NATION

PASSWORD

[SUBMITTED] Having A Dead Good Time

A place to spoil daily issues for those who haven't had them yet, snigger at typos, and discuss ideas for new ones.
User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

[SUBMITTED] Having A Dead Good Time

Postby Kaschovia » Thu Aug 04, 2022 11:05 am

Not sure if this has been done before, but if it has then that's okay we can all move on with our lives.
TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: No drug laws, poor health services, commercial drug production legalized

DESCRIPTION:
A total absence of drug laws in @@NAME@@ has paved the way for the industrial production and distribution of increasingly potent synthetic substances into several inner city areas, resulting in overdose rates far exceeding the capacity of health services.

OPTION 1
"Newly-synthesized substances, particularly synthetic opioids, can be up to fifty-times stronger than heroin," warns drug awareness advocate @@RANDOMNAME@@, dressed more like a junior sales assistant than a qualified expert, "which means individuals in vulnerable circumstances can and will throw themselves to the abyss whenever they want, especially if they're already an addict. It's clear we're not intent on criminalising the current market, but if we ban the commercial synthesis of these stronger substances before manufacturers find a way to sell them dangerously cheap, countless @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ will be saved."

OUTCOME:
commercial production of heroin is at an all-time high

OPTION 2
"That just won't cut it!" barks your Health Secretary @@RANDOMNAME@@, pacing the room more agitated by the second. "If these seedy manufacturers want to keep producing and selling what should essentially be classed as poison, they should be prepared to deal with a whole new class of regulations. I'm talking constant safety investigations, product testing, tracking... the lot! And if a single person dies on their product, I say we have grounds to relocate as much of their profits as we please directly into the @@DEMONYM@@ health services. Sounds like a win-win to me."

OUTCOME:
the health services are high on drug money

OPTION 3
"Are you scared or something?" mocks particularly-intimidating industrial drugs manufacturer @@RANDOMNAME@@, vials of @@HIS@@ latest syntheses displayed on your desk. "My stuff sells well because it feels good. Why deny upstanding citizens the right to that? Our specialized laboratories have yielded substances stronger and more addictive than ever before... we'll have customers paying triple by next week! It's too late to go back now, @@LEADER@@, I say we move forward into this profitable oblivion."

OUTCOME:
the backstreets of @@NAME@@ are referred to as 'zombie zones'

TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: No drug laws, poor health services, commercial drug production legalized

DESCRIPTION:
A total absence of drug laws in @@NAME@@ has paved the way for the industrial production and distribution of cheap and increasingly potent synthetic substances into the streets of several inner city areas, resulting in rates of overdose far exceeding the capacity of health services.

OPTION 1
"Newly-synthesized substances, particularly synthetic opioids, can be up to fifty-times stronger than heroin," warns drug awareness advocate @@RANDOMNAME@@, dressed more like a junior sales assistant than a qualified expert, "which means individuals in vulnerable circumstances can throw themselves to the abyss at the drop of a hat. It's clear we're not intent on criminalising the current market, but the potency of these new substances makes me question why their production is even allowed at all. We don't have to ban any existing substances, just ban the synthesis of stronger ones and put more well-needed @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ into the health services."

OUTCOME:
drug addictions are state controlled

OPTION 2
"That just won't cut it!" barks your Health Secretary @@RANDOMNAME@@, pacing around the room more agitated by the second. "If these seedy manufacturers want to keep producing and selling what should essentially be classed as poison, they should be prepared to deal with a whole new class of regulations. I'm talking constant safety inspections, product tracking... the lot! And if even one person dies at their hand, I'm sure our strictest maximum security prisons would be a great place for these careless head honchos to spend the rest of their lives."

OUTCOME:
drugs manufacturers are quickly moving production back into makeshift, off-the-grid labs

OPTION 3
"Are you scared or something?" mocks particularly-intimidating industrial drugs manufacturer @@RANDOMNAME@@, vials of @@HIS@@ latest syntheses displayed on your desk. "My stuff sells well because it feels good. Why deny upstanding citizens the right to that? Our specialized laboratories have yielded substances stronger and more addictive than ever before... we'll have customers paying triple by next week! It's too late to go back now, @@LEADER@@, I say we move forward into this profitable oblivion."

