[CLOSED] Helmets On, We're Off To Work!

[Kaschovia]

Helmets On, We're Off To Work!

Validity: Decent environmentalism, poor public transport, low-mid intelligence, high private industry/economic freedom, above average crime

The Issue: A startup company distributing and servicing rental electric scooters across @@CAPITAL@@ is under pressure as dozens of hospitalized @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ are saying the scooters are too dangerous for the busy capital.

Option 1: "We already have a handful of major manufacturing deals on the table, promising thousands of jobs and a massive boost to the local economy," reassures CEO of SuperScoot @@RANDOMNAME@@, whizzing around your office on @@HIS@@ electric scooter, "eventually, when our customers get more comfortable riding the scooters, all of us will reap the benefits! Reduced carbon emissions, faster inner city routes, more convenient government subsidiz- " @@HE@@ crashes head first into your desk, obliterating it, and gets up to brush @@HIM@@self off. "I'm fine! Look, all we need is some government grants to get us over the line, and while you're at it, leave all of that corporate safety liability nonsense out of this, we're talking progress here!"

Effect: dodging swarms of e-scooters is considered sport in @@CAPITAL@@

Option 2: "How utterly ridiculous!" asserts your Minister for Preventing Fun Times @@RANDOMNAME@@, playing a poorly-made animation of an e-scooter accident complete with stock explosion sounds. "I'm not sure how this weasel snuck past our safety regulations in the first place, but we need to put the brakes on dangerous modes of transport in busy urban areas. I can't imagine how many unknowing city-goers have collided with reckless riders... Ban the use of electric scooters nationwide, won't you think of the children, @@LEADER@@?"

Effect: underground e-scooter gangs terrorise the nation's capital at night

Option 3: "A few crashes and lawsuits shouldn't put new modes of eco-friendly transport out of business," points out @@CAPITAL@@ University student representative @@RANDOMNAME@@, equipped with various pin-on badges and ribbons, "While we shouldn't be pandering to money-hungry venture capitalists who don't care about customer safety, these electric scooters have been priceless for students who don't drive or don't want to use the terrible city transport services. The government should run electric scooter safety and training courses so we can get licenses! It'd also separate those who should be using the scooters from those who definitely shouldn't."

Effect: average university attendance rides on the availability of e-scooters

Option 4: "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?!" Shouts @@RANDOMNAME@@, the Senior @@CAPITAL@@ Chief of Police, visibly drooling. "Squadrons of expertly-trained electric scooter officers chasing down drug dealers through alleyways, tail whipping over walls in the name of order and security? Count me in! The public don't need stuff like this when they have perfectly normal working legs but this could be a game changer in local policing matters. Give us a couple thousand of these, modded with batons, spikes, the works... and I will show you just how awesome these things can be."

Effect: electric scooter riding police officers have taken over skateparks

Helmets On, We're Off To Work!

Validity: Decent environmentalism, poor public transport, low-mid intelligence, high private industry/economic freedom, above average crime

The Issue: A startup company distributing and servicing pay-to-use electric scooters across @@CAPITAL@@ is under pressure as dozens of hospitalized @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ are saying the scooters are too dangerous for the busy capital.

Option 1: "We already have a handful of major manufacturing deals on the table, promising thousands of jobs and a massive boost to the local economy." Reassures @@RANDOMNAME@@, CEO of SuperScoot, whizzing around your office on an electric scooter to prove its safety. "Eventually, when @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ get more comfortable riding our scooters, all of us reap the benefits! Reduced carbon emissions, faster inner city routes, more convenient government subsidiz- " @@HE@@ crashes head first into your desk, obliterating it, and gets up to brush @@HIM@@self off. "I'm fine! Look, all we need is some government grants to get us over the line, and while you're at it, leave all of that corporate safety liability nonsense out of this, we're talking progress here!"

Effect: dodging swarms of e-scooters is considered sport in @@CAPITAL@@

Option 2: "How utterly ridiculous! I'm not sure how this preposterous little business even snuck past our safety regulations, but it's clear we need to crack down on dangerous modes of transport in built-up urban areas, especially if provided by unregulated business startups! So many buildings and corners, I can't imagine how many unknowing victims have collided head on with reckless riders," Asserts @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Minister for Preventing Fun Times, presenting a poorly-made animation of an e-scooter accident complete with stock explosion sounds. "We need to ban the use of electric scooters nationwide! Think of the children, @@LEADER@@."

