[Submitted] Bath and Body Skunkworks

[Luna Amore]

New draft based on the Pepsi Navy in the 80's. The WA/Non-WA isn't necessary strictly speaking, but since we can provide tailored options based on nation's WA status, I think it's nice to throw it in there. Doppelganger removed.

[title] Bath and Body Skunkworks

[desc] The Perpetual Lotion Company has bartered an unusual deal with East Lebatuck. There is a high demand among the East Lebatuckese people for the company's personal hygiene products, but recent sanctions have rendered East Lebatuck’s currency worthless internationally. As a different method of payment was needed, the parties agreed to trade billions of @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ of product for a fleet of old warships including 13 submarines, 5 cruisers, 2 destroyers, an aircraft carrier, and an uncharacteristically menacing tugboat.

[validity] capitalism, no autarky

[option] “A private company simply cannot be allowed to own warships,” begins your Secretary of State, @@RANDOMNAME@@, while looking over a detailed report of the trade. “It doesn’t matter that these old warships were likely headed to the scrapyard. Do you really trust the East Lebatuckese safety protocols? No, between the possibility of active ordnance and the company taking hostile takeovers too literally, it is clear the government must put an end to this and seize these ships.”
[effect] the government seizes corporate assets it deems ‘scary enough’

[option] “This is between us and the East Lebatuckese government.” chastises the representative from Perpetual Lotion while leafing through a catalog of military hardware. “A customer wanted a product and had something of value to trade in return. Simple as that. Frankly, we’ve done more to disarm East Lebatuck with this deal than @@NAME@@ has in twenty years! If you are that concerned about the safety of the equipment, by all means come inspect it and disarm the equipment as necessary. Not that it matters, we’re probably going to scrap them for the metal anyway. Maybe keep a ship or two for promotions. We'll play it by ear.”
[effect] repurposed warships fire swag at company promotional events

[option] “Woah ho ho there!” snipes an older, bearded gentleman decked out in camouflage. “They shouldn't scrap those ships, and, by god, they absolutely shouldn't hand them over to the gubment. Oh sure, when @@LEADER@@ wants to stock up on cutting-edge killing machines, it’s all hunky-dory. But when a company makes a perfectly legal trade for some well-worn ships, the Man loses his mind! PLC should be allowed to maintain a standing army if that’s what they aim to do. No inspections, no restrictions. They have to be allowed to protect their own interests whatever that entails.”
[effect] companies are literally blowing their competition out of the water

[title] Bath and Body Skunkworks

[desc] The Perpetual Lotion Company has bartered an unusual deal with East Lebatuck. There is a high demand among the East Lebatuckese people for the company's personal hygiene products, but recent WA sanctions have rendered East Lebatuck’s currency worthless internationally. As a different method of payment was needed, the parties agreed to trade billions of @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ of product for a fleet of old warships including 13 submarines, 5 cruisers, 2 destroyers, an aircraft carrier, and an uncharacteristically menacing tugboat.

[validity] capitalism, no autarky

[option] “A private company simply cannot be allowed to own warships,” begins your Secretary of State, @@RANDOMNAME@@, while looking over a detailed report of the trade. “It doesn’t matter that these old warships were likely headed to the scrapyard. Do you really trust the East Lebatuckese safety protocols? No, between the possibility of active ordnance and the company taking hostile takeovers too literally, it is clear the government must put an end to this and seize these ships.”
[effect] the government seizes corporate assets it deems ‘scary enough’
[valid-if]Not in the WA

[option] “Suffice to say that the World Assembly is not happy with this development,” states @@NAME@@’s WA ambassador, clutching a binder. “Actions like this weaken the integrity of the WA sanction. Strictly speaking, this does not violate the resolution due to the company using a non-WA middleman, but it would be in our best interest to nip this in the bud for the sake of our standing in the international community.”
[effect] CEOs spend the first hour of their day sorting through World Assembly letters telling them what they can’t do
[valid-if] WA member

[option] “This is between us and the East Lebatuckese government.” chastises the representative from Perpetual Lotion while leafing through a catalog of military hardware. “A customer wanted a product and had something of value to trade in return. Simple as that. Frankly, we’ve done more to disarm East Lebatuck with this deal than @@NAME@@ has in twenty years! If you are that concerned about the safety of the equipment, by all means come inspect it. Not that it matters, we’re probably going to scrap them for the metal anyway. Maybe keep a ship or two for promotions. We'll play it by ear.”
[effect] repurposed warships fire swag at company promotional events

[option] “Woah ho ho there!” snipes an older, bearded gentleman decked out in camouflage. “They shouldn't scrap those ships, and, by god, they absolutely shouldn't hand them over to the gubment. Oh sure, when @@LEADER@@ wants to stock up on cutting-edge killing machines, it’s all hunky-dory. But when a company makes a perfectly legal trade for some well-worn ships, the Man loses his mind! PLC should be allowed to maintain a standing army if that’s what they aim to do. No inspections, no restrictions. They have to be allowed to protect their own interests whatever that entails.”
[effect] companies are literally blowing their competition out of the water

[title] Bath and Body Skunkworks

[desc] The Perpetual Lotion Company has bartered an unusual deal with East Lebatuck. There is a high demand among the East Lebatuckese people for the company's personal hygiene products, but due to the worthlessness of East Lebatuck’s currency internationally, another form of payment had to be arranged. The parties agreed to trade billions of @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ of product for a fleet of old warships including 13 submarines, 5 cruisers, 2 destroyers, an aircraft carrier, and an uncharacteristically menacing tugboat.