OUTCOME:
the backstreets of @@NAME@@ are referred to as 'zombie zones'

TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: No drug laws, poor health services, commercial drug production legalized

DESCRIPTION:
A total absence of drug laws in @@NAME@@ has paved the way for the industrial production and distribution of cheap and increasingly potent synthetic substances into the streets of several inner city areas, resulting in rates of overdose far exceeding the capacity of health services.

OPTION 1
"Newly-synthesized substances, particularly opioids, can be up to fifty-times stronger than heroin," warns drug awareness advocate @@RANDOMNAME@@, dressed more like a junior sales assistant than a qualified expert, "which means individuals in vulnerable circumstances can too easily choose an abyss of dependence. It's clear we're not intent on criminalising all drugs, but the potency of these new substances makes me question why their production is even allowed at all. Instead of banning any existing substances, why not just ban the synthesis of stronger ones?"

OUTCOME:
large scale drug manufacturers have moved their operations back to alleyways and abandoned warehouses

OPTION 2
"Are you scared or something?" mocks particularly-intimidating industrial drugs manufacturer @@RANDOMNAME@@, vials of @@HIS@@ latest syntheses displayed on your desk. "My stuff sells well because it feels good. Why deny upstanding citizens the right to that? Our experiments have yielded substances stronger and more addictive than ever before... we'll have customers paying triple by next week! It's too late to go back now, @@LEADER@@... I say we move forward into this profitable oblivion."

OUTCOME:
the streets of @@NAME@@ are awash with zombified dragon chasers

OPTION 3
"How can you justify putting the lives of our people at risk like this?" probes your Health Secretary @@RANDOMNAME@@, pacing around the room more agitated by the second. "Is it not obvious to you that these substances need to be regulated, even just a little tighter? It's completely inhumane to allow them in such potent quantities anywhere in @@NAME@@, and you're only making it worse even entertaining these exploitative manufacturers! The government should be in charge of all drug production and distribute these substances based solely on avoiding overdoses."

OUTCOME:
drug addictions are state controlled

TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: No drug laws, poor health services, commercial drug production legalized

DESCRIPTION:
A total absence of drug laws in @@NAME@@ has paved the way for the industrial production and distribution of cheap and increasingly potent synthetic substances into the streets of several inner city areas, resulting in rates of overdose far exceeding the capacity of health services.

OPTION 1
"Newly-synthesized substances, particularly opioids, can be up to fifty-times stronger than heroin," warns drug awareness advocate @@RANDOMNAME@@, dressed more like a junior sales assistant than a qualified expert, "which means individuals in vulnerable circumstances can too easily choose an abyss of dependence. It's clear we're not intent on criminalising all drugs, but the potency of these new substances makes me question why their production is even allowed at all. Instead of banning any existing substances, why not just ban the synthesis of stronger ones?"

OUTCOME:
large scale drug manufacturers have moved their operations back to alleyways and abandoned warehouses

OPTION 2
"Are you scared or something?" mocks particularly-intimidating industrial drugs manufacturer @@RANDOMNAME@@, vials of @@HIS@@ latest syntheses displayed on your desk. "My stuff sells well because it feels good. Why deny upstanding citizens the right to that? In fact, our trials have shown tremendous progress in the development of even stronger products, set to be released onto the streets this week! It's too late to go back now, @@LEADER@@... I say we move forward into this profitable oblivion."

OUTCOME:
the streets of @@NAME@@ are awash with zombified dragon chasers

OPTION 3
"How can you justify putting the lives of our people at risk like this?" probes your Health Secretary @@RANDOMNAME@@, staring at the drugs manufacturer with terrifying malice. "Is it not obvious to you that these substances need to be regulated, even just a little tighter? It's completely inhumane to allow them in such potent quantities anywhere in @@NAME@@, and you're only making it worse even entertaining these exploitative manufacturers! The government should be in charge of all drug production and distribute these substances based solely on avoiding overdoses."

OUTCOME:
drug addictions are state controlled

TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: No drug laws, poor health services, commercial drug production legalized

DESCRIPTION:
A total absence of drug laws in @@NAME@@ has paved the way for the industrial production and distribution of cheap and increasingly potent synthetic substances into the streets of several inner city areas, pushing the limits of what many @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ consider worth legalising.