Effect: underground e-scooter gangs terrorise the nation's capital at night

Option 3: "A few crashes and lawsuits shouldn't put new modes of eco-friendly transport out of business," points out @@RANDOMNAME@@, President of the @@CAPITAL@@ University Students Union, equipped with various pin-on badges and ribbons, "While we shouldn't be pandering to money-hungry venture capitalists who don't care about customer safety, these electric scooters have been priceless for students who don't drive or don't want to use the terrible city transport services. I get a real sense of independence when the wind rushes through my hair on the way to class, you know? The government should run electric scooter safety and training courses so we can get electric scooter licenses! It'd also separate those who should be using the scooters from those who definitely shouldn't."

Effect: average student attendance rides on the availability of e-scooters

Option 4: "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?!" Shouts @@RANDOMNAME@@, the Senior @@CAPITAL@@ Chief of Police, visibly drooling. "Squadrons of expertly-trained electric scooter officers chasing down drug dealers through alleyways, tail whipping over walls in the name of order and security? Count me in! The public don't need stuff like this when they have perfectly normal working legs, but this could be a game changer in local policing matters. Give us a couple thousand of these, modded with batons, spikes, the works... and I will show you just how powerful these things can be."

Effect: electric scooter riding police officers have taken over skateparks

Helmets On, We're Off To Work!

Validity: Decent environmentalism, poor public transport, low-mid intelligence, high private industry/economic freedom, above average crime

The Issue: A startup company distributing and servicing pay-to-use electric scooters across @@CAPITAL@@ is under pressure as dozens of hospitalized @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ are saying the scooters are too dangerous for the busy capital.

Option 1: "We already have a handful of major manufacturing deals on the table, promising thousands of jobs and a massive boost to the local economy," reassures @@RANDOMNAME@@, CEO of SuperScoot, whizzing around your office on an electric scooter to prove its safety, "eventually, when @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ get more comfortable riding our scooters, all of us reap the benefits! Reduced carbon emissions, faster inner city routes, more convenient government subsidiz- " @@HE@@ crashes head first into your desk, obliterating it, and gets up to brush @@HIM@@self off, "Nothing happened! Look, all we need is some government grants to get us over the line, and trash those pesky safety regulations while you're at it, they're obstructing progress!"

Effect: the elderly are routinely run down on sidewalks by @@CAPITAL@@ residents obsessed with getting to work quicker.

Option 2: "How utterly ridiculous!" Mocks @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Minister for Preventing Fun Times, "I'm not sure how this preposterous little business even snuck past our safety regulations, but it's clear we need to crack down on dangerous modes of transport in built-up urban areas, especially if provided by unregulated business startups! So many buildings and corners, I can't imagine how many unknowing victims have collided head on with reckless riders," @@HE@@ presents an animation of a boy riding off a cliff on an electric scooter, a stock explosion sound playing out of time. "We need to ban the use of electric scooters nationwide! Think of the children, @@LEADER@@."

Effect: the end of the working day is signalled by the arrival of carless employees.

Option 3: "A few crashes and lawsuits shouldn't put new modes of eco-friendly transport out of business," points out @@RANDOMNAME@@, President of the @@CAPITAL@@ University Students Union, equipped with various pin-on badges and ribbons, "While we shouldn't be pandering to money-hungry venture capitalists who don't give a damn about customer safety, these electric scooters have been genuinely priceless for us students who don't drive or don't want to use the underfunded and practically non-existent city transport services. I get a real sense of independence when the wind rushes through my hair on the way to class, you know?" @@HIS@@ classmates nod in approval, all kitted up to scoot to their next lecture in an arrow formation. "The government should run electric scooter safety and training courses so we can get electric scooter licenses and more badges to fasten to our vests! It'd also separate those who should be using the scooters from those who definitely shouldn't."

