[SUBMITTED] Run, not Hide

[Apabeossie]

This is my second attempt at writing an actual decent issue. Any feedback will be appreciated.

Submitting before Halloween when I'm ready.

Notes: The (fire)fighter part labelled in red that the scientist relabelled a fighter drone. Currently looking for better ways to write or alternative jokes.

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbour spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue," says Fire Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "Children unfamiliar with fire view it as a predator to hide from. If we teach kids how to evacuate properly, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum and provide grants for the fire department, so we can teach kids about escaping the fire. Quick, get low, cover your nose and mouth and follow me."

Result: stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favourite playtime game


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If these kids weren’t left at home alone unwatched like this, this situation would never have happened! You should mandate that children have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep them safe."

Result: teen parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around

Option 3: "Hallo @@LEADER@@, I've heard zat you're having izzues with fire..." says scientist @@RANDOMNAME@@, holding a large drone labelled (fire)fighter. "All zis could be easier with firefighting drones zat can carry powder to put off fire, and ja, even find children using cameras. Ve von't need to risk losing lives vith drones. Throw some funding to drone development. This new technology vill save lives."

Result: firefighting drones put out barbecue grills unbidden

Option 4: "We don't need to do all of that, you know," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, holding an asbestos garment bag. "When there is nothing in the house to burn, the fire won't burn, you know. Just mandate that all, yes, all objects be fire-resistant. That way the fire won't spread, and children like these won't face life or death situations. Here, I've brought a new fireproof suit for you."

Result: toast never burns but always has a weird chemical taste

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbour spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue," says Fire Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "Children unfamiliar with fire view it as a predator to hide from. If we teach kids how to evacuate properly, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum and provide grants for the fire department, so we can teach kids about escaping the fire. Quick, get low, cover your nose and mouth and follow me."

Result: practicing stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favourite playtime game


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If these kids weren’t left at home alone, this situation would never have happened! You should mandate that children have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep them safe."

Result: teen parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around

Option 3: "Hallo @@LEADER@@, I've heard zat you're having izzues with fire..." says scientist @@RANDOMNAME@@, holding a large drone labelled (fire)fighter. "All zis could be easier with firefighting drones zat can carry powder to put off fire, and ja, even find children using cameras. ve von't need to risk losing lives vith drones. Throw some funding to drone development. This new technology vill save lives."

Result: firefighting drones put out barbecue grills unbidden

Option 4: "We don't need to do all of that, you know," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, holding an asbestos garment bag. "When there is nothing in the house to burn, the fire won't burn, you know. Just mandate that all, yes, all objects be fire-resistant. That way the fire won't spread, and children like these won't face life or death situations. He opens his fireproof suitcase. Here, I've brought a new fireproof suit for you."

Result: toast never burns but always has a weird chemical taste

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbour spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue," says Fire Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "Children unfamiliar with fire view it as a predator to hide from. If we teach kids how to evacuate properly, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum and provide grants for the fire department, so we can teach kids about escaping the fire. Quick, cover your nose and mouth and follow me."

Result: practicing stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favourite playtime game


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If these kids weren’t left at home alone, this situation would never have happened! You should mandate that children have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep them safe."

Result: teen parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around


"Halo @@LEADER@@, I've heard zat you're having izzues with fire..." says scientist @@RANDOMNAME@@ as @@HE@@ appears out of nowhere. "All zis could be easier with virevighting drones...drones zat can carry powder, an yas, iven find children....ve von't need to risk lives vith drones...throw some funding to me...this new technology vill save lives..."

Result: drones are tasked with putting out birthday candles.

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue," says Fire Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "Children unfamiliar with fire view it as a predator to hide from. If we teach kids how to evacuate properly, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum and provide grants for the fire department, so we can teach kids about escaping fire. Quick, cover your nose and mouth and follow me."

Result: practicing stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favourite playtime game


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If these kids weren’t left at home alone, this situation would never have happened! You should mandate that children have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep them safe."

Result: teen parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around


Option 3: "We don't need to do all of that, you know," says @@RANDOMNAME@@. "When there's nothing in the house to burn, the fire won't burn, you know. Just mandate that all, yes all objects be fire-resistant. That way the fire won't spread, and it would be good for our citizens, you know. Here, I've brought a new fireproof suit for you."

Result: campers struggle to produce heat as "firewood" is made fireproof.

Draft 8

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbour spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue," says Fire Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "Children unfamiliar with fire view it as a predator to hide from. If we teach kids how to evacuate properly, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum and provide grants for the fire department, so we can teach kids about escaping fire. Quick, @@LEADER@@, cover your nose and mouth and follow me."