OPTION 1
"These newly-synthesized substances, particularly opioids, can be up to fifty-times stronger than heroin," warns drug awareness advocate @@RANDOMNAME@@, dressed more like a junior sales assistant than a qualified speaker, "which means vulnerable individuals in difficult situations can take the affordable descent into an abyss of addiction and dependence. It's clear we're not intent on criminalising all drugs, but the potency of these newer, synthetic substances are leading to overdose rates far above the capacity of our health services. Instead of banning existing substances, why not just ban the synthesis of these new ones?"

OUTCOME:
drug addicts regularly revolt demanding stronger substances

OPTION 2
"Are you scared or something?" mocks particularly-deranged industrial drugs manufacturer @@RANDOMNAME@@, vials of @@HIS@@ latest syntheses displayed on your desk. "My stuff sells well because it feels good. Why deny upstanding citizens the right to that? In fact, our trials have shown tremendous progress in the development of even stronger products, set to be released onto the streets this week! It's too late to go back now, @@LEADER@@... I say we move forward into this profitable oblivion."

OUTCOME:
the streets of @@NAME@@ are awash with zombified dragon chasers

OPTION 3
"How can you justify putting the lives of our people at risk like this?" probes your Health Secretary @@RANDOMNAME@@, staring at the drugs manufacturer with terrifying malice. "Is it not obvious to you that these substances need to be regulated, even just a little tighter? It's completely inhumane to allow them in such potent quantities anywhere in @@NAME@@, and you're only making it worse even entertaining these exploitative manufacturers! The government should be in charge of all drug production and distribute these substances based solely on avoiding overdoses."

OUTCOME:
drug addictions are state controlled

TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: lenient drug laws, musical

DESCRIPTION:
After a surge in drug-related deaths at this year's biggest @@DEMONYM@@ festivals left families and event promotors devastated, security and harm reduction measures at mainstream music events are now under the microscope of the general public.

OPTION 1
"From our p-passionate management and staff," mumbles the HoppedUp festival press manager @@RANDOMNAME@@, glancing skittishly at the group of investment directors listening in the corner, "our prayers go out to the families affected. We always try our best to ensure the safety of our festival-goers, which is why at all upcoming events, we'll have professionally-trained harm reduction staff on hand to identify and prevent dangerous drug-related situations before they escalate," @@HE@@ scans the room nervously, @@HIS@@ sales manager at the back of the room nodding with approval, " so g-get your tickets now for thirty percent off!"

OUTCOME:
drugged-up festival goers hop in and out of medical tents in-between fixes

OPTION 2
"You mean to say you want to make it safer to do drugs at these filthy festivals in the first place?!" scolds distraught school teacher @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, clutching her late son's bucket hat. "My boy is dead because security let a drug dealer slip through the cracks!" She addresses you with a stern, unshaken stare, "The issue doesn't lay with event organizers, it lays in the hands of the police. We need to enforce much heavier security at these events and tighter drug laws across the nation!"

OUTCOME:
police officers spend more time strip-searching people at festival gates than they do fighting actual crime

OPTION 3
"These events are causing more problems than they ever solved," mutters @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Senior Advisor on Ruining Fun, a bitter smirk spreading across @@HIS@@ face, " so why don't we just ban them? It's clear the youth intend to take copious amounts of drugs at them no matter what we do, so let's not give them any more chances than we should, and you should definitely criminalise all drugs as well... tighter restrictions just make for more creative abusers." @@HE@@ slumps back into his chair, visibly avoiding fun thoughts.

OUTCOME:
illegal underground raves and drug parties ravage the youth

OPTION 4
"Do we need to catastrophize everything?" asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, President of the @@DEMONYM@@ Drug Awareness Association, a distinctly earthy stench filling the room, "The problem is not with drugs, or even with the festival staff, but with the quality of education and societal awareness of substances themselves!" @@HE@@ clicks to the next slide, showing pictures of people taking drugs and having a good time, "See? No matter what deterrents we put in place, curiosity will always find a way up people's noses and into their veins, so it's about time we stop pushing a stigmatic narrative on drugs and start teaching fresh curriculum on not just the dangers, but also the medicinal benefits of some of these very interesting substances."

OUTCOME:
preschoolers can be heard reciting drug names alphabetically during recess

TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: lenient drug laws, musical

DESCRIPTION:
After a surge in drug-related deaths at this year's biggest @@DEMONYM@@ festivals left families and event promotors devastated, security and harm reduction measures at mainstream music events are now under the microscope.