Effect: dodging swarms of e-scooters is considered sport in @@CAPITAL@@.

Option 4: "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?" Asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, the Senior @@CAPITAL@@ Chief of Police, visibly drooling. "Squadrons of expertly-trained electric scooter officers chasing down drug dealers through alleyways, tail whipping over walls in the name of order and security? Count me in." @@HE@@ takes out a notepad and starts drawing the scene. "The public don't need stuff like this when they have perfectly normal working legs, but this could be a game changer in local security matters. Give us a couple thousand of these, modded with batons, spikes, the works... and I will show you just how powerful these things can be." @@HE@@ lowers @@HIS@@ blacked-out aviators and action rolls out of the room, hitting @@HIS@@ head on the door frame.

Effect: electric scooter riding police officers have taken over skateparks.

Helmets On, We're Off To Work!

Validity: Decent environmentalism, poor public transport, low-mid intelligence, high private industry/economic freedom, above average crime

The Issue: A startup transport company distributing and servicing low-cost, pay-to-use electric scooters across @@CAPITAL@@ has failed spectacularly as it turns out @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ are shockingly bad at handling the few scooters not yet stolen and stripped for parts, with dozens already hospitalized and filing lawsuits.

Option 1: "We already have a handful of major manufacturing deals on the table, promising thousands of jobs and a serious boost to the local economy," reassures @@RANDOMNAME@@, CEO of SuperScoot, darting around your office on one of the scooters to prove their safety, "any scooter stolen is considered part of the setup costs, at least while we work on new, state-of-the-art tracking chips. Eventually, people will be comfortable navigating the streets on our scooters and the benefits will be incredible: reduced carbon emissions, faster inner city routes, more convenient government subsidization... you name it." @@HE@@ crashes head first into your desk, obliterating it, and gets up to brush himself off, "Nothing happened! Look, all we need is fewer restrictions and more freedom to operate in cities across @@NAME@@, and I promise you won't regret it. The electric scooter revolution is well and truly here."

Effect: cities are inundated with abandoned and broken electric scooters.

Option 2: "How utterly ridiculous!" Mocks @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Minister for Preventing Fun Times, "I'm not sure how this preposterous little business even snuck past our safety regulations, but it's clear we need to crack down on dangerous modes of transport in built-up urban areas, especially if provided by unregulated business startups! So many buildings and corners, I can't imagine how many unknowing victims have collided head on with reckless riders," @@HE@@ presents an animation of a boy riding off a cliff on an electric scooter, a stock explosion sound playing out of time. "We need to ban the use of electric scooters nationwide! Think of the children, @@LEADER@@."

Effect: it takes the carless two working days to walk to work.

Option 3: "A few crashes and lawsuits shouldn't put new modes of eco-friendly transport out of business," points out @@RANDOMNAME@@, President of the @@CAPITAL@@ University Students Union, equipped with various pin-on badges and ribbons, "While we shouldn't be pandering to money-hungry venture capitalists who don't give a damn about customer safety, these electric scooters have been genuinely priceless for us students who don't drive or don't want to use the slow, inner city public transport services. I get a real sense of independence when the wind rushes through my hair on the way to class, you know?" @@HIS@@ classmates nod in approval, all kitted up to scoot to their next lecture in an arrow formation. "With some extra funding, electric scooters could be safer, easier to track and store throughout the country, awarded dedicated street lanes, and keep our economies and students moving."

Effect: the elderly are routinely run down by students on electric scooters late for class.

Option 4: "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?" Asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, the Senior @@CAPITAL@@ Chief of Police, visibly drooling. "Squadrons of expertly-trained electric scooter officers chasing down drug dealers through alleyways, tail whipping over walls in the name of order and security? Count me in." @@HE@@ takes out a notepad and starts drawing the scene. "The public don't need stuff like this when they have perfectly normal working legs, but this could be a game changer in local security matters. Give us a couple thousand of these, modded with batons, spikes, the works... and I will show you just how powerful these things can be." @@HE@@ lowers @@HIS@@ blacked-out aviators and action rolls out of the room, hitting @@HIS@@ head on the door frame.

Effect: electric scooter riding police officers have taken over skateparks.

[Australian rePublic]

Why are the elderly hanging around at universities? Unless they are themselves students

[The Grand Fifth Imperium]

i cant help but make this joke:
"Effect: the elderly are routinely run down by students on electric scooters late for class."

why are the scooters late for class?

[Urine Town]

Two things I’d change

1. I’m going to assume option 2’s fallout was an exaggeration. If not, than a 2 day walking commute is equivalent to around two hours’ worth of driving to work, which is already a hopelessly long commute time. One fallout suggestion: “just as the carless arrive at work, it’s already time to go home.” This alludes to around 8-10 hours of walking, not 48 hours of walking

2. Why would the police patrol skateparks? Skateparks aren’t illegal

To end things on a positive note, I was nitpicking heavily with this one and the vast majority of your issue was either well thought out or just fun to read, especially the whole “elderly being run over by students”

[Verdant Haven]

- The concept of this one is highly entertaining. Having watched people using rented Segways and scooters do such amusing/terrifying things as drive them straight into fountains, forget how to stop while at the back of a group, and unthinkingly take them up the onramps onto major interstate highways, this sounds about right.

- The dilemma is both amusing and engaging – it's just presented as such a long sentence that it feels a bit hard to unwrap. If you can break up that sentence a bit, that will help. On first read, without checking the options yet, I should note that I am not sure what dilemma I'm going to be asked to solve... will it be theft of scooters, people injuring themselves, or the failure of a company?

- ...and the first option is about reducing regulation in order to improve public transport? I didn't see that coming. Is this speaker supposed to be the CEO of the now failed company, or a rival? Remember those hardcoded gender words! You'll want to use @@HIM@@self rather than "himself" in option 1.

- Effect 1: Effect lines should not contradict the decision made. If the player chooses to subsidize and support scooters in order to improve their transportation system, it's probably best not to have the effect be about how that decision failed and looks bad. If the real emphasis is on removing regulations, I would focus the option text on that part, rather than all of the benefits of scooters and how safe they'll be. This is important, because...

- What is the difference in outcome between options 1 and 3? As written, both options basically talk about how good they are, how the government should fund them, and how it's going to revolutionize transport.

All in all, I think there's an excellent issue to be found in here. It needs specificity, and the options need to clearly address the problem. The options themselves don't seem to address the matter of theft, nor of the bankrupt company, so I would strip those out of the dilemma and focus it heavily on the safety side of things, around which it seems like all of the options are fundamentally revolving.

[Kaschovia]

Why are the elderly hanging around at universities? Unless they are themselves students

In many cities likely to be affected by this, of which there are many examples IRL, university buildings aren't hidden safely away in campuses but are often just off the side of a busy road. Especially with universities that have city-wide campuses, I can imagine swarms of students careening down busy streets would at the very least impact those of us less able to matrix flip out of the way.

i cant help but make this joke:
"Effect: the elderly are routinely run down by students on electric scooters late for class."

why are the scooters late for class?

They need to get to their classes too!

Two things I’d change

1. I’m going to assume option 2’s fallout was an exaggeration. If not, than a 2 day walking commute is equivalent to around two hours’ worth of driving to work, which is already a hopelessly long commute time. One fallout suggestion: “just as the carless arrive at work, it’s already time to go home.” This alludes to around 8-10 hours of walking, not 48 hours of walking

2. Why would the police patrol skateparks? Skateparks aren’t illegal

To end things on a positive note, I was nitpicking heavily with this one and the vast majority of your issue was either well thought out or just fun to read, especially the whole “elderly being run over by students”

Thank you for the positive feedback!

I like your suggestion for the effect line, and have changed it to: "the end of the working day is signalled by the arrival of carless employees." Let me know if that sounds good.

The option isn't saying skateparks are illegal, it's saying in their spare time they'd probably rip up the ramps doing some sick tailwhips and tricks to impress the local teenagers.

- The concept of this one is highly entertaining. Having watched people using rented Segways and scooters do such amusing/terrifying things as drive them straight into fountains, forget how to stop while at the back of a group, and unthinkingly take them up the onramps onto major interstate highways, this sounds about right.

