NationStates

Taking a crack at another issue. Here it is:

[Validity] Only valid for nations with medium to high obesity rates, no autarky, no vegetarianism, and permit sports.

[Description] The 28th International Chili Dog Eating Contest has chosen to host this year's competition in @@NAME@@, bringing eating fans from around the world to @@CAPITAL@@ to see the spectacle. Deeming the whole sport grotesque, your squeamish Minister of Health is convinced that the competition is a public health risk.


[Option 1] "Ugh, I can't even look at chili dogs anymore after watching one of those so-called sporting events!" whimpers your Minister of Health, dry-heaving at the thought. "This kind of behavior is known to be extremely unhealthy. The sport could convince people that mass eating is okay to do as a fun hobby! It's a shame that our nation has resorted to watching people hedonistically engorge themselves for entertainment. It sends a terrible message to our citizens. What if a child saw this? A poor, sweet, impressionable child? We should be promoting healthful eating wherever possible. Think of the children! The children!"

[Outcome 1] sugar cookies are dealt to children in back-alleys

[Option 2] "Now, I don't see the justification for banning something because one person hates it" drawls world champion eater Bowie Peanut, adjusting the biggest belt buckle you've ever seen. "Competitive eating is a noble activity, and while some highfalutin aristocrats may find it crass, it celebrates the joy of a good meal. I'd suggest nurturing this sport, and bring in boatloads of tourists not only to see us eat, but maybe experience some of the culinary delights @@NAME@@ has to offer! Think about all of that publicity you'll get from, I don't know, being permanent host for the championship? Sounds like a good deal to me!"

[Outcome 2] children that wear less than size XXL are sent to skinny camps

[Option 3] "Really!?" shouts professional Calvinball coach @@RANDOMNAME@@. "We're considering eating chili dogs a sport now? Back in my day, our young adults sought glory by somersaulting their way past the keeperbacks all the way to the endturf and scoring a goaldown, narrowly beating the other team! Now the kids who failed Phys Ed can be hotshot sports stars? They can hardly even do push-ups! @@LEADER@@, banish this eating nonsense from this good nation, and start funding real sports! GO @@ANIMAL@@S!"

[Outcome 3] there has been a recent surge of out-of-shape children in orphanages

convinced that it's existence is a public health risk.

Is it the advertising to ordinary people which then makes them become gluttons themselves? Is it the meat industry pushing their products like how gambling companies sponsor football kits? Additionally, I think it's better tailored for countries that have high obesity rates to receive this issue, given that it's going to have a much bigger adverse impact in that way.

Outer Sparta wrote:

convinced that it's existence is a public health risk.

Is it the advertising to ordinary people which then makes them become gluttons themselves? Is it the meat industry pushing their products like how gambling companies sponsor football kits? Additionally, I think it's better tailored for countries that have high obesity rates to receive this issue, given that it's going to have a much bigger adverse impact in that way.

I was trying to convey that the whole reason that the minister hates it is because they think that it is gross. I will try to make that clearer if I stick with that reasoning. There is an angle I could take that shows the sport as glorifying binge eating causing that disorder to be viewed as normal, and encouraging normal people to eat large amounts of food. What would you think if that?

Millenhaal wrote:

Outer Sparta wrote:Is it the advertising to ordinary people which then makes them become gluttons themselves? Is it the meat industry pushing their products like how gambling companies sponsor football kits? Additionally, I think it's better tailored for countries that have high obesity rates to receive this issue, given that it's going to have a much bigger adverse impact in that way.

I was trying to convey that the whole reason that the minister hates it is because they think that it is gross. I will try to make that clearer if I stick with that reasoning. There is an angle I could take that shows the sport as glorifying binge eating causing that disorder to be viewed as normal, and encouraging normal people to eat large amounts of food. What would you think if that?

I would focus on the gluttony aspect and how it would send a wrong message. The minister hating it because it's gross doesn't convey enough.

Outer Sparta wrote:

Millenhaal wrote:
I was trying to convey that the whole reason that the minister hates it is because they think that it is gross. I will try to make that clearer if I stick with that reasoning. There is an angle I could take that shows the sport as glorifying binge eating causing that disorder to be viewed as normal, and encouraging normal people to eat large amounts of food. What would you think if that?

I would focus on the gluttony aspect and how it would send a wrong message. The minister hating it because it's gross doesn't convey enough.

Edited it a little bit. I focused more on the gluttony and how it promotes bad eating. What are your opinions on the other 2 options?

New draft up! I put some love into the bottom two options. Still looking for an appropriate zinger for the option 3 fallout.

Desc- foodies and competitive eaters are two very different things. Option 3- only valid for countries that allow sports

New draft! Wondering if it's in a submittable state right now?

Millenhaal wrote:New draft! Wondering if it's in a submittable state right now?

It's been up for less than a week. Give it a bit

Australian rePublic wrote:

Millenhaal wrote:New draft! Wondering if it's in a submittable state right now?

It's been up for less than a week. Give it a bit

I suppose it won't hurt to allot my draft more time. Any more useful thoughts about it?

I like this

I think I'd want to send my Minister of Health home sick for the day if he threw up that much. XD

It's not a bad draft.