OPTION 1
"From our passionate management and staff," blurts @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, public relations manager for HoppedUp, the nation's largest mainstream music festival, "our prayers go out to the families affected. We always try out best to ensure the safety of our Hoppers, which is why at our upcoming events," he says as he hands out leaflets and business cards to your assistants, "we'll have even more professionally-trained harm reduction staff on hand to identify and prevent dangerous drug-related situations before they escalate." He scans the room with a huge grin, his sales manager at the back of the room nodding with approval, "Get your tickets now for thirty percent off!"

OUTCOME:
drugged-up festival goers hop in and out of medical tents in between hits

OPTION 2
"You mean to say you want to make it safer to do drugs in the first place?" scolds @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, clutching her son's bucket hat. "My son is dead because the security at these filthy festivals let a drug dealer slip through the cracks!" She addresses you with a stern, unshaken stare, "The issue doesn't lay with event organizers, it lays in the hands of the police. At the very least, we need much heavier security at these events and tighter drug detection measures across the nation."

OUTCOME:
police officers spend more time strip-searching people at supermarket entrances than they do fighting actual crime

OPTION 3
"These festivals are causing more problems than they ever solved," mutters @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, your Senior Advisor on Ruining Fun, a bitter smirk spreading across his face, " so why don't we just ban them? It's clear the youth intend to take copious amounts of drugs at them no matter what we do, so let's not give them any more chances than we should." He slumps back into his chair, visibly avoiding fun thoughts.

OUTCOME:
illegal underground raves and secret drug parties make up the average teenager's lifestyle

OPTION 4
"Do we need to catastrophize everything?" asks @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, President of the @@DEMONYM@@ Drug Awareness Association, a distinctly earthy stench filling the room, "The problem is not with drugs, or even with the festival staff, but with the quality of education and societal awareness of substances themselves!" She clicks to the next slide, showing pictures of people taking drugs and having a good time, "See? No matter what deterrents we put in place, curiosity will always find a way up people's noses and into their veins, so it's about time we stop pushing a stigmatic narrative on drugs and start teaching fresh curriculum on not just the dangers, but also the medicinal benefits of some of these very interesting substances."

OUTCOME:
preschoolers can be heard reciting drug names alphabetically during recess

TITLE: Having A Dead Good Time

VALIDITY: lenient drug laws, musical

DESCRIPTION:
Family members and event public relations managers were devastated after a surge in drug-related deaths at this year's biggest @@DEMONYM@@ festivals as security and harm reduction procedures at mainstream musical events were brought under the microscope.

OPTION 1
"From all of our management and staff," interjects @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, public relations manager for HoppedUp, the nation's largest mainstream music festival, "we truly do empathise and always ensure the safety of our Hoppers comes first, which is why at all of our upcoming events," for which he begins handing out leaflets and business cards, "we'll have even more professionally-trained harm reduction staff on hand to identify and prevent dangerous drug-related situations before they take place," He scans the room with a huge grin, his sales manager at the back of the room nodding with approval, "get your tickets now for thirty percent off!"

OUTCOME:
drugged-up festival goers hop in and out of medical tents in between hits

OPTION 2
"You mean to say you want to make it safer to do drugs in the first place? My sixteen-year-old son is dead because the security at these festivals, which by the way are a haven for young adults to try whatever garbage they can get their hands on, couldn't be bothered to properly check the man who sold him whatever it was he took," scolds @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, clutching her son's bucket hat, "the issue doesn't lay with event organisers, it should lay in the hands of the police," she looks over to you with stern, unshaken eyes, "at the very least, we need much tighter security at these events and much tighter drug detection measures across the nation."

OUTCOME:
police officers spend more time strip searching people at supermarket entrances than they do fighting actual crime

OPTION 3
"Seems like these festivals are causing more chaos than they ever fixed," mutters @@RANDOMMALENAME@@, your Senior Advisor on Ruining Fun, a terribly bitter half-smile spreading across his face, "how about, we just ban them? It's clear young people find them so appealing, especially if they're going to do copious amounts of drugs there anyway, so let's not give them any more chances than we should," he slumps back into his chair, visibly avoiding fun thoughts.

