avoid hitting them! Motorists must pass a driving test to get a license and so should the cyclists and due to the amount of accidents they causing by riding out in front of cars, the tests must be rigorous!".

Effect: anyone wishing to cycle on the streets of @@name@@ must have completed a degree in cyclist etiquette

Option 2: "I think you're missing a great opportunity here" states a famous doctor @@randomname@@. "We've two feet and a heartbeat, that's all the transport we need. Ban all vehicles! Cars, buses and bicycles. All of them! Think of how our health will improve when we have to walk everywhere!".

Effect: fire brigades now consist of people running through towns with buckets of water

Option 3: "Our friend there is right about one thing, this is a good opportunity” says wealthy tycoon @@randomname@@. "Let's have cyclists do the same things motorists must do. Register each bicycle and we'll tax them, that will solve this problem quickly! We can use the money to invest in the roads and make routes for the cyclists to go! Everybody wins, and we make a healthy profit."

Effect: children are regularly convicted of bicycle tax evasion

Option 4: "This wouldn't be a problem if we invested in more cycle paths," interjects avid cyclist @@RANDOM_FEMALE_NAME@@. "We have bus lanes, taxi lanes and even bowling lanes. It's time to start heavily investing in @@NAME@@'s cycling infrastructure and create a haven for cyclists. With dedicated areas for cyclists to move through our nation, we remove this problem altogether. It's good for the environment, good for the roads and good for me! I mean us ... cyclists ... ugh ... all of us! The cost will, of course be worth it!"

Effect: @@name@@ is famous for five-level stack interchanges which are exclusively used by cyclists

Why are cyclists on the road a problem? They take up less space than cars.

Trotterdam wrote:Why are cyclists on the road a problem? They take up less space than cars.

yeah, cyclists ain't the problem, cars are, cars take up wayyyy too much land compared to bicycles and are less space efficient than bus and trains

Hi, it’s good but you need to add full stops. Also the last effect could be changed to “Cyclists have become the most taxed people in the whole of @@NAME@@“

Thank you all for the feedback and looking through it. I've added in the full stops and made the issue, well, more of an issue. Hopefully that makes it more clear! Its an unanticipated increase, and motors are frustrated by it.

I've amended the last affect too, thank you Biladu Al Rafidayn!

Markanite wrote:Thank you all for the feedback and looking through it. I've added in the full stops and made the issue, well, more of an issue. Hopefully that makes it more clear! Its an unanticipated increase, and motors are frustrated by it.

I've amended the last affect too, thank you Biladu Al Rafidayn!

You’re welcome!
I enjoyed my stay in 10000 Islands so I hope this wins

Trotterdam wrote:Why are cyclists on the road a problem? They take up less space than cars.

Neo-Bauhinia wrote:

Trotterdam wrote:Why are cyclists on the road a problem? They take up less space than cars.

yeah, cyclists ain't the problem, cars are, cars take up wayyyy too much land compared to bicycles and are less space efficient than bus and trains

You would be surprised by how many issues car drivers have with cyclists in car-dominated societies. Even though cars are way bigger. Anyways.

Welcome to GI Markanite! Please read this guide from Sirocco/CWA as to what we're looking for when Issue Editors look at issues.

Description -- You need to set up specifically why people are complaining about cyclists. The description just says cycling has increased but we have no idea why some people would view it as a bad thing. Also Environment Minister doesn't seem to strike me as the right person to complain about cyclists.

Options -- You have too many of them, condense them down and increase the length of the options so there is a clear choice. Please provide some humour and characterisation as well.

Effect lines -- Most of these simply restate what was chosen in the issue. They appear on a nation's front page and so should act as more of a 'punchline' like an unintended consequence or something absurd happening.

Thanks for taking a look through this and giving so much feedback!

I'll take a look at it over the next few days and amend it.

I've taken the above comments on board and updated the issue in the first post!

- Referring to the cyclists as a "plague" is simultaneously non-specific, and also judgmental. The description should be neutral or factual. It can describe people being upset about things, but try to avoid declaring an objective fact that prejudices the player for or against a given party.

- The description, adjusted for the above, would work if you cut it off after "congestion." The congestion is the problem, not the journalist. Add the description of the journalist to the option where that person is speaking.

- For option 1, the argument seems to come down to a cyclist scratching the speaker's car, and an unsupported claim about numerous people being killed by cyclists. I would focus this person's argument a bit more on 1) what the cyclists are doing wrong, and 2) why some other form of transportation (like cars) is better.

- Effect line 1… bicycles don't really burn? Is there another way to get at this idea?

- Slapping in a TV Evangelist for option 2 (and the reference in option 3) presupposes religion being permitted. Change "God gave us" to "We've got" and you can open up the validity of this option to everybody. The speaker could be any number of other folks with that kind of perspective.

- In option 3, why will taxing cyclists solve the problem? People are still going to need to get where they're going, which will likely mean some kind of bike, car, or other vehicle. I'm totally willing to hear an argument from this speaker about why that would work, or how the revenue can be used to improve the situation, but the current argument doesn't sell it.

- For all effect lines, remember that they aren't complete sentences. They shouldn't be capitalized, nor should they end in periods.

Another good option is to add more cycle infrastructure. The influx of people bicycling and traffic being jammed could mean a lack of dedicated infrastructure and thus they take up space on the streets.

Thank you both for your comments! I've adapted the issue, let me know what you think!

Additionally, thank you both for your guidance through this process. There are so many intricacies with issue writing that I wasn't aware of!

You need an option about more cycle ways. Seems logical until you consider the cost

Australian rePublic wrote:You need an option about more cycle ways. Seems logical until you consider the cost

I had hoped that's loosely covered in Option 3, which focuses on more investment in cycling infrastructure.

Markanite wrote:

Australian rePublic wrote:You need an option about more cycle ways. Seems logical until you consider the cost

I had hoped that's loosely covered in Option 3, which focuses on more investment in cycling infrastructure.

Nope. Different concepts

Australian rePublic wrote:

Markanite wrote:
I had hoped that's loosely covered in Option 3, which focuses on more investment in cycling infrastructure.

Nope. Different concepts

What do you think of the latest draft, I've added it in!

Markanite wrote:

Australian rePublic wrote:Nope. Different concepts

What do you think of the latest draft, I've added it in!

Pretty good, I guess. Just have the speaker say that the exorbitant cost would be worth it, so that it doesn't seem to obvious

Australian rePublic wrote:

Markanite wrote:
What do you think of the latest draft, I've added it in!

Pretty good, I guess. Just have the speaker say that the exorbitant cost would be worth it, so that it doesn't seem to obvious

Thanks for reading it over it and the feedback!