- The dilemma is both amusing and engaging – it's just presented as such a long sentence that it feels a bit hard to unwrap. If you can break up that sentence a bit, that will help. On first read, without checking the options yet, I should note that I am not sure what dilemma I'm going to be asked to solve... will it be theft of scooters, people injuring themselves, or the failure of a company?

- ...and the first option is about reducing regulation in order to improve public transport? I didn't see that coming. Is this speaker supposed to be the CEO of the now failed company, or a rival? Remember those hardcoded gender words! You'll want to use @@HIM@@self rather than "himself" in option 1.

- Effect 1: Effect lines should not contradict the decision made. If the player chooses to subsidize and support scooters in order to improve their transportation system, it's probably best not to have the effect be about how that decision failed and looks bad. If the real emphasis is on removing regulations, I would focus the option text on that part, rather than all of the benefits of scooters and how safe they'll be. This is important, because...

- What is the difference in outcome between options 1 and 3? As written, both options basically talk about how good they are, how the government should fund them, and how it's going to revolutionize transport.

All in all, I think there's an excellent issue to be found in here. It needs specificity, and the options need to clearly address the problem. The options themselves don't seem to address the matter of theft, nor of the bankrupt company, so I would strip those out of the dilemma and focus it heavily on the safety side of things, around which it seems like all of the options are fundamentally revolving.

Thank you!

Writing issues is always an entertaining endeavour, especially if I get to describe stuff I see IRL.

For the description of the issue, I have changed it to: " A startup company distributing and servicing pay-to-use electric scooters across @@CAPITAL@@ is under pressure as dozens of hospitalized @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ are saying the scooters are too dangerous for the busy capital."

The CEO is of the company the issue is about. I imagine them as a hopeless salesperson who saw an opportunity, avoided every safety obstacle in their way to try for a monopoly on the emerging pay-to-use electric scooter market and is now begging you not to slap them with a fine or increase restrictions. Giving into him, despite him destroying your desk, just allows them to keep avoiding improving safety to turn a bigger profit. I've changed the option to:

Option 1: "We already have a handful of major manufacturing deals on the table, promising thousands of jobs and a massive boost to the local economy," reassures @@RANDOMNAME@@, CEO of SuperScoot, whizzing around your office on an electric scooter to prove its safety, "eventually, when @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ get more comfortable riding our scooters, all of us reap the benefits! Reduced carbon emissions, faster inner city routes, more convenient government subsidiz- " @@HE@@ crashes head first into your desk, obliterating it, and gets up to brush @@HIM@@self off, "Nothing happened! Look, all we need is some government grants to get us over the line, and trash those pesky safety regulations while you're at it, they're obstructing progress!"

Effect: the elderly are routinely run down on sidewalks by @@CAPITAL@@ residents obsessed with getting to work quicker.

I changed both 1 and 3 so they take more separate approaches.

[Verdant Haven]

- Your premise is dramatically improved.

- Option 1 is making a good case now. This is a rare case where I think two dialogue tags works for an option, but I would suggest ending each with a period and having the following dialogue start a new sentence. Maybe replace "Nothing happened!" (something obviously happened) with "I'm fine!" or another line to follow that focus on safety.

- Effect 1: I feel like this needs to be a bit shorter. The concept of the effect is generally indistinct from that of Effect 3, which I like better. You can also remove the periods from this and the other effects – if used, appropriate terminal punctuation will be added by the game.

- There is a little bit of a contradiction happening between Option 1 (which says the business is being held back by regulations) and Option 2 (saying the business is unregulated). Perhaps if Option 1 were to suggests limiting corporate liability for safety issues instead of removing regulations, Option 2 would work for suggesting adding regulation on this new market segment that previously snuck through because they weren't yet covered?

- Option 2's second dialogue tag is amusing, but could be combined with the first to avoid breaking up the dialogue as much.

- Because the issue doesn't particularly focus on commute times anywhere except in passing, Effect 2 feels a little bit orphaned and hard to understand. Something more direct that makes it clear that the difficult commute or bad traffic causes employees to arrive just in time to leave would be helpful (remember that people will be seeing these effect lines on Nation Pages, without any additional context to help understand what they mean).