OUTCOME:
illegal underground raves and secret drug parties make up the average teenagers lifestyle

OPTION 4
"Do we need to catastrophize everything?" asks @@RANDOMFEMALENAME@@, President of the @@DEMONYM@@ Drug Awareness Association, a distinctly earthy smell filling the room, "The problem is not with drugs, or even with the festival staff, but with the quality of education and societal awareness of substances themselves!" She clicks to the next slide, showing pictures of people taking drugs and having a good time, "See? No matter what deterrents we put in place, curiosity will always find a way up people's noses and into their veins, so it's about time we stop pushing a stigmatic narrative on drugs and start teaching fresh curriculum on not just the dangers, but also the medicinal benefits of some of these very interesting substances."

OUTCOME:
preschoolers can be heard reciting drug names alphabetically during recess
Last edited by Kaschovia on Sun Sep 03, 2023 4:07 am, edited 13 times in total.

User avatar
Trotterdam
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10541
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Trotterdam » Thu Aug 04, 2022 1:22 pm

Kaschovia wrote:Not sure if this has been done before, but if it has then that's okay we can all move on with our lives.
#609 addresses drugs at music festivals, although nobody's died from them (yet). The actual narrative looks pretty different, so it might be okay.
Last edited by Trotterdam on Fri Aug 05, 2022 2:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Thu Aug 04, 2022 5:32 pm

Trotterdam wrote:
Kaschovia wrote:Not sure if this has been done before, but if it has then that's okay we can all move on with our lives.
url=http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=88&start=25#609]#609[/url] addresses drugs at music festivals, although nobody's died from them (yet). The actual narrative looks pretty different, so it might be okay.

That's reassuring. I too believe the narratives differ between them. This one focuses more on the serious downside of lax drug laws, in overdoses at events where drugs may be significantly more prevalent and available, the impact of greater security, proactive harm reduction, and education, rather than permitting music to be played there if it encourages that behavior. I think some interesting related issues could also come from choosing options that relax drug laws, which is a contentious and unexplored area for a lot of nations (IRL too).

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Sat Aug 13, 2022 4:34 am

I've made some edits to the draft and would appreciate any feedback.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Sun Apr 30, 2023 3:54 pm

I'd like to continue working on this draft if an issue hasn't already been accepted with this premise since I last stopped working on it. As always, feedback is appreciated.

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 27180
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Australian rePublic » Tue May 02, 2023 3:42 am

Option 4- medical benefits?
Hard-Core Centrist. Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right.
All in-character posts are fictional and have no actual connection to any real governments
You don't appreciate the good police officers until you've lived amongst the dregs of society and/or had them as customers
From Greek ancestry Orthodox Christian
Issues and WA Proposals Written By Me |Issue Ideas You Can Steal
I want to commission infrastructure in Australia in real life, if you can help me, please telegram me. I am dead serious

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Tue May 16, 2023 2:54 pm

Australian rePublic wrote:Option 4- medical benefits?

What do you mean?

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Thu May 25, 2023 7:31 am

I have significantly edited the draft, and would appreciate any more thoughts on this!

User avatar
Australian rePublic
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 27180
Founded: Mar 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Australian rePublic » Tue Jun 06, 2023 3:50 am

Kaschovia wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:Option 4- medical benefits?

What do you mean?

What medical benefits?
Hard-Core Centrist. Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right.
All in-character posts are fictional and have no actual connection to any real governments
You don't appreciate the good police officers until you've lived amongst the dregs of society and/or had them as customers
From Greek ancestry Orthodox Christian
Issues and WA Proposals Written By Me |Issue Ideas You Can Steal
I want to commission infrastructure in Australia in real life, if you can help me, please telegram me. I am dead serious

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 2801
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Tue Jun 06, 2023 1:13 pm

In addition to 609 that Trot linked above, issue 1492 is also about drugs at music festivals, with a bit more focus on the negatives. It still doesn't reach the realm of overdose deaths, but it does have several similar options, including improving festival conditions, increasing security to stop drug dealers, and banning music festivals.

The topic of dealing with overdose deaths is huge, and there are a lot of ways to look at it, but the specific lens of music festivals is getting a little crowded.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:35 am

Verdant Haven wrote:In addition to 609 that Trot linked above, issue 1492 is also about drugs at music festivals, with a bit more focus on the negatives. It still doesn't reach the realm of overdose deaths, but it does have several similar options, including improving festival conditions, increasing security to stop drug dealers, and banning music festivals.

The topic of dealing with overdose deaths is huge, and there are a lot of ways to look at it, but the specific lens of music festivals is getting a little crowded.