Result: practicing stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favourite playtime game.


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If those uncaring parents hadn’t left their kids at home alone, this situation would have never happened! You should mandate that children have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep children safe."

Result: teen parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around.

Option 3: "We don't need to do all of that, you know," says @@RANDOMNAME@@. "All this is unnecessary if we have better technology, you know. We just need better sprinklers, fire detectors and fire slides that you can use to get out of your house, you know. Sure, there will be a lot of houses to install these, but it's worth the cost, you know."

Result: children are too afraid to go down fire slides.

Option 3: "We don't need to do all of that, you know," says @@RANDOMNAME@@. "When there's nothing in the house to burn, the fire won't burn at all right? Just mandate that all, yes all furniture, objects, and clothing be fire-resistant. Also, children should have a child-tracking device in their wrist all of the time, so parents can keep an eye on them. Here, I've brought a new fireproof suit for you."

Result: kids are expected to find their way home from their preschool on their own.

Draft 7

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue," says Fire Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "Children unfamiliar with fire view it as a predator to hide from. If we teach kids how to evacuate properly, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum and provide grants for the fire department, so we can and teach kids about fire evacuation. Quick, @@LEADER@@, cover your nose and mouth and follow me."

Result: stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favorite playtime game.


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If those uncaring parents hadn’t left their kids at home alone, this situation would have never happened! You should mandate that children have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep children safe."

Result: kids’ parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around.

Option 3: "We don't need to do all of that, you know," says @@RANDOMNAME@@. "All this is unnecessary if we have better technology, you know. We just need better sprinklers, fire detectors and fire slides that you can use to get out of your house, you know. Sure, there will be a lot of houses to install these, but it's worth the cost, you know."

Result: children are too afraid to go down fire slides.

Option 4: "Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

Result: kids are expected to find their way home from their preschool on their own.

Draft 6

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue." says Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "Children unfamiliar view it as a predator to hide from. If we teach kids how to properly evacuate, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum and provide grants for us – the fire department, so we can send fire engines around to schools and teach kids about fire evacuation. Quick, @@LEADER@@, cover your mouth and nose and follow me."

Result: stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favorite playtime game.


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If those uncaring parents hadn’t left their kids at home alone, this situation would have never happened! They should have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep everyone safe."

Result: kids’ parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around.

Option 3: "Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

Result: kids are expected to find their way home from their preschool on their own.

Draft 5

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke. In the following press conference, Fire Chief @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@ explained that many children unfamiliar with fire can view it as a predator to hide from, rather than something that can be escaped.


Option 1: "This is clearly an educational issue." says Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "If we teach kids how to properly evacuate, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum. You should also provide grants for us – the fire department, so we can send fire engines around to schools and teach kids to get out when they see a fire. Quick, @@LEADER@@, cover your mouth and nose and follow me."

Result: stop-drop-and-roll is kindergartners' favorite playtime game.


Option 2: "Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home?" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. "If those uncaring parents hadn’t left their kids at home alone, this situation would have never happened! Children can’t take care of themselves! They should have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep everyone safe."

Result: Kids’ parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around.

Option 3: "Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

Result: Kids are expected to find their way home from their preschool on their own.

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two 7-year-old children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke. In the following press conference, Fire Chief @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@ explained that many children unfamiliar with fire can view it as a predator to hide from, rather than something that can be escaped.


Option 1: “This is clearly an educational issue.” says Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. “If we teach kids how to properly evacuate, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum. You should also provide grants for us – the fire department, so we can send fire engines around to schools and teach kids to get out when they see a fire!”

Result: stop-drop-and-roll has replaced hide-and-seek as kindergartners' favorite playtime game.


Option 2: “Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home??” cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. “If those uncaring parents hadn’t left their kids at home alone, this situation would have never happened! Children can’t take care of themselves! They should have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep everyone safe. It’s the only way to keep everyone safe.”

Result: Kids’ parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around.

Option 3: “As usual, technology has the best answer!” claims @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of a technology company. Allow me to introduce our new invention, the auto firefighter! This robot can spot any fires in the house and swiftly remove them with a fire extinguisher inside! That way, you don’t need to worry about fires getting too large to threaten lives in the first place. What could go wrong?

Result: Families often have their birthday cakes sprayed with powder.

Option 4: "Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

Result: Kids are expected to find their way home from their preschool on their own.

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

[box]Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke. In the following press conference, Fire Chief @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@ explained that many children unfamiliar with fire can view it as a predator to hide from, rather than something that can be escaped.


