Advertisement
by USS Monitor » Fri May 17, 2019 10:39 am
by Third Asopia » Sat May 18, 2019 4:02 pm
by Autonomous Cleaner Bot Cleaners » Sat May 18, 2019 4:09 pm
Third Asopia wrote:I'm just wondering if youth rebelliousness could work. But, I'm not creative in any way so I may need help.
by Third Asopia » Sat May 18, 2019 4:25 pm
Autonomous Cleaner Bot Cleaners wrote:Third Asopia wrote:I'm just wondering if youth rebelliousness could work. But, I'm not creative in any way so I may need help.
Presumably you're continuing the discussion from viewtopic.php?f=13&t=464680 , yes?
by The Super Fork » Mon May 20, 2019 5:49 am
by Candlewhisper Archive » Mon May 20, 2019 6:05 am
by The Super Fork » Mon May 20, 2019 7:21 am
by Pogaria » Mon May 20, 2019 3:53 pm
The Super Fork wrote:Regarding follow-up issues, is it possible for a choice to lead to multiple other issues?
Currently Issue #271 can chain into Issue #511. Is it possible to have Issue #271 chain into #511 and/or another issue?
My issue idea is that It you choose #271.6 (where the government pays vigilantes), poor citizens looking for cash turn to vigilantism and get wiped out by the criminals.
by Virtual States » Mon May 20, 2019 10:42 pm
by The Sherpa Empire » Mon May 20, 2019 11:39 pm
Virtual States wrote:Hi there!
I recently got Issue #1198, The Death Debate Isn't Dead Yet. I'd like to suggest an update to this issue.
The first option in response to the issue mentions unburied/uncremated dead bodies being a public health hazard. I'd like to point out that this is not necessarily the case. Dead bodies only present a serious health hazard if the person dies due to disease, and at that point the body could only spread that disease or whatever other communicable diseases the person may have had at the time of death. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_ri ... ead_bodies
The second option directly responds to the first option, argues against it, and provides an alternative. I'd like to suggest that the fact that only the bodies of persons who die from disease present any real health hazard be added to this option's rebuttal of the first option. It would make the second option's argument stronger, and also presents an opportunity to educate players on this subject.
Thanks!
by Candlewhisper Archive » Tue May 21, 2019 2:27 am
Virtual States wrote:Hi there!
I recently got Issue #1198, The Death Debate Isn't Dead Yet. I'd like to suggest an update to this issue.
The first option in response to the issue mentions unburied/uncremated dead bodies being a public health hazard. I'd like to point out that this is not necessarily the case. Dead bodies only present a serious health hazard if the person dies due to disease, and at that point the body could only spread that disease or whatever other communicable diseases the person may have had at the time of death. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_ri ... ead_bodies
The second option directly responds to the first option, argues against it, and provides an alternative. I'd like to suggest that the fact that only the bodies of persons who die from disease present any real health hazard be added to this option's rebuttal of the first option. It would make the second option's argument stronger, and also presents an opportunity to educate players on this subject.
Thanks!
by Autonomous Cleaner Bot Cleaners » Tue May 21, 2019 10:47 am
Candlewhisper Archive wrote:The Issue: After a hard day of resolving issues, you decided to cozy over to a nice comfy chair and turn on your television. After watching your favorite show, it then cuts to a commercial for what seems like a drug advert.
The narrative experimentation is interesting, but not working here. I suggest that the opening text should include the actual dilemma.
by Candlewhisper Archive » Wed May 22, 2019 1:03 am
by USS Monitor » Wed May 22, 2019 1:14 am
by Devil Heart » Wed May 22, 2019 2:57 pm
by USS Monitor » Wed May 22, 2019 9:23 pm
Devil Heart wrote:Ya made me laugh and splutter tea everywhere USS Monitor! Luckily my keyboard is still operational
Anyway, I'd like to try an issue about needing to re-colonise out there in space somehow because Earth is dying fast > the associated race against time alongside the prohibitive costs and the need for scientific development/experimentation in space to see what is going to work. You know, terra-forming, building your own planet etc, stuff like this:
https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/06/what ... -not-tech/
Or in more depth, Isaac Arthur ideas:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Isaak+terrafo ... &ia=videos
But I'd need lots of help. Probably need a co-author I'm guessing.
Anyway, is this too big a bite for this very beginner writer of issues?
Has something too similar been done?
by The Vladivostok Confederacy » Fri May 24, 2019 2:41 pm
by Trotterdam » Fri May 24, 2019 3:15 pm
Search the existing issues for "referendum"/"referenda".The Vladivostok Confederacy wrote:Would it be possible to write an issue about direct democracy vs representative democracy? I just wanted to make sure that
- It hasn't already been written and
- Something like this could affect policies and such, so would this even be possible?
by Minoa » Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:11 am
by Chan Island » Sat Jun 01, 2019 8:14 am
Conserative Morality wrote:"It's not time yet" is a tactic used by reactionaries in every era. "It's not time for democracy, it's not time for capitalism, it's not time for emancipation." Of course it's not time. It's never time, not on its own. You make it time. If you're under fire in the no-man's land of WW1, you start digging a foxhole even if the ideal time would be when you *aren't* being bombarded, because once you wait for it to be 'time', other situations will need your attention, assuming you survive that long. If the fields aren't furrowed, plow them. If the iron is not hot, make it so. If society is not ready, change it.
by Trotterdam » Sat Jun 01, 2019 10:03 am
by Chan Island » Sat Jun 01, 2019 1:48 pm
Conserative Morality wrote:"It's not time yet" is a tactic used by reactionaries in every era. "It's not time for democracy, it's not time for capitalism, it's not time for emancipation." Of course it's not time. It's never time, not on its own. You make it time. If you're under fire in the no-man's land of WW1, you start digging a foxhole even if the ideal time would be when you *aren't* being bombarded, because once you wait for it to be 'time', other situations will need your attention, assuming you survive that long. If the fields aren't furrowed, plow them. If the iron is not hot, make it so. If society is not ready, change it.
by Candlewhisper Archive » Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:49 am
Minoa wrote:Hello,
Sorry for the rushed message as I am busy today, but what are the newspaper banner codes for Issues 0, 666 and 999? I ask this question because I am updating the NSindex template documentation in the process of phasing out newspaper screenshots for each issue, in favour of a template-based newspaper generator.
-- Minoa
by Candlewhisper Archive » Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:50 am
Chan Island wrote:
Not quite, I was thinking more in terms of the membership or the hack, not the actual politicians. There was a case recently where a Labour Party operator type got expelled for going into tinfoil hat town when talking about anti-semitism.
I'll take this as a sign it hasn't been done yet.
by Minoa » Tue Jun 04, 2019 3:59 am
Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Minoa wrote:Hello,
Sorry for the rushed message as I am busy today, but what are the newspaper banner codes for Issues 0, 666 and 999? I ask this question because I am updating the NSindex template documentation in the process of phasing out newspaper screenshots for each issue, in favour of a template-based newspaper generator.
-- Minoa
Issue 0 uses the "default" banner that occurs if no banner code has been set. 666 uses c25 for main and b5 for side. 999 uses w3 for main and h1 for side.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Elucubria, Man Im Dead Ong, Valentine Z
Advertisement