[validity] capitalism, no autarky

[option] “A private company simply cannot be allowed to own warships,” begins your Secretary of State, @@RANDOMNAME@@, while looking over a detailed report of the trade. “It doesn’t matter that these are old warships they were likely going to be decommissioned. Do you really trust the East Lebatuckese safety protocols? No, between the possibility of active ordnance and the company taking hostile takeovers too literally, it is clear the government must put an end to this.”
[effect] the government seizes corporate assets it deems ‘scary enough’
[valid-if]Not in the WA

[option] “Suffice to say that the World Assembly is not happy with this development,” states @@NAME@@’s WA ambassador, binder clutched against @@HIS@@ chest. “Several strongly worded letters have been written and I suspect several more will follow by week’s end. Strictly speaking, we aren’t sure there’s any specific resolution this action breaches, but it would be in our best interest to nip this in the bud for the sake of our standing in the international community.”
[effect] CEOs spend the first hour of their day sorting through World Assembly letters telling them what they can’t do
[valid-if] WA member

[option] “This is between us and the East Lebatuckese government.” chastises the representative from Perpetual Lotion while leafing through a catalog of military hardware. “A customer wanted a product and had something of value to trade in return. Simple as that. Frankly, we’ve done more to disarm East Lebatuck with this deal than @@NAME@@ has in twenty years! So kindly stay out of our business. Besides, we’re probably going to scrap them for the metal anyway. Maybe keep a ship or two for promotions. We'll play it by ear.”
[effect] repurposed warships fire swag at company promotional events

[option] “Woah ho ho there!” snipes an older, bearded gentleman decked out in camouflage. “They shouldn't scrap those ships, and, by god, they absolutely shouldn't hand them over to the gubment. Oh sure, when @@LEADER@@ wants to stock up on cutting-edge killing machines, it’s all hunky-dory. But when a company makes a perfectly legal trade for some well-worn ships, the Man loses his mind! PLC should keep the ships and set up shop somewhere outside of @@NAME@@’s jurisdiction. With friends like these, m’right?”
[effect] companies are literally blowing their competition out of the water

[Australian rePublic]

Why does a company want a navy, and why is it any of @@NAME@@'s concern?

[The Free Joy State]

The parties agreed to trade billions of dollars of product for a fleet of old warships including 13 submarines, 5 cruisers, 2 destroyers, an aircraft carrier, and an uncharacteristically menacing tugboat.

@@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, perhaps?

Also, the "uncharacteristically menacing tugboat"...

[Luna Amore]

The parties agreed to trade billions of dollars of product for a fleet of old warships including 13 submarines, 5 cruisers, 2 destroyers, an aircraft carrier, and an uncharacteristically menacing tugboat.

@@CURRENCYPLURAL@@, perhaps?

Also, the "uncharacteristically menacing tugboat"...

I completely forgot that was a macro.

Fixed.

Why does a company want a navy, and why is it any of @@NAME@@'s concern?

That’s explained in the issue.

[Australian rePublic]

Why does a company want a navy, and why is it any of @@NAME@@'s concern?

[Luna Amore]

As I said, both of your points are explained in the issue. Requoting the exact same question is just unhelpful spam.

Aussie, do me a favor and stop commenting on my drafts. I find the overwhelming majority of your comments completely unhelpful.

[Verdant Haven]

- Great inspiration for an issue! I share Joy's amusement at the uncharacteristically menacing tugboat :-D

- Since East Lebatuck is generally presented as a major power with a strong space program (that you can collaborate with, even as a capitalist), and as having significant international influence within its sphere, it might be worth introducing some explanation for why their currency has become worthless on the international market. Maybe the UF just announced major sanctions or something?

- Just as a wording note for option 1, the ships would already be "decommissioned" prior to sale. When it comes to warships, that's just the term for officially retiring them from active military service with their country (they can be re-commissioned if sold to somebody else, but any given commissioning is specific to a given operator). If these ships were headed for the breakers, that might just be referred to as "likely going to be scrapped."

- I'm a little iffy on the WA doppelganger, simply because it doesn't explain anything about why the WA is unhappy. The non-WA version provides both reasonable and humorous justifications for taking action, while the WA version just says "people are unhappy."

- Option 3 doesn't make clear what the govm't decision is – "just stay out of our business" is kinda what happens when you dismiss. Would it make sense for the govm't to encourage companies to make these kinds of trades, in order to remove more of EL's military hardware?