Option 1: “This is clearly an educational issue.” says Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. “If we teach kids how to properly evacuate, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum. You should also provide grants for us – the fire department, so we can send fire engines around to schools and teach kids to get out when they see a fire!”

Result: dinnertime in @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ is marked by children running to escape the flames of their parents' cooking ranges.


Option 2: “Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home??” cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. “If those uncaring parents hadn’t left their kids at home alone, this situation would have never happened! Children can’t take care of themselves! They should have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep everyone safe. It’s the only way to keep everyone safe.”

Result: Kids’ parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around.

Option 3: “As usual, technology has the best answer!” claims @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of a technology company. Allow me to introduce our new invention, the auto firefighter! This robot can spot any fires in the house and swiftly remove them with a fire extinguisher inside! That way, you don’t need to worry about fires getting too large to threaten lives in the first place. What could go wrong?

Result: Families often have their birthday cakes sprayed with powder.

Option 4: "Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

Result: Kids are expected to find their way home from their preschool on their own.

Run, not hide

Validity: No Child Self-Rearing

Description: Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke. In the following press conference, fire chief @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@ remarked that this was shockingly common behavior for children, and called for the government to intervene.

Option 1: “This is clearly an educational issue.” says Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. “If we teach kids how to properly evacuate, things like this won’t happen again! @@LEADER@@, you should add fire safety into the national curriculum. You should also provide grants for us – the fire department, so we can send fire engines around to schools and teach kids to get out when they see a fire!”

Result: dinnertime in @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ is marked by children running to escape the flames of their parents' cooking ranges.


Option 2: “Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home??” cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ tired and uninterested children behind @@HIM@@ on a leash. “If those uncaring parents hadn’t left their kids at home alone, this situation would have never happened! Children can’t take care of themselves! They should have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep everyone safe. It’s the only way to keep everyone safe.”

Result: Kids’ parties are often ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around.

Option 3: “As usual, technology has the best answer!” claims @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of a technology company. Allow me to introduce our new invention, the auto firefighter! This robot can spot any fires in the house and swiftly remove them with a fire extinguisher inside! That way, you don’t need to worry about fires getting too large to threaten lives in the first place. What could go wrong?

Result: Families often have their birthday cakes sprayed with powder.

Option 4: "Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

Result: Kids are expected to find their way home from their preschool on their own.

Run, not Hide
Description: Yesterday, a house caught fire while two children were playing inside alone. The two children, not knowing what to do, went hiding in the closet right after calling the emergency service. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke. But the question is, how to prevent it from happening again?

Option 1: “This is clearly an educational issue.” says @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of the @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ fire department, holding a 100-page manual for fire safety. “If these kids had known how to evacuate, this would have never happened! @@LEADER@@, we should be teaching our children what to do when there’s a fire. That’s the only way to keep everyone safe!”

Result: children who ring fire alarms for fun claim they were “helping with fire safety education”.

Option 2: “Wait the parents left children ALONE at home??” cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ children behind @@HIM@@. “If those uncaring parents had never gone outside without their kids, this situation would have never happened! Children should have at least one adult protector with them, 24/7. It’s the only way to keep everyone safe.”

Result: parents going to work are often asked if their children are at home alone.

Option 3: “As usual, technology has the best answer!” claims @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of a technology company. Allow me to introduce our new invention, the auto firefighter! This robot can spot any fires in the house and swiftly remove them with a fire extinguisher inside their body! That way we can suppress the fires easily and quickly. What could go wrong?
Result: families often have their birthday cakes sprayed with powder.

Option 4: “Allow me to ask me a question: Do we really need to care?” mumbles renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. “This happened clearly because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet! It’s their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money on these so-called “safety education”. People should know better.”

Result: thousands die each year from carelessness.

[Australian rePublic]

How old were the children?

And why would a fire alarm system that could easily be deliberately triggered by a child? Like, are those actually a widespread thing in the USA? I've seen them on American TV, but are they actually as widespread as TV/movies would have you believe? Also, in case of an actual emergency, those alarms would be too hot and/or, you might not have time to pull them when trying to run away. I've seen one in Hawaii, I was wondering how it would be possible to run toward the alarm, possibly in the direction of the fire. (And in either case, I'm pretty sure it was out of reach of children) But in places with children, especially, you think they'd have automatic fire alarms

[Apabeossie]

How old were the children?

around 7 or 8.

And why would a fire alarm system that could easily be deliberately triggered by a child? Like, are those actually a widespread thing in the USA? I've seen them on American TV, but are they actually as widespread as TV/movies would have you believe? Also, in case of an actual emergency, those alarms would be too hot and/or, you might not have time to pull them when trying to run away. I've seen one in Hawaii, I was wondering how it would be possible to run toward the alarm, possibly in the direction of the fire. (And in either case, I'm pretty sure it was out of reach of children)

sorry if you misunderstood, I meant calling by telephone/phone.