I'll see if I can rework the draft in a different context to music festivals.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:26 am

I've reworked the draft from the perspective of a nation which is seeing runaway drug production and innovation, leading to increasingly potent substances in the absence of drug laws.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Fri Jun 23, 2023 8:47 am

Any feedback on the revised premise would be appreciated!

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 2801
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Sat Jun 24, 2023 4:55 pm

- This is much better than another music festival approach - good on you.

- In the description, why are these new synthetics "pushing the limits of what many @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ consider worth legalizing?" That's not a particularly useful or informative line by itself. I would suggest replacing it with the bit about spiking overdose rates from Option 1, which can serve as factual background information if moved to the description, informing all the choices instead of just that one.

- I understand in subjective terms what is meant by "strong" or "stronger" drugs, but multiple speakers are referencing these in somewhat more absolute ways – "50 times stronger than heroin" and "even stronger products [than the current ones]" are leaving me wondering exactly what is meant. Are there more specific ways to make these arguments?

- Effect 1 doesn't seem believable or funny. It's a fairly straightforward "you chose wrong" sounding description, and even in the places most afflicted by the opioid epidemic, I'm not aware of addicts organizing revolts to try and get more potent highs.

- Describing speaker 2 as "particularly deranged" is definitely a non-neutral description for a character presenting a broad industry position. There are some fairly evocative ways one could describe the speaker to suggest they've been using their own product, without simply calling them insane.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Sat Jun 24, 2023 7:37 pm

Verdant Haven wrote:- This is much better than another music festival approach - good on you.

- In the description, why are these new synthetics "pushing the limits of what many @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ consider worth legalizing?" That's not a particularly useful or informative line by itself. I would suggest replacing it with the bit about spiking overdose rates from Option 1, which can serve as factual background information if moved to the description, informing all the choices instead of just that one.

- I understand in subjective terms what is meant by "strong" or "stronger" drugs, but multiple speakers are referencing these in somewhat more absolute ways – "50 times stronger than heroin" and "even stronger products [than the current ones]" are leaving me wondering exactly what is meant. Are there more specific ways to make these arguments?

- Effect 1 doesn't seem believable or funny. It's a fairly straightforward "you chose wrong" sounding description, and even in the places most afflicted by the opioid epidemic, I'm not aware of addicts organizing revolts to try and get more potent highs.

- Describing speaker 2 as "particularly deranged" is definitely a non-neutral description for a character presenting a broad industry position. There are some fairly evocative ways one could describe the speaker to suggest they've been using their own product, without simply calling them insane.

I've edited the description so the immediate premise of the issue is a bit more apparent earlier on, edited the effect line for option 1, and changed the description of the speaker in option 2.

As for describing the strength of the newly-synthesized substances, I'm not exactly sure how to be more specific as their increasing strength (as the premise of the issue lays out) is worryingly hard to predict. Not sure how to fix that just yet.

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 2801
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Mon Jun 26, 2023 10:25 am

- The new description is great.

- I think the "stronger" language can perhaps work for the option 1 advocate, who is focusing more on other aspects, but it would be interesting to hear the manufacturer in option 2 clarify the strength in some sort of measurable way – a longer high, a more complete ego death, a gentler return to reality – marketing speak!

- In option 3, it's hard to tell if the speaker is addressing the manufacturer at whom s/he is staring, or Leader, who is the one "entertaining" the manufacturer.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Mon Jun 26, 2023 8:04 pm

Verdant Haven wrote:- The new description is great.

- I think the "stronger" language can perhaps work for the option 1 advocate, who is focusing more on other aspects, but it would be interesting to hear the manufacturer in option 2 clarify the strength in some sort of measurable way – a longer high, a more complete ego death, a gentler return to reality – marketing speak!

- In option 3, it's hard to tell if the speaker is addressing the manufacturer at whom s/he is staring, or Leader, who is the one "entertaining" the manufacturer.

Instead of the manufacturer speaking solely in terms of strength, I have amended it such that the focus is also on increasing profitability by making them more addictive. I think it would make more sense for the manufacturer to be pitching that angle instead. Let me know what you think.

I've also changed the action clause of the third speaker so they're pacing around the room instead of staring, just to clear up the confusion.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Sat Jul 01, 2023 9:47 am

Not quite sure what else might need adding to this draft at the moment, feedback appreciated!

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Tue Aug 08, 2023 3:53 am

Feedback on this would still be greatly appreciated.

