The Writers' Block

[Verdant Haven]

I'm totally up for a good author (which would be you, yaaaay) taking on palm oil again from a different angle. I absolutely agree that the issue doesn't go far into the whole palm oil debate, but when it came up I snapped it up immediately, as it was just about the only draft ever submitted that even mentioned palm oil.

Palm oil is a big enough topic to support at least a couple more issues. There's the orangutan extinction, and the displaced populations, and of course there's the loss of rainforest. Whichever angle you take, count me as interested.

Awesome, thanks. I've got the outline in place, and will get the first draft written in short order - hopefully this weekend!

[Sanctaria]

Just some news.

Wyethalania has been retired from the Issues Editing team. We know his real life is pretty hectic at the moment so if/when he comes back to NS, he's more than welcome to come back on the team.

Similarly, Helaw has let us know that he just doesn't have the time to devote to editing right now, so he has also retired from the team. As with Wye, Helaw has an open invitation to return whenever he feels he is able.

Thanks to both for their service.

[Gozira]

Hello. I have been thinking of an issue that is mostly connected with military, but with the inclusion of ethical themes and some other fluff. Are any of you sick of those?

The conceptual issue may have some similarities with the "killer robots pew pew" issue but that could be ignored (unless there are even more surreal issues).

all criticism will be be considered

I will post soon (to be more precise it stands for my prototype issue not the final product)

The Issue

Basically, the unnamed leader of the nation has participated in the opening of a memorial for the disabled veterans of a recent war, who were forced to leave the fronts of war.
the event causes controversy and the options start to boil.

The options will be inclusive of several perspectives.
The first option will give the injured troops a path of continuous service in the military. This decision will increase defence forces and inclusion.
Another option will allow the unfortunate people to continue their career in the military as non-combative members, and the third will completely shut out the disabled veterans.
The last option will advocate for the modification of the scarred and injured, public servants so that they can go on with their war, Robocop-style.

any thoughts?

[Candensia]

Hello. I have been thinking of an issue that is mostly connected with military, but with the inclusion of ethical themes and some other fluff. Are any of you sick of those?

The conceptual issue may have some similarities with the "killer robots pew pew" issue but that could be ignored (unless there are even more surreal issues).

all criticism will be be considered

I will post soon (to be more precise it stands for my prototype issue not the final product)

The Issue

Basically, the unnamed leader of the nation has participated in the opening of a memorial for the disabled veterans of a recent war, who were forced to leave the fronts of war.
the event causes controversy and the options start to boil.

The options will be inclusive of several perspectives.
The first option will give the injured troops a path of continuous service in the military. This decision will increase defence forces and inclusion.
Another option will allow the unfortunate people to continue their career in the military as non-combative members, and the third will completely shut out the disabled veterans.
The last option will advocate for the modification of the scarred and injured, public servants so that they can go on with their war, Robocop-style.

any thoughts?

Welcome to GI. First off, this issue presents a situation, but not an issue. Every issue needs to have an identifiable debate. For example, an issue on veterans benefits would have an option for and against those benefits. I don’t see any debate right now.

I think you should flesh this out, then stick it in a draft thread so that it can recieve communal feedback.

EDIT: Also, watch out for overlap with #422

[Gozira]

Hello. I have been thinking of an issue that is mostly connected with military, but with the inclusion of ethical themes and some other fluff. Are any of you sick of those?

The conceptual issue may have some similarities with the "killer robots pew pew" issue but that could be ignored (unless there are even more surreal issues).

all criticism will be be considered

I will post soon (to be more precise it stands for my prototype issue not the final product)

The Issue

Basically, the unnamed leader of the nation has participated in the opening of a memorial for the disabled veterans of a recent war, who were forced to leave the fronts of war.
the event causes controversy and the options start to boil.

The options will be inclusive of several perspectives.
The first option will give the injured troops a path of continuous service in the military. This decision will increase defence forces and inclusion.
Another option will allow the unfortunate people to continue their career in the military as non-combative members, and the third will completely shut out the disabled veterans.
The last option will advocate for the modification of the scarred and injured, public servants so that they can go on with their war, Robocop-style.

any thoughts?

Welcome to GI. First off, this issue presents a situation, but not an issue. Every issue needs to have an identifiable debate. For example, an issue on veterans benefits would have an option for and against those benefits. I don’t see any debate right now.

I think you should flesh this out, then stick it in a draft thread so that it can recieve communal feedback.

Thanks for the feedback. I'll follow the advice.
Am I prohibited from deleting any messages here? Im just asking.

[Trotterdam]

Basically, the unnamed leader of the nation has participated in the opening of a memorial for the disabled veterans of a recent war, who were forced to leave the fronts of war.