- Option 4 doesn't have a significant difference in government action from Option 3 – it's just a "stay out of their business" choice. Where the difference lies is in the actions it suggests a private company should take, outside govm't jurisdiction, and therefore outside Leader's ability to enact.

[Luna Amore]

Thank you for the feedback, VH.

I’ve tried to incorporate all of your points.

Second draft changes:

— added reference to WA sanctions in the description to explain why EL’s currency is worthless internationally
— changed decommissioned to ‘likely headed for the scrapyard’
— added reference to gov’t seizing ships in opt 1
— tied the WA sanctions in the desc to why the WA objects in the WA doppelgänger (I had originally left out any reasoning as a joke tying to the effect, but this incorporates your suggestions better)
— removed the @@HIS@@ macro from the WA option to avoid stepping on player autonomy
— added government action to option 3 of having inspections of the material
— added government action to option 4 of allowing companies to maintain military hardware to protect their interest (wacky option gonna wacky)

[Tinhampton]

Editorial precedent dictates that GA committees should not be invented. I see absolutely no reason why GA sanctions should also be invented.

[Luna Amore]

Editorial precedent dictates that GA committees should not be invented. I see absolutely no reason why GA sanctions should also be invented.

I didn’t specify why EL was being sanctioned. It could be they are violating an existing resolution (GA579 mentions sanctions from a quick search).

The exact reason for the sanctions is immaterial to the issue, so as long as the GA can sanction member states, I don’t see how this is inventing a sanction.

[Luna Amore]

Two week bump.

[Verdant Haven]

- I think I would try to avoid citing the WA as the source of sanctions in the description itself, simply because non-WA nations have no reason to care (non-members are the vast majority, after all – fewer than 7% of nations are WA members). I think a slightly more nebulous presentation like "international sanctions" would do the trick, with the WA then available as the Option 1 doppelganger for nations that do happen to be members. As you say, the WA thing isn't really necessary to the issue, so minimizing its presence for non-WA recipients is vital.

- The WA doppelganger's reasoning is significantly improved. It would be good for it to be made equally clear as the non-WA version about what, exactly, you're being asked to do. "Nip this in the bud" could mean a lot of things, while "seize these ships" is clear and decisive.

- In terms of outcomes, it looks like the primary difference between the latter two options is the degree of regulatory involvement or non-involvement. Both seem to allow the company to do whatever it wants though, which I suspect is because of the wishy-washy language the company rep uses in their option. Probably, Maybe, Play it by ear... all of those basically translate as "let us do whatever we want," which in turn makes it feel indistinct from the final option (unless the third option is meant to *compel* the company to retain and maintain the ships, which would be hilarious but I don't think is the present goal).

[Trotterdam]

- I think I would try to avoid citing the WA as the source of sanctions in the description itself, simply because non-WA nations have no reason to care

WA sanctions would still be relevant to non-member nations if they forbid member nations from trading with you. At least, provided that the majority of economically-important nations are in the WA (which isn't actually true in gameplay, but may or may not be assumed to be true in the world of NPC nations).

[Verdant Haven]

- I think I would try to avoid citing the WA as the source of sanctions in the description itself, simply because non-WA nations have no reason to care

WA sanctions would still be relevant to non-member nations if they forbid member nations from trading with you. At least, provided that the majority of economically-important nations are in the WA (which isn't actually true in gameplay, but may or may not be assumed to be true in the world of NPC nations).

It's the "not true in gameplay" I'm thinking about. I prefer to avoid any reference to the WA for those who are not in it. *Not* joining the WA is a specific, and often very purposeful, game decision the player has made, and I am of the opinion that we should respect that just as we try to respect policy choices made in Issues. I am of the opinion that the less overlap we have between the two very different worlds of WA and Issues, the better.

[The Eltran]

Instead of the WA, you could make a reference to East Lebatuck being sanctioned by most of the nations in @@REGION@@. I remember seeing other issues that talked about policies being common in the region.

[Luna Amore]

3rd draft up. Dropped WA from the description and the WA doppelganger. I thought it would be an interesting idea to integrate WA status into more issues, but It isn't strictly speaking necessary and it has become more of a distraction trying to accomplish it without stepping on toes.

- In terms of outcomes, it looks like the primary difference between the latter two options is the degree of regulatory involvement or non-involvement. Both seem to allow the company to do whatever it wants though, which I suspect is because of the wishy-washy language the company rep uses in their option. Probably, Maybe, Play it by ear... all of those basically translate as "let us do whatever we want," which in turn makes it feel indistinct from the final option (unless the third option is meant to *compel* the company to retain and maintain the ships, which would be hilarious but I don't think is the present goal).

The main difference between the two is #2 allows them to keep the ships as long as the government inspects them. #3 calls for companies to be able to maintain functional military equipment. I think #3 is clear in that regard. I've expanded this sentence in #2 (addition in bold) to drive the distinction.

If you are that concerned about the safety of the equipment, by all means come inspect it and disarm the equipment as necessary.