The Writers' Block

[Katalaysia]

Just to check, are there any issues on national tests (as in, whether your nation should give regulated exams to people at certain ages/points in their education)?

[Trotterdam]

Is #668 what you're looking for?

[Katalaysia]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking of. Ah well, thanks anyway.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

What a great issue that is! I have nothing but the highest respect for both the author of that piece, and that talented editor.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Is there an option in an issue that obliterates all the rich-poor divides when taken, (i.e. making everybody's income level equal by force, like a Robin Hood option)? I think there was one, but I can't remember which issue it was. I might be wrong as well, of course.

[Kleinekatzen]

IS there an issue that reduces a nations population count?

Cause I was thinking of two possible scenarios that would take a chain issues that would reduce a nation population in half or even more should they (a) qualify for it [say having a pop of more then a billion] and (b) choose an option for it instead of outright dismissing it. The reason for these issues is that some nations have an really large population and might want to trim the fat in a RP way.

The two option i was considering were
(1)"A large asteroid called [insert modname with most nation delete/bans here] has been plotted to strike [nation name] in two years time! You meet with your advisers in a dark room while they are pointing flashlights at their faces.
Follow this would be options to keep quiet on this to avoid panic while preparing to deal with it, revealing the truth, accepting the asteroid as 'divine judgement' etc. The each option would have a mini chain before impact (unavoidable) with each path taken determining how much of the population dies (from 90% to 25%).

(2)Colonizing Space
Haven't thought this out as much to be honest. But general idea is to 'send' a proportion (or more) of a nation population out to colonize new worlds via sci-fi logic.

As you can tell I as more focused on the the nation is about to go boom option.

[Caracasus]

IS there an issue that reduces a nations population count?

Cause I was thinking of two possible scenarios that would take a chain issues that would reduce a nation population in half or even more should they (a) qualify for it [say having a pop of more then a billion] and (b) choose an option for it instead of outright dismissing it. The reason for these issues is that some nations have an really large population and might want to trim the fat in a RP way.

The two option i was considering were
(1)"A large asteroid called [insert modname with most nation delete/bans here] has been plotted to strike [nation name] in two years time! You meet with your advisers in a dark room while they are pointing flashlights at their faces.
Follow this would be options to keep quiet on this to avoid panic while preparing to deal with it, revealing the truth, accepting the asteroid as 'divine judgement' etc. The each option would have a mini chain before impact (unavoidable) with each path taken determining how much of the population dies (from 90% to 25%).

(2)Colonizing Space
Haven't thought this out as much to be honest. But general idea is to 'send' a proportion (or more) of a nation population out to colonize new worlds via sci-fi logic.

As you can tell I as more focused on the the nation is about to go boom option.

No. Issue effects cannot alter a nation's population count.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Is there an option in an issue that obliterates all the rich-poor divides when taken, (i.e. making everybody's income level equal by force, like a Robin Hood option)? I think there was one, but I can't remember which issue it was. I might be wrong as well, of course.

Wealth gaps and income disparities are secondary stats, emergent from the game engine. We never directly code changes to them, and though obviously we know how to make them change if we want them to, we're actually not coding stats according to the visible outcomes, but rather according to narrative sense for the invisible primary stats. How the game then translates those invisible stats into visible stats is not up to us.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Not totally unrelated to the above post, there has always been controversies in Turkey (a nation with great income inequality compared to most of Europe, though not compared to the US, thankfully) regarding showing food on TV in a way that is "appetite-stimulating". When I was a child, for instance, there was a debate as to whether sucuk ads (sucuk is like a Turkish version of pepperoni) should be banned or be broadcast after 11pm, when children have gone to bed. The logic behind was this: "Pepperoni is an expensive meat product that many low-income families cannot afford, and when children see it on TV, in a commercial that has been specifically designed to trigger your appetite, like, showing pepperoni slices sizzle in the pan with two perfectly round, bright yellow egg yolks, and steaming...mmm, those poor children will want to eat pepperoni and will pester their parents about them, asking them why they never eat it for breakfast."

This is totally BS, in my opinion, I found it a shameless attempt to help the government keep low-income people in blissful ignorance, while nothing was done to tackle the income inequality. I mean, if there are people who cannot afford some food items (and pepperoni is NOT that fancy, I mean, we're not talking about caviar here, please); the government should be ashamed of it, but instead they considered banning these ads so that "poor kids wouldn't know what they were missing."

Out of sight, out of mind; right? (I believe the same goes for school uniforms as well.)

The same issue came up when the popularity of a TV show where a foodie visited restaurants and tasted and "graded" their food, rose. Opponents were saying that the guy sometimes went to very expensive restaurants where most people could not imagine eating, and then he ate the food in a way that made the viewers' mouth water (what the hell? how should he eat it?). So they called for a ban. (Excuse me? Use your remote control if you don't like the show. Turks are weird. Whenever they don't like something, they want it to be banned. I believe this is because we have no culture of democracy, and children aren't being taught to respect other people's opinions. Frankly, what most people understand under democracy is basically "tyranny of majority" - so hey, if 100,000 people call for a ban, they should get the ban, right?)

I really really find this way of pandering to low-income voters distasteful, I also do not understand how meekly these people can accept their misery, and just want the "temptation" to be removed from their visual field, instead of questioning why they are not able to eat those foods in the first place, at least every now and then. This just "masks" the problem of income inequality, and it is "stupidity" at its highest.

But I thought maybe I could write an issue about that. The issue could be valid for nations with great income inequality, and its structure could be like this:

1. Poor labourer saying that s/he can't afford the food that his/her child sees on TV and wants him/her to buy. (this option could have two versions for vegetarian and non-vegetarian nations) and urging the government to ban the foodie show on TV.

2. The foodie demanding a subsidy from the government to shoot new episodes where he tastes affordable foods for poor people.

3. A person with a Robin Hood sentiment (like me, lol) coming in and ranting at the leader for allowing the income inequality to get so bad that some people cannot even afford food, and asking for a radical redistribution of wealth, such that everybody earns the same amount of money, no matter what they do. (that's why I asked whether there was such an option. If there is already an issue that does that, I will have to reformulate the 3rd option to this issue).

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Is there an option in an issue that obliterates all the rich-poor divides when taken, (i.e. making everybody's income level equal by force, like a Robin Hood option)? I think there was one, but I can't remember which issue it was. I might be wrong as well, of course.

Wealth gaps and income disparities are secondary stats, emergent from the game engine. We never directly code changes to them, and though obviously we know how to make them change if we want them to, we're actually not coding stats according to the visible outcomes, but rather according to narrative sense for the invisible primary stats. How the game then translates those invisible stats into visible stats is not up to us.

Could it be done if an issue called for it?

And if it can be done, would you WANT to do this?

This question can be relevant for an issue project I have in mind (see post above).

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Sure, I guess.

My advice, as always, would be to never write issues with stats in mind, but rather with the story front-and-centre.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Sure, I guess.

My advice, as always, would be to never write issues with stats in mind, but rather with the story front-and-centre.

Sure

I asked this though, just because the particular option I have in mind would require the game to fix all citizens' income levels.

------------------------------------

How does this premise about banning the TV show of a foodie in a country with large income disparity sound by the way?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Sure, just bear in mind the population demographic of the game, and aim to present at least 2 options that will seem equally reasonable to the majority (or rather, that equal proportions of the majority will consider to be reasonable).

[Australian rePublic]

Would it be a bad idea to write an issue based on the assumption that @@NAME@@ is a former colony which still has ties to its colonial master?

[Ransium]

Would it be a bad idea to write an issue based on the assumption that @@NAME@@ is a former colony which still has ties to its colonial master?

Yep. Far too many assumptions.

[The Grene Knyght]

I've noticed a lot of socialist nations have managed to achieve extremely high political freedom and civil rights at the expense of the economy. I'm interested in writing an issue geared specifically such nations, because in my experience its difficult to grow your economy as a socialist nation while maintaining other stats.
Does anyone know of similar issues already out there, focusing on economic reform for poorly functioning socialist economies?

[Caracasus]

I've noticed a lot of socialist nations have managed to achieve extremely high political freedom and civil rights at the expense of the economy. I'm interested in writing an issue geared specifically such nations, because in my experience its difficult to grow your economy as a socialist nation while maintaining other stats.
Does anyone know of similar issues already out there, focusing on economic reform for poorly functioning socialist economies?

What sort of line are you planning on taking?

Honestly there are very few (barring The Bear Necessities #339 - my favourite and of course the one where you turn over your economy to an AI) that even deal with socialist economics.

There's definite potential room for struggling economic nation issues - especially ones that don't make the assumption that your nation is basically a western liberal democracy/similar. Feel free to pick the bones of this one I started and abandoned if there's anything useful in it viewtopic.php?f=13&t=409589

EDIT: Forgot to add: Yes please! If you can get some stuff drafted that'd be great. At present being a communist nation rules you out of a lot of issues.

Something else off the top of my head - potential here for bringing in a couple of NPC nations. There's the United Federation that is loosely a stand in for the US, and East Lebatuck which is a stand-in for a USSR style soviet nation. Perhaps an issue could revolve around which one you go to for financial aid, with both nations wanting something in return? Third option could be a Burkina Faso style "Self sufficiency in four years" option... dunno.

[The Grene Knyght]

I've noticed a lot of socialist nations have managed to achieve extremely high political freedom and civil rights at the expense of the economy. I'm interested in writing an issue geared specifically such nations, because in my experience its difficult to grow your economy as a socialist nation while maintaining other stats.
Does anyone know of similar issues already out there, focusing on economic reform for poorly functioning socialist economies?