USS Monitor wrote:I think I'd want to send my Minister of Health home sick for the day if he threw up that much. XD

It's not a bad draft.

Thanks! I suppose the Minister of Health needs a Minister of Health. Do you want to get into specifics about what you would change?

Hello there! This is an amusing and light-hearted topic, with a reasonable issue surrounding it. Cleverly chosen. Here are my thoughts as you continue to shape it.

- This probably would have a "no autarky" validity and a "no vegetarianism" validity. Neither are strictly necessary for it, but it will take a lot fewer mental gymnastics to accept with those in place.

- In Option 1, I'd reduce the "after 30 straight minutes of vomiting" to something a bit less absurd, like "dry-heaving at the thought." I'm also curious why the minister can't look at chili dogs anymore? The use of "anymore" implies some specific past incident or issue. Additionally, it's unlikely that government officials in state atheist nations (some of which execute people for religious sentiment) would use "God" as an interjection in casual speech. That first sentence could be something like "Ugh, I can't even look at chili dogs!" says your Minister of Health, dry-heaving at the thought.

- For all three of your options, they don't need the extra dialogue tag/sentence on the end. While end tags like that can add to a text in some situations, nine times out of ten they are padding that don't contribute to the decision or argument. Let the options end when the speakers stop talking.

- The first outcome/effect line doesn't reflect an extension of what the option proposal is. The proposal is to promote healthy eating, not to punish bad eating through arrest or criminalization. The effect, while obviously we love humor and ad absurdum results, should derive from the decision being made.

- For all three of your effect lines, be aware that those should not be written as sentences. They will appear as part of a list, so shouldn't generally start with a capital or end with a period

- The second option is pretty reasonable. The one thing I would suggest adding is a bit more *reason* for Leader to choose it. Why nurture the sport? What benefit will it bring?

- I get where you're going with the second effect line, but for a person seeing this line without knowing the issue, it could be misinterpreted as the exact reverse of what is intended (an "eating camp" for overweight kids could very easily be interpreted as a "healthy eating" camp). There may be room to turn the stereotype on its head here, if you're up for it. Something about sending low-BMI kids to "skinny camp" to put on some weight?

- Option 3 doesn't really need to be gendered. The coach could be either gender, and they could just be talking about "young people" instead of "young men" (not every nation has real world 1950s gender norms, and some are matriarchies specifically!). Additionally, it doesn't seem like the eating contest is government sponsored – it's just a visiting tour that happens to be in your nation. As such, I'm not sure exactly what Leader is being told to "put away" by this coach.

- Effect 3 is improved from the first draft, but still needs a bit more. One can get a championship pennant in chess, eating, or anything else, so this result isn't strictly limited to the decision in question. It's also seems largely about children's lives more than just human life in general. Perhaps something like "a child's success is measured in pull-ups" or similar?

- Because the entire thing is about something being treated as a "sport" (every speaker calls it that), the validity for permitting sports should probably go on the entire issue, rather than just the final option.

Verdant Haven wrote:-snip-

I have edited my issue accordingly. Thank you for the constructed feedback!

Good update there – nice work incorporating feedback but putting it into your own words. I think I only see a few more minor things that could use some attention.

- I like your first effect line, but simply due to the fact of how they're presented (in list formatted, separated by commas), it likely wouldn't work. It's best to avoid needing punctuation (the comma in the line will make it look like two separate effect lines, instead of one), and to phrase it as a descriptive statement about the country. Short and snappy is the goal.

- Good improvement on the second option. That's the kind of argument it needed.

- The second effect line is much improved, but will work best without taking sides on pounds vs kilograms (metricism is a policy nations can have, and "pounds" wouldn't be used in them)

- Give it a good final pass for things like grammar, word agreement, and sentence length. It's mostly solid, but there are one or two spots where it might be able to be polished.

Verdant Haven wrote:-snip-

All done! Much appreciated.

I think I'm gonna do a lil /bump. yknow. Just a lil /bump.

I'm considering submitting now. Thoughts? I won't put it on last call quite yet.

Millenhaal wrote:[Outcome 2] children that wear less than size XXL are sent to skinny camps

Only thing i'd change. For rest it looks fine to me! (Then again, I'm not so experienced)

/bump


I don't like how much I'm bumping this. Is Got Issues usually like this?

Millenhaal wrote:/bump


I don't like how much I'm bumping this. Is Got Issues usually like this?

(DISCLAIMER: I have only posted 1 draft on this forum and it's still WIP)
I'd put it in [LAST CALL], wait for 3,5 days, bump, wait for 3,5 days and if no-one responds by then, I'd submit it.

Hello! This draft has been stagnant for a while, and so I am hereby putting it in last call. I could be convinced to reverse this if it isn't ready though.

Millenhaal wrote:Hello! This draft has been stagnant for a while, and so I am hereby putting it in last call. I could be convinced to reverse this if it isn't ready though.

I'd still polish a few things such as grammar and maybe add a bit more character to your speakers.

Outer Sparta wrote:

Millenhaal wrote:Hello! This draft has been stagnant for a while, and so I am hereby putting it in last call. I could be convinced to reverse this if it isn't ready though.

I'd still polish a few things such as grammar and maybe add a bit more character to your speakers.

Can I ask how you would do this, if you don't mind?