- Option 3 is making some sense now – having what amounts of scooter licenses for operators is completely reasonable to suggest. I don't think this option benefits from its second dialogue tag at all. I'm also not familiar with the significance of badges and such on the vest... is this a reference to a specific widespread practice? It sounds to me like boy scouts or girl scouts, which doesn't jive with the context given.

- Option 4 has a painful three dialogue tags. I would suggest eliminating the middle one and blending the remaining pair (the speaker's departure at the end doesn't add to our understanding).

[Kaschovia]

- Your premise is dramatically improved.

- Option 1 is making a good case now. This is a rare case where I think two dialogue tags works for an option, but I would suggest ending each with a period and having the following dialogue start a new sentence. Maybe replace "Nothing happened!" (something obviously happened) with "I'm fine!" or another line to follow that focus on safety.

- Effect 1: I feel like this needs to be a bit shorter. The concept of the effect is generally indistinct from that of Effect 3, which I like better. You can also remove the periods from this and the other effects – if used, appropriate terminal punctuation will be added by the game.

- There is a little bit of a contradiction happening between Option 1 (which says the business is being held back by regulations) and Option 2 (saying the business is unregulated). Perhaps if Option 1 were to suggests limiting corporate liability for safety issues instead of removing regulations, Option 2 would work for suggesting adding regulation on this new market segment that previously snuck through because they weren't yet covered?

- Option 2's second dialogue tag is amusing, but could be combined with the first to avoid breaking up the dialogue as much.

- Because the issue doesn't particularly focus on commute times anywhere except in passing, Effect 2 feels a little bit orphaned and hard to understand. Something more direct that makes it clear that the difficult commute or bad traffic causes employees to arrive just in time to leave would be helpful (remember that people will be seeing these effect lines on Nation Pages, without any additional context to help understand what they mean).

- Option 3 is making some sense now – having what amounts of scooter licenses for operators is completely reasonable to suggest. I don't think this option benefits from its second dialogue tag at all. I'm also not familiar with the significance of badges and such on the vest... is this a reference to a specific widespread practice? It sounds to me like boy scouts or girl scouts, which doesn't jive with the context given.

- Option 4 has a painful three dialogue tags. I would suggest eliminating the middle one and blending the remaining pair (the speaker's departure at the end doesn't add to our understanding).

1. Changed the dialogue in option 1 as per your suggestion.

2. Periods removed. I've replaced effect 1 with effect 3 as it is shorter and addresses the safety issue a bit more directly. Effect 3 has been changed as well.

3. I've edited option 1 to focus more on limiting corporate liability as recommended.

4. Combined the dialogue tags in option 2. Also changed the effect line, let me know if it still needs improvement.

5. Option 3 dialogue improved and cleaned up a bit more.

6. Option 4 shortened, dialogue also improved.

[Australian rePublic]

Why are the elderly hanging around at universities? Unless they are themselves students

In many cities likely to be affected by this, of which there are many examples IRL, university buildings aren't hidden safely away in campuses but are often just off the side of a busy road. Especially with universities that have city-wide campuses, I can imagine swarms of students careening down busy streets would at the very least impact those of us less able to matrix flip out of the way.

Yes, As a courier, I frequently deliver to such a university. The way it was worded, I thought the oldies were on campus, rather than on the street

[Verdant Haven]

Lots of good improvements here.

Keep taking feedback for a while, and reviewing it yourself from time to time to find efficiencies and word flow improvements. I think you'll have a good submission when the time is right!

[Kaschovia]

Just went over the options, cutting down on unnecessary dialogue and text. Think this version is the cleanest so far, but if there's anything else left to do then let me know!

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I'd note that the existing issue on unicycles is basically this one, through a lens of satire. Not something you'd find on a free text search of the archive, of course, but likely this issue would be considered to be a "duplicate" for that reason. In my opinion, anyway.

[Kaschovia]

I'd note that the existing issue on unicycles is basically this one, through a lens of satire. Not something you'd find on a free text search of the archive, of course, but likely this issue would be considered to be a "duplicate" for that reason. In my opinion, anyway.

What issue number is that?