What sort of line are you planning on taking?

Honestly there are very few (barring The Bear Necessities #339 - my favourite and of course the one where you turn over your economy to an AI) that even deal with socialist economics.

There's definite potential room for struggling economic nation issues - especially ones that don't make the assumption that your nation is basically a western liberal democracy/similar. Feel free to pick the bones of this one I started and abandoned if there's anything useful in it viewtopic.php?f=13&t=409589

EDIT: Forgot to add: Yes please! If you can get some stuff drafted that'd be great. At present being a communist nation rules you out of a lot of issues.

Something else off the top of my head - potential here for bringing in a couple of NPC nations. There's the United Federation that is loosely a stand in for the US, and East Lebatuck which is a stand-in for a USSR style soviet nation. Perhaps an issue could revolve around which one you go to for financial aid, with both nations wanting something in return? Third option could be a Burkina Faso style "Self sufficiency in four years" option... dunno.

I've pretty much drafted it already. I'll post it in the forums for a second opinion soon. Right now I just want to make it more specific. Currently the issue is just a more elaborate version of "the economy isn't good and these people are offering solutions"

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Has there been an issue on people eating the meat of their pets?

I was wondering whether I could write an issue inspired the Yulin Festival in China, where dog meat is eaten. Animal rights activists claim that, despite the assurances of the defenders of the festival to the contrary, they have never seen "dog farms" where dog meat is produced with more humane methods. Instead, it appears to be the case (as confirmed by the confessions of the "dog hunters") that some people, armed with crossbows, wander in villages and shoot shepherds' dogs, guard dogs, etc. with poisonous needles and then their meat is served at the Yulin Festival. But rural people may consume dog meat at other times of the year as well. (btw, it is to be expected that the poison released to the animals' bodies from the needles will pass on to humans when they eat them, and cause some health issues; but people generally take the risk).

Would it be good to write an issue that has a premise similar to the Yulin Festival?

---------------------------
P.S. I'll admit that the idea was brought to my mind by the discussions on giving a vegan diet to pets & eating snails going on in the GI forum right now. But I think this issue (if I ever write it) will be sufficiently different from them.

[Libertypendence Park]

Has there been an issue on people eating the meat of their pets?

I was wondering whether I could write an issue inspired the Yulin Festival in China, where dog meat is eaten. Animal rights activists claim that, despite the assurances of the defenders of the festival to the contrary, they have never seen "dog farms" where dog meat is produced with more humane methods. Instead, it appears to be the case (as confirmed by the confessions of the "dog hunters") that some people, armed with crossbows, wander in villages and shoot shepherds' dogs, guard dogs, etc. with poisonous needles and then their meat is served at the Yulin Festival. But rural people may consume dog meat at other times of the year as well. (btw, it is to be expected that the poison released to the animals' bodies from the needles will pass on to humans when they eat them, and cause some health issues; but people generally take the risk).

Would it be good to write an issue that has a premise similar to the Yulin Festival?

---------------------------
P.S. I'll admit that the idea was brought to my mind by the discussions on giving a vegan diet to pets & eating snails going on in the GI forum right now. But I think this issue (if I ever write it) will be sufficiently different from them.

I always like the issues that presume little cultural quirks about your nation. What if the issue was rural shepherds complaining about the festival giving their neighbors an excuse to shoot their @@ANIMALS@@, so they want the government to choose between stifling a part of the national culture or granting amnesty to thieves?

[Ransium]

Has there been an issue on people eating the meat of their pets?

I was wondering whether I could write an issue inspired the Yulin Festival in China, where dog meat is eaten. Animal rights activists claim that, despite the assurances of the defenders of the festival to the contrary, they have never seen "dog farms" where dog meat is produced with more humane methods. Instead, it appears to be the case (as confirmed by the confessions of the "dog hunters") that some people, armed with crossbows, wander in villages and shoot shepherds' dogs, guard dogs, etc. with poisonous needles and then their meat is served at the Yulin Festival. But rural people may consume dog meat at other times of the year as well. (btw, it is to be expected that the poison released to the animals' bodies from the needles will pass on to humans when they eat them, and cause some health issues; but people generally take the risk).

Would it be good to write an issue that has a premise similar to the Yulin Festival?

---------------------------
P.S. I'll admit that the idea was brought to my mind by the discussions on giving a vegan diet to pets & eating snails going on in the GI forum right now. But I think this issue (if I ever write it) will be sufficiently different from them.

I always like the issues that presume little cultural quirks about your nation. What if the issue was rural shepherds complaining about the festival giving their neighbors an excuse to shoot their @@ANIMALS@@, so they want the government to choose between stifling a part of the national culture or granting amnesty to thieves?