User avatar
Blazing Nation
Civilian
 
Posts: 1
Founded: Mar 25, 2023
Father Knows Best State

Postby Blazing Nation » Tue Aug 08, 2023 9:31 am

Kaschovia wrote:Feedback on this would still be greatly appreciated.

reply given by Blazing Nation.


pretty good issue. the issue would help other nations if they have bad health and drug quality.
maybe one of the options could enact the "no drug" policy.
blazing nation
under fire blaze

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 2801
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:56 am

Option 3 feels like the weak link for me at present. Option 1 has already given us a pro-regulatory choice, so the argument in speaker 3's second sentence feels out of place, like it's an responding to option 2 rather than to Leader, who already has increased regulation as an available choice. I wonder if there might be a direction this could take that looks at it from a criminal rather than a regulatory perspective? Maybe they argue that at a certain point, substances are categorized as poisons or weapons rather than drugs, so a different set of laws apply? Then maybe dealers are allowed to make whatever they want, but face prosecution for client deaths.

That's one thought – obviously others may apply. Overall it's a pretty solid offering.

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Sun Aug 27, 2023 3:09 am

Verdant Haven wrote:Option 3 feels like the weak link for me at present. Option 1 has already given us a pro-regulatory choice, so the argument in speaker 3's second sentence feels out of place, like it's an responding to option 2 rather than to Leader, who already has increased regulation as an available choice. I wonder if there might be a direction this could take that looks at it from a criminal rather than a regulatory perspective? Maybe they argue that at a certain point, substances are categorized as poisons or weapons rather than drugs, so a different set of laws apply? Then maybe dealers are allowed to make whatever they want, but face prosecution for client deaths.

That's one thought – obviously others may apply. Overall it's a pretty solid offering.

Took your suggestion and overhauled the issue around it. I've swapped the order of the options so it essentially reads: harsher regulation, harsher punishment, no regulation or punishment, and I have also swapped/improved some effect lines. I've tried to implement the poison angle you suggested, so let me know if it works or if it still needs changing a bit.

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 2801
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Sun Aug 27, 2023 5:55 pm

Some reasonable improvements there. A few fairly minor elements left:

- In option 1, I'm not clear on if the speaker's use of "existing substances" is perhaps meant to mean "previously-existing" substances (ie, not the new synthetics), or if they're ok with allowing currently existing synthetics such as the one they described above (50 times stronger than heroin, etc) and only want to stop whatever happens to come next. I'm guessing that they probably want to roll back the clock a little bit, but that isn't clear from their choice of language.

- Effect 1: it would be good to get a bit more humor in here. Maybe something about government safety regulations related to trip hazards, or high places, or something along those lines.

- Option 2: Good with the exception of the prison validity that's needed. Could do a doppelganger for "No Prisons" nations, or adjust the suggested punishment.

- Effect 2: Would like to see more humor here as well, and try to avoid needing commas in the effect line (it will confuse the comma-separated list that the line joins on a player's nation page)

User avatar
Kaschovia
Issues Editor
 
Posts: 720
Founded: Apr 09, 2016
Anarchy

Postby Kaschovia » Mon Aug 28, 2023 9:15 am

Verdant Haven wrote:Some reasonable improvements there. A few fairly minor elements left:

- In option 1, I'm not clear on if the speaker's use of "existing substances" is perhaps meant to mean "previously-existing" substances (ie, not the new synthetics), or if they're ok with allowing currently existing synthetics such as the one they described above (50 times stronger than heroin, etc) and only want to stop whatever happens to come next. I'm guessing that they probably want to roll back the clock a little bit, but that isn't clear from their choice of language.

- Effect 1: it would be good to get a bit more humor in here. Maybe something about government safety regulations related to trip hazards, or high places, or something along those lines.

I've made option 1 a little more clear in terms of the language around which substances specifically should be banned, and reworked the effect line with a bit more humour.

Verdant Haven wrote:- Option 2: Good with the exception of the prison validity that's needed. Could do a doppelganger for "No Prisons" nations, or adjust the suggested punishment.

- Effect 2: Would like to see more humor here as well, and try to avoid needing commas in the effect line (it will confuse the comma-separated list that the line joins on a player's nation page)

I've changed the punishment aspect and reworked the effect line.

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 2801
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Mon Aug 28, 2023 11:42 am

That's looking pretty good to me now! Much improved.

Don't think I've got anything else at the moment.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Got Issues?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads