[SUBMITTED - 2/5/2021] The Lowest Form of Wit

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

[description]@@RANDOMNAME1@@, your Minister of Health, became a target of criticism when @@HE