You can't simply say that the leader of the nation has done something. The leader of the nation is the player, and players don't like being told that they've done something they never agreed to.

You can, though, write the actions of other politicians serving under the player, or of the leaders of other nations.

First off, this issue presents a situation, but not an issue. Every issue needs to have an identifiable debate. For example, an issue on veterans benefits would have an option for and against those benefits. I don’t see any debate right now.

Even before the options, an issue should present some sort of problem or unusual circumstance, that justifies why people suddenly think something should be done about the subject now.

Am I prohibited from deleting any messages here? Im just asking.

The forum software won't allow you to delete posts unless they're the last post in the thread. You can edit posts, potentially completely blanking them, but that's considered rude, though I don't believe it's against any official site rules. Still, it's better to leave old posts be. Maybe someone will turn out to still have something useful to contribute after you had given up, and if not, then the thread will quickly drop to the bottom of the index and not bother anyone.

[Australian rePublic]

Just some news.

Wyethalania has been retired from the Issues Editing team. We know his real life is pretty hectic at the moment so if/when he comes back to NS, he's more than welcome to come back on the team.

Similarly, Helaw has let us know that he just doesn't have the time to devote to editing right now, so he has also retired from the team. As with Wye, Helaw has an open invitation to return whenever he feels he is able.

Thanks to both for their service.

that's sad

[Australian rePublic]

Everytime I've had an even number of published issues, atleast exactly half of them were published by CWA. Yesturday was the first exception to this in my entire writing carer

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Everytime I've had an even number of published issues, atleast exactly half of them were published by CWA. Yesturday was the first exception to this in my entire writing carer

Sounds like a challenge to me. I'll have to keep an eye out for more Aussie issues.

[Australian rePublic]

Everytime I've had an even number of published issues, atleast exactly half of them were published by CWA. Yesturday was the first exception to this in my entire writing carer

Sounds like a challenge to me. I'll have to keep an eye out for more Aussie issues.

Nah. More like a matter of fact,

But if it means more published issues, then I'll accept any interpretation. Baggie, the only other editor with more than one of mine, is catching up, mate...

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Sounds like a challenge to me. I'll have to keep an eye out for more Aussie issues.

Nah. More like a matter of fact,

But if it means more published issues, then I'll accept any interpretation. Baggie, the only other editor with more than one of mine, is catching up, mate...

No worries, I've found a much easier solution. If I go back and delete three or four of your published issues where you've worked with other editors, then natural balance will be restored. Problem solved!

[Australian rePublic]

What do you guys think of this issue. Whilst ait's based on Kimba the White Lion, it's also based on my own uphill legal battle against one of the world's largest companies (a legal battle which my lawyer, who happens to be a family member, told me not to persue, primarily because of option 3).

A big @@DENONYM@@ company violates the copyright of a small, foreign company. Small company can't do anything because of the power disparity. You were called to address this:
1. Address the power disparity by shifting the rules in favour of the little guy
2. Let capitalism and justice do its work. Who said it's not a fair battle?
3. The issue is that the loser has to pay the winner's court fees, which screws them over, and tips the scale of favour over to the defendant
4. Screw them, they're foreigners. Let the @@DENONYM@@ film studio take precident

[Australian rePublic]

Nah. More like a matter of fact,

But if it means more published issues, then I'll accept any interpretation. Baggie, the only other editor with more than one of mine, is catching up, mate...

No worries, I've found a much easier solution. If I go back and delete three or four of your published issues where you've worked with other editors, then natural balance will be restored. Problem solved!

Me and my big mouth...

[Candensia]

I just think CWA likes to own a majority stake in nifty issues authors, you know, to pass on to his grandkids or something. Too bad he only holds a plurality with me.

[Bears Armed]

We have at least one issue with an option that bans cars in favour of public transport. Is there room for a follow-up issue about what to do with the few people who insist on still driving, illegally [and maybe abetted by clandestine tinkerers who build or rebuild cars for them ), in sparsely-populated areas or at night, because they enjoy it so much?
Options would be: just jail them like other criminals; psychiatric treatment to cure them of this obsession (maybe switch the order of those two, so that it's easier to make 'Must Have Prisons' a validity for just one option rather than for the entire issue?);decide that they can't be cured & authorize shooting them on sight; set aside 'reservations' where the expected-to-be-few fanatical ones can live & drive as they please without disturbing other people?
Idea inspired a short story that I read last weekend, 'Interurban Queen' by R.A. Lafferty.