But in places with children, especially, you think they'd have automatic fire alarms

They may or may not have had automatic alarms, my point was that they went hiding instead of evacuating.

[Baggieland]

Nice issue premise: the level of education citizens have when it comes to what to do in a natural disaster.

I live in a country that is right on the 'ring of fire'. A month or two ago we had an earthquake (not a direct hit, but it was certainly felt). I was amazed by the number of people who evacuated my apartment building by using the lift!

This topic is not taught in schools, there aren't any infomercials on TV, nothing.

There's some food for thought for you as you draft this issue.

[Trotterdam]

Not knowing the best way to evacuate, fine. But thinking that it's a good idea to stay inside a burning building? I don't think even most children are that dumb.

Also, option 3 (which is about how to put out fires, rather than how to evacuate properly) seems irrelevant to the premise.

[Verdant Haven]

Not knowing the best way to evacuate, fine. But thinking that it's a good idea to stay inside a burning building? I don't think even most children are that dumb.

Actually, this is a huge problem. Children often will hide when a building is on fire, getting under beds, in closets, behind curtains, and otherwise trying to be unseen. To them, the fire is basically "a monster" to hide from. This is exacerbated by the fact that firefighters in full bunker gear look and sound like monsters as well, so some kids won't respond to shouts for them, even from a couple feet away. This is part of why FF's carefully search burning houses room by room, feeling with their hands, and using a thermal camera if they can, often before they even start putting water on the flames. A lot of the outreach fire departments do to primary schools is to tell kids the importance of leaving a house rather than hiding, and to familiarize them with what a geared-up firefighter looks and sounds like.

The first episode of Denver Fire's "Rolling Hot" YouTube series touches on this, with an engine visiting a school to show young children what a firefighter is like in their gear, so they aren't afraid in the future. Here's a link if interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4e9CCfaMw0 (that part starts at about the 3:30 mark)

[Australian rePublic]

How old were the children?

around 7 or 8.

Specify. Those children could have been anywhere between 2-18

And why would a fire alarm system that could easily be deliberately triggered by a child? Like, are those actually a widespread thing in the USA? I've seen them on American TV, but are they actually as widespread as TV/movies would have you believe? Also, in case of an actual emergency, those alarms would be too hot and/or, you might not have time to pull them when trying to run away. I've seen one in Hawaii, I was wondering how it would be possible to run toward the alarm, possibly in the direction of the fire. (And in either case, I'm pretty sure it was out of reach of children)

sorry if you misunderstood, I meant calling by telephone/phone.

But in places with children, especially, you think they'd have automatic fire alarms

They may or may not have had automatic alarms, my point was that they went hiding instead of evacuating.

Fine

Not knowing the best way to evacuate, fine. But thinking that it's a good idea to stay inside a burning building? I don't think even most children are that dumb.

Would most adults even know the best way to evacuate? Me, personally, I'd just run for the door trying frantically to not burn my hand on the metal. Unless you're one of those families who live in bush fire prone areas and have a fire safety. In that case, it would almost certainly have been communicated to the kids

Also, option 3 (which is about how to put out fires, rather than how to evacuate properly) seems irrelevant to the premise.

Not necassirily, if you can put the fire out, no need to evacuate

[Apabeossie]

around 7 or 8.

Specify. Those children could have been anywhere between 2-18

I could go with 7.

Nice issue premise: the level of education citizens have when it comes to what to do in a natural disaster.

I live in a country that is right on the 'ring of fire'. A month or two ago we had an earthquake (not a direct hit, but it was certainly felt). I was amazed by the number of people who evacuated my apartment building by using the lift!

This topic is not taught in schools, there aren't any infomercials on TV, nothing.

There's some food for thought for you as you draft this issue.

Thanks a lot!

--
Now, if the issue topic is good enough, how can I improve my draft?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Not knowing the best way to evacuate, fine. But thinking that it's a good idea to stay inside a burning building? I don't think even most children are that dumb.

Actually, this is a huge problem. Children often will hide when a building is on fire, getting under beds, in closets, behind curtains, and otherwise trying to be unseen. To them, the fire is basically "a monster" to hide from. This is exacerbated by the fact that firefighters in full bunker gear look and sound like monsters as well, so some kids won't respond to shouts for them, even from a couple feet away. This is part of why FF's carefully search burning houses room by room, feeling with their hands, and using a thermal camera if they can, often before they even start putting water on the flames. A lot of the outreach fire departments do to primary schools is to tell kids the importance of leaving a house rather than hiding, and to familiarize them with what a geared-up firefighter looks and sounds like.

The first episode of Denver Fire's "Rolling Hot" YouTube series touches on this, with an engine visiting a school to show young children what a firefighter is like in their gear, so they aren't afraid in the future. Here's a link if interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4e9CCfaMw0 (that part starts at about the 3:30 mark)

I also thought this wasn't a significant issue till I read VH's response here.

To the author, I'd recommend incorporating some of this information to frame the dilemma, so that players receiving the issue also get to understand that it is actually a proper problem.

[Baggieland]

I think you have stumbled across two separate issues here!

First of all, finish off this current issue with A LOT of what Verdant Haven wrote about.

Secondly, if you want, you could write ANOTHER issue about...

I live in a country that is right on the 'ring of fire'. A month or two ago we had an earthquake (not a direct hit, but it was certainly felt). I was amazed by the number of people who evacuated my apartment building by using the lift!

This topic is not taught in schools, there aren't any infomercials on TV, nothing.

Not knowing the best way to evacuate, fine. But thinking that it's a good idea to stay inside a burning building? I don't think even most children are that dumb.

I also thought this wasn't a significant issue till I read VH's response here.

Just to clarify: the people using the lift in the earthquake were not children -- they were adults -- and they aren't dumb, as I mentioned before, they simply don't know because society has never taught them about this topic. Never talked about this when they went to school, no infomercials on TV, no nothing.

There would need to be a validity check so that it is only for nations with a small education budget.

Up to you of course, if you want to write a second issue on a similar topic.

[Apabeossie]

I think you have stumbled across two separate issues here!

First of all, finish off this current issue with A LOT of what Verdant Haven wrote about.

I'm not sure how to incorporate VH's thing naturally into the description (Also, doing it will make the issue too much about education). Will it be better to add it to the 1st option?

[Verdant Haven]

I think you have stumbled across two separate issues here!

First of all, finish off this current issue with A LOT of what Verdant Haven wrote about.

I'm not sure how to incorporate VH's thing naturally into the description (Also, doing it will make the issue too much about education). Will it be better to add it to the 1st option?

Here are some suggestions for incorporating that material - just thoughts! Use them or avoid them as you please :-)

My second draft this year, here we go.
Run, not Hide
Description: Yesterday, a house caught fire while two children were playing inside alone. The two children, not knowing what to do, went hiding in the closet right after calling the emergency service. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke. But the question is, how to prevent it from happening again?

I would probably specify the children as "young children." I'd have a neighbor notice the flames and call the fire service, while the kids just hide - that helps with the question of "what kid knows to call, but not to flee." Something like this might be useful:

Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two young children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted fire fighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. In the following press conference, fire chief @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@ remarked that this was a shockingly common behavior for children, and called for the government to intervene.

With that you've got the setup, the explanation of why it matters, and the specific impetus for government action. That lets us move quickly to the options.

Option 1: “This is clearly an educational issue.” says @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of the @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ fire department, holding a 100-page manual for fire safety. “If these kids had known how to evacuate, this would have never happened! @@LEADER@@, we should be teaching our children what to do when there’s a fire. That’s the only way to keep everyone safe!”

Result: children who ring fire alarms for fun claim they were “helping with fire safety education”.

Good concept here, but perhaps have the chief asking for something very specific. What goes in to teaching children what to do? It might be "increase funding for the fire department so we can engage in community education." It might be "We should come up with a mascot, a black and white spotted @@ANIMAL@@ perhaps, to teach children about safety!" It could even be "We need to run a series of public service announcements during kids cartoons to tell kids to get out when they see flames."(validity: television) Any number of things, but specific is good. A possible example:

"This is clearly an educational issue." says Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "If we teach kids to evacuate properly, things like this won't happen! @@LEADER@@, you should provide grants for first responders so we can send fire engines around to schools and teach kids to get out when they see a fire!"

For the effect line, what's something that follows as a humorous extreme? We're talking about telling kids to evacuate around flames, so let's play with evacuation. What are some example of kids encountering flames in daily life?

dinnertime in @@NAME@@ is marked by hundreds of children running to escape the flames of their parents' cooking ranges

Option 2: “Wait the parents left children ALONE at home??” cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ children behind @@HIM@@. “If those uncaring parents had never gone outside without their kids, this situation would have never happened! Children should have at least one adult protector with them, 24/7. It’s the only way to keep everyone safe.”

Result: parents going to work are often asked if their children are at home alone.

I like this position as an option - just need a bit of tweaking for humor and flow, and to stay focused on the subject of evacuation. For the speaker, they're dragging their kids along (presumably on some boring and unnecessary trip), and are accusing other parents of being uncaring. That's a ripe opportunity for irony. Perhaps they're literally dragging the kids along with a leash? Maybe the kids are crying or unhappy? Something basically pointing out that they're not a great parent either. For example:

"Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home??" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, dragging @@HIS@@ tired and unhappy children behind him on a leash. "If those uncaring parents hadn't left their kids home alone, this situation would have never happened! Children can't take care of themselves! They should have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep everyone safe."

For the effect, let's stir up some amusement. What's the actual upshot here? An adult protector 24/7 for any child. An adult has to be there. Who is the default babysitter most of us think of? Let's have a look at one possibility...

former teen babysitters gaze longingly as professional nannies live lives of luxury

Another option might be to have teenage parties always ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around (maybe with literal wet blankets, for smothering fires? Could be worth it)

Option 3: “As usual, technology has the best answer!” claims @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of a technology company. Allow me to introduce our new invention, the auto firefighter! This robot can spot any fires in the house and swiftly remove them with a fire extinguisher inside their body! That way we can suppress the fires easily and quickly. What could go wrong?
Result: families often have their birthday cakes sprayed with powder.

I feel like this option is entertaining, and the imagery of the effect line is hilarious, but it doesn't really address the issue of getting children out of danger. One still evacuates a building a suppression system - the system is to buy you time and reduce the damage. It also might start running in to complications with validities related to technology levels, AI/robot sentience and citizenship, etc. Funny as it is, I'd probably drop this one, since it doesn't fit the issue well enough to be worth the finagling required (in my opinion).

Option 4: “Allow me to ask me a question: Do we really need to care?” mumbles renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. “This happened clearly because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet! It’s their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money on these so-called “safety education”. People should know better.”

Result: thousands die each year from carelessness.

This seems like a good position to include, so I'd just suggest a few tweaks to the text for word usage and topical emphasis.

"Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

This of course is a great chance to make some ridiculous leaps of logic about what we can expect children to know. You could go all over the board with this, but just as an example:

newborn babies are expected to find their own way home from the hospital


Additionally, upon reflection, I think this whole issue probably needs a validity to avoid nations with vat-grown populations. That's simple enough though.

[Apabeossie]

I'm not sure how to incorporate VH's thing naturally into the description (Also, doing it will make the issue too much about education). Will it be better to add it to the 1st option?

Here are some suggestions for incorporating that material - just thoughts! Use them or avoid them as you please :-)

My second draft this year, here we go.
Run, not Hide
Description: Yesterday, a house caught fire while two children were playing inside alone. The two children, not knowing what to do, went hiding in the closet right after calling the emergency service. Fortunately, the children were rescued before they were suffocated by the smoke. But the question is, how to prevent it from happening again?

I would probably specify the children as "young children." I'd have a neighbor noticed the flames and call the fire service, while the kids just hide - that helps with the question of "what kid knows to call, but not to flee." Something like this might be useful:

Yesterday, a house in @@CAPITAL@@ caught fire while two young children were home alone. A neighbor spotted the blaze and alerted firefighters, who found the children in a closet trying to hide from the flames. In the following press conference, fire chief @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@ remarked that this was a shockingly common behavior for children, and called for the government to intervene.

With that you've got the setup, the explanation of why it matters, and the specific impetus for government action. That lets us move quickly to the options.

Option 1: “This is clearly an educational issue.” says @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of the @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ fire department, holding a 100-page manual for fire safety. “If these kids had known how to evacuate, this would have never happened! @@LEADER@@, we should be teaching our children what to do when there’s a fire. That’s the only way to keep everyone safe!”

Result: children who ring fire alarms for fun claim they were “helping with fire safety education”.

Good concept here, but perhaps have the chief asking for something very specific. What goes in to teaching children what to do? It might be "increase funding for the fire department so we can engage in community education." It might be "We should come up with a mascot, a black and white spotted @@ANIMAL@@ perhaps, to teach children about safety!" It could even be "We need to run a series of public service announcements during kids cartoons to tell kids to get out when they see flames."(validity: television) Any number of things, but specific is good. A possible example:

"This is clearly an educational issue." says Chief @@RANDOMLASTNAME_1@@, holding up a weighty fire safety manual. "If we teach kids to evacuate properly, things like this won't happen! @@LEADER@@, you should provide grants for first responders so we can send fire engines around to schools and teach kids to get out when they see a fire!"

For the effect line, what's something that follows as a humorous extreme? We're talking about telling kids to evacuate around flames, so let's play with evacuation. What is some examples of kids encountering flames in daily life?

dinnertime in @@NAME@@ is marked by hundreds of children running to escape the flames of their parents' cooking ranges

Option 2: “Wait the parents left children ALONE at home??” cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, with @@HIS@@ children behind @@HIM@@. “If those uncaring parents had never gone outside without their kids, this situation would have never happened! Children should have at least one adult protector with them, 24/7. It’s the only way to keep everyone safe.”

Result: parents going to work are often asked if their children are at home alone.

I like this position as an option - just need a bit of tweaking for humor and flow, and to stay focused on the subject of evacuation. For the speaker, they're dragging their kids along (presumably on some boring and unnecessary trip), and are accusing other parents of being uncaring. That's a ripe opportunity for irony. Perhaps they're literally dragging the kids along with a leash? Maybe the kids are crying or unhappy? Something basically pointing out that they're not a great parent either. For example:

"Wait, the parents left children ALONE at home??" cries @@RANDOMNAME@@, dragging @@HIS@@ tired and unhappy children behind him on a leash. "If those uncaring parents hadn't left their kids home alone, this situation would have never happened! Children can't take care of themselves! They should have at least one adult protector with them 24/7 who can get them out in an emergency. It's the only way to keep everyone safe."

For the effect, let's stir up some amusement. What's the actual upshot here? An adult protector 24/7 for any child. An adult has to be there. Who is the default babysitter most of us think of? Let's have a look at one possibility...

former teen babysitters gaze longingly as professional nannies live lives of luxury

Another option might be to have teenage parties always ruined by wet-blanket adults hanging around (maybe with literal wet blankets, for smothering fires? Could be worth it)

Option 3: “As usual, technology has the best answer!” claims @@RANDOMNAME@@, head of a technology company. Allow me to introduce our new invention, the auto firefighter! This robot can spot any fires in the house and swiftly remove them with a fire extinguisher inside their body! That way we can suppress the fires easily and quickly. What could go wrong?
Result: families often have their birthday cakes sprayed with powder.

I feel like this option is entertaining, and the imagery of the effect line is hilarious, but it doesn't really address the issue of getting children out of danger. One still evacuates a building a suppression system - the system is to buy you time and reduce the damage. It also might start running in to complications with validities related to technology levels, AI/robot sentience and citizenship, etc. Funny as it is, I'd probably drop this one, since it doesn't fit the issue well enough to be worth the finagling required (in my opinion).

Option 4: “Allow me to ask me a question: Do we really need to care?” mumbles renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. “This happened clearly because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet! It’s their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money on these so-called “safety education”. People should know better.”

Result: thousands die each year from carelessness.

This seems like a good position to include, so I'd just suggest a few tweaks to the text for word usage and topical emphasis.

"Allow me to ask a question: why do we care?" mutters renowned libertarian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "This clearly happened because the children were stupid enough to hide in the closet. It's their fault for not being smart enough! The government should stop wasting money trying to protect children - the kids should know better."

This of course is a great chance to make some ridiculous leaps of logic about what we can expect children to know. You could go all over the board with this, but just as an example:

newborn babies are expected to find their own way home from the hospital


Additionally, upon reflection, I think this whole issue probably needs a validity to avoid nations with vat-grown populations. That's simple enough though.

Thank you so much! I'll start working on my second draft soon.
just one question: Am I allowed to copy what you wrote into my issue? Or do I have to use my own writing?

[Trotterdam]

just one question: Am I allowed to copy what you wrote into my issue? Or do I have to use my own writing?

If Verdant Haven is okay with you using his stuff, then it's not against the site rules, though if you use more than a few words you should probably list him as a co-author (there is no dedicated field for this, so it's traditional to cram it in the "validity" field, though really you just need to put it anywhere the editors will see it).

The fact that he posted his writing in your thread probably means he's okay with you using it, but I suppose it can't hurt to double-check.

[Verdant Haven]

Thank you so much! I'll start working on my second draft soon.
just one question: Am I allowed to copy what you wrote into my issue? Or do I have to use my own writing?

Yes, please feel free.

Trotterdam's post above is accurate - I posted it in your thread as a suggestion, so I'm definitely ok with you using it. I always recommend giving it your own voice so that it really fits what you're thinking for the issue, but take as much or as little as you like from what I wrote. Thank you for asking :-)

[Apabeossie]

I just made my second draft. I don't really feel like dropping the third option yet, but I might later.

[Apabeossie]

sorry if I'm being too impatient but
ｂｕｍｐ

[Australian rePublic]

See, option 1 of this issue draft is what I'm talking about when I say that we need more issues about nations where the children are too poor to go to school

[Apabeossie]

See, option 1 of this issue draft is what I'm talking about when I say that we need more issues about nations where the children are too poor to go to school

hm?
----------
unrelated question: How long does it usually take for submitted issues to make it into the game? Just curious.

[Verdant Haven]

unrelated question: How long does it usually take for submitted issues to make it into the game? Just curious.

Not all submitted issues will see the light of day, though drafting on this forum dramatically increases the odds.

In my experience:

After being submitted, if they make it to the "maybe" pile, it is usually one to six months before I've heard from an editor who is interested in working with me on polishing it. That process in turn can be several more months, and isn't guaranteed to end with publication. For example, I had an issue that I was working with the editor on, they told me felt like it was in final form and ready... And then nothing for months. Finally received a message apologizing and saying they were retiring, and the issue would go back to the pile for somebody else. Never heard anything again. On the other hand, when an editor in the thread has specifically said they want to work on it and to send it in, the process has been as fast as about two months, and even faster than that for the 1234 contest.

The main heartbreak is that if you submit an issue and it doesn't get selected for the maybe pile, or it does but later gets deleted due to lack of interest, you never hear anything back. I've had issues I was super confident in just vanish in the haze (see above occurrence), and ones I'd given up hope for suddenly get picked up. Because of the sheer volume of submissions (many of which don't draft here and are apparently just plain useless) it isn't reasonable to expect the editors to personally contact people when issues don't make the cut.

[Bears Armed]

The main heartbreak is that if you submit an issue and it doesn't get selected for the maybe pile, or it does but later gets deleted due to lack of interest, you never hear anything back. I've had issues I was super confident in just vanish in the haze (see above occurrence), and ones I'd given up hope for suddenly get picked up.

And sometimes you submit one that's received favourable feedback, but then one by somebody else that enters use has a similar enough theme that concern about duplication would obviously block yours from being added as well...

[Apabeossie]

unrelated question: How long does it usually take for submitted issues to make it into the game? Just curious.

Not all submitted issues will see the light of day, though drafting on this forum dramatically increases the odds.

In my experience:

After being submitted, if they make it to the "maybe" pile, it is usually one to six months before I've heard from an editor who is interested in working with me on polishing it. That process, in turn, can be several more months and isn't guaranteed to end with publication. For example, I had an issue that I was working with the editor on, they told me felt like it was in the final form and ready... And then nothing for months. Finally received a message apologizing and saying they were retiring, and the issue would go back to the pile for somebody else. I never heard anything again. On the other hand, when an editor in the thread has specifically said they want to work on it and to send it in, the process has been as fast as about two months, and even faster than that for the 1234 contest.

The main heartbreak is that if you submit an issue and it doesn't get selected for the maybe pile, or it does but later gets deleted due to lack of interest, you never hear anything back. I've had issues I was super confident in just vanish in the haze (see above occurrence), and ones I'd given up hope for suddenly get picked up. Because of the sheer volume of submissions (many of which don't draft here and are apparently just plain useless), it isn't reasonable to expect the editors to personally contact people when issues don't make the cut.

Several months...Yeah I should stop being nervous about my issue. Otherwise I'll be repeating the [*no telegram* :( *telegram* :D *not an editor* D:] process every day...
-----------
Anyways, how does the current draft look(although it's mostly made out of VH's writing :P)?

[Baggieland]

Additionally, upon reflection, I think this whole issue probably needs a validity to avoid nations with vat-grown populations

Not sure about that. Vat-grown populations just mean that the population is created by technology as opposed to natural birth. While some nations might envision their vat people to emerge as adults, other nations might envision them to emerge as children. This definitely needs the no wild child policy though.

[Australian rePublic]

Additionally, upon reflection, I think this whole issue probably needs a validity to avoid nations with vat-grown populations

Not sure about that. Vat-grown populations just mean that the population is created by technology as opposed to natural birth. While some nations might envision their vat people to emerge as adults, other nations might envision them to emerge as children. This definitely needs the no wild child policy though.

Either case, those emerged adults will still have the knowledge base of children. Being grown up doesn't mean that you've had an education (my adult grandmother hasn't had an education, and she's in her 80's). Being grown up doesn't mean that you've learnt to speak human langauge, and doesn't mean you know how to deal with fires. In many cases, you'd be like a child, just less small

[Baggieland]

The vat policy only states that citizens are "born" in vats, and doesn't expand the definition beyond that. Some nations' citizens will come out of the vats as babies, others as adults, some will come out of the vats all educated, others with no education.