Hey! You never answered my TG about your issue I edited, where you ultimately happy with how it turned out?

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Hey, I have an issue idea about cross-culturally (?) adopted children. I'll roughly lay it out below and I'd like your advice before attempting a draft.

This is about a controversy in Germany between German authorities and the Child Protection Services. The issue is this: Turkish immigrants in Germany are claiming that the Child Protection Services are "snatching" their kids from them and accommodating them in state-run institutions or giving them to German adoptive parents because the government wants to "assimilate" Turkish kids.

Here is a link about that (sorry it's in German): http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/t ... 28481.html

Well, I believe preconceptions against the Turkish parents in Germany being uneducated and abusive might be playing a role in the high numbers of Turkish kids taken from their families, but I believe some cultural differences play a role as well.

For example, many Turkish families, especially those from rural areas, think that it is OK to spank their children when they misbehave and they do not consider it child abuse. German authorities, however, are very strict about that, so they will snatch the kid from the parents if they are physically abused like that. I think Turks do not see this simple cultural difference, and the claims above are just conspiracy theories IMO.

I know there is already an issue about whether corporal punishment should be allowed, but maybe this, too, could work as an issue.

e.g. Marche Noirian immigrants saying @@NAME@@ wants to assimilate their kids, and a spokesperson for Child Protection Services saying Marche Noirian immigrants spank their kids and that's why they have to take them. (validity: corporal punishment must be illegal)

------------------------------------

And interestingly, there are additional complexities surrounding this issue.

For example, a few years ago, Turkish TVs reported about a Turkish family living in the Netherlands. Their child, too, had been taken away from them due to parental neglect. It seems that they did not object to their child being taken away and placed in an orphanage at the time. A few years later, however, their child was adopted by a lesbian couple. When the family found out about this, they went mad and alerted the Turkish TV channels to give publicity to this issue. They said they did not want their son to be raised by sinful homosexuals, although they had not cared about their son all the time he was under the protection of the Dutch State. It seemed to me that they hated the homosexual couple more than they loved their own kid, sadly. They'd rather see their son grow up in an institution than in a family environment where the parental figures are gay.

Another family from Germany, too, appeared on a Turkish TV show with a sob story. Their story was also similar, but the cause for their objection to adoption was different. Like the family in the Netherlands, their daughter had been taken away due to parental neglect when she was just a baby. Then she was adopted by a heterosexual German couple (so no problem there for the conservative, deeply-religious Turkish family). However, when their daughter turned 8, the family found out that the adoptive German parents had "converted" their daughter to Christianity (so maybe she was baptized? I didn't quite get how the German family "converted" the kid, but whatever). And they went mad. After 8 years of not giving a damn about how their daughter fared, they thought they were still entitled to dictate how this family had to raise their daughter, when they heard she was now being raised as a Christian.

Well, while I am certainly not a fan of indoctrinating your children on religious matters, I think the German family can baptize their adopted child if they want to, and that it is quite inappropriate on the part of the Turkish biological parents to meddle with their life.

I could perhaps empathize with these families, if they had objected to their kids getting taken away in the beginning, but they didn't mention that at all, so I assume that the allegations of "parental neglect" were true and they accepted that. Only when they found out about the sexual orientation & the religious leanings of the adoptive parents, respectively, did they start to care about their children. I find this really hypocritical.
----------------------

Anyway maybe writing an issue about this could also be possible.

For example,

1) (for a nation that allows homosexual couples to get married and adopt kids) The kid of a Marche Noirian immigrant couple is taken away due to parental neglect and given to a homosexual couple for adoption. The Marche Noirian family says, even if their kid has been taken away, they should still have a say in how (and by whom) s/he is gonna be raised. So they either want the child back or maybe it is OK for them if a heterosexual couple adopts the child.

2) Or maybe the child of a Marche Noirian immigrant family is taken away, but then the @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ parents convert the child to @@FAITH@@ and the Marche Noirian family says their child should be raised as a, say, Violetist, and they object to the adoption.

-----------------------

What do you say?

[Bears Armed]

You get the opposite situation, too, where the authorities insist that (for the sake of multiculturalism?) children can only be adopted by their own kind of people...

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

You get the opposite situation, too, where the authorities insist that (for the sake of multiculturalism?) children can only be adopted by their own kind of people...

Oh, I didn't know about that...In which countries does this happen?

I think this can also be an issue, but it needs to assume that the authorities insist on this, to begin with.

So maybe I could start with my original idea (e.g. "I don't want my kid to be adopted by homosexuals or people who follow a different religion) and one of the options could involve a government official who is bored of the whole debate, so s/he says people should be adopting kids from their own racial/religious community. (in that case it should be about different religions, and not homosexuality, I suppose.)

[The Blaatschapen]

Also, something about native Americans and Aboriginals being forcibly taken away from their parents. Slightly different angle.