You do already know some of Lafferty's works, right? The best-known is probably a short story titled 'Land of Great Horses'.. If you don't know about him then you've been missing a treat. Find some, read them, and then I challenge you to say honestly that he couldn't have produced some great Issues for urrs...
^_^

[Candlewhisper Archive]

We have at least one issue with an option that bans cars in favour of public transport. Is there room for a follow-up issue about what to do with the few people who insist on still driving, illegally [and maybe abetted by clandestine tinkerers who build or rebuild cars for them ), in sparsely-populated areas or at night, because they enjoy it so much?

Almost. We have illegal racers implied by issue 625

@choice: "Oh my... Are those all V12 Maxati Baryons? The fastest road-legal automobiles in the world?" asks police officer @@RANDOMNAME@@, showing an inappropriate level of enthusiasm. "These have to be destined for illegal race circuits... I say we chip them with GPS trackers, let them slip back into circulation, so we can track down the criminals. I foresee high speed car chases, so you'd better keep a handful back for the police."

We also have Issue 74 which is about illegal street races, but is explicitly for nations who haven't banned cars.

[Australian rePublic]

We have at least one issue with an option that bans cars in favour of public transport. Is there room for a follow-up issue about what to do with the few people who insist on still driving, illegally [and maybe abetted by clandestine tinkerers who build or rebuild cars for them ), in sparsely-populated areas or at night, because they enjoy it so much?
Options would be: just jail them like other criminals; psychiatric treatment to cure them of this obsession (maybe switch the order of those two, so that it's easier to make 'Must Have Prisons' a validity for just one option rather than for the entire issue?);decide that they can't be cured & authorize shooting them on sight; set aside 'reservations' where the expected-to-be-few fanatical ones can live & drive as they please without disturbing other people?
Idea inspired a short story that I read last weekend, 'Interurban Queen' by R.A. Lafferty.
You do already know some of Lafferty's works, right? The best-known is probably a short story titled 'Land of Great Horses'.. If you don't know about him then you've been missing a treat. Find some, read them, and then I challenge you to say honestly that he couldn't have produced some great Issues for urrs...
^_^

So we're talking about those who drive recteationally, rather than out of necessity? Make sure to clarify that

[Tsandonown]

The supposed area 51 raid is coming up and I was wondering if there is already an issue addressing a similar problem such as

youth citizens have been planning on raiding a secret government division dedicated to understanding advanced technology.

And then options could be

move the technology to a different location; increase security surrounding the area; make all discoveries from the division publicly available; use the event to attract tourists to the area.

Just wondering if this is already drafted/done or whether I could make an issue on it?

[Sanctaria]

The supposed area 51 raid is coming up and I was wondering if there is already an issue addressing a similar problem such as

youth citizens have been planning on raiding a secret government division dedicated to understanding advanced technology.

And then options could be

move the technology to a different location; increase security surrounding the area; make all discoveries from the division publicly available; use the event to attract tourists to the area.

Just wondering if this is already drafted/done or whether I could make an issue on it?

The problem with such referencing an event like this is that in five years time when someone gets the issue, no one will know what the original reference was.

Maybe instead of "raiding", the accidental revealing of an area, or a tourist bus getting lost and wandering into a restricted area would be a better starting point, though to be honest I still remain unconvinced and would have to see a draft.

[Snoodum]

I was thinking about writing an issue based on the opiate crisis in the US. Any thoughts?

[Australian rePublic]

I was thinking about writing an issue based on the opiate crisis in the US. Any thoughts?

Don't be too America-centric

[Snoodum]

I was thinking about writing an issue based on the opiate crisis in the US. Any thoughts?

Don't be too America-centric

I'll try my best not to.

[Australian rePublic]

I remember a while back, when we had a draft about racist dogs. What ended up happening to that? It seemed like an interesting issue

[Bears Armed]

The supposed area 51 raid is coming up and I was wondering if there is already an issue addressing a similar problem such as And then options could be Just wondering if this is already drafted/done or whether I could make an issue on it?

The problem with such referencing an event like this is that in five years time when someone gets the issue, no one will know what the original reference was.

Maybe instead of "raiding", the accidental revealing of an area, or a tourist bus getting lost and wandering into a restricted area would be a better starting point, though to be honest I still remain unconvinced and would have to see a draft.

Haven't we already got an issue about somebody (A television programme-maker?) stumbling across a secret government site?

[Trotterdam]

The problem with such referencing an event like this is that in five years time when someone gets the issue, no one will know what the original reference was.

Maybe instead of "raiding", the accidental revealing of an area, or a tourist bus getting lost and wandering into a restricted area would be a better starting point, though to be honest I still remain unconvinced and would have to see a draft.

Haven't we already got an issue about somebody (A television programme-maker?) stumbling across a secret government site?

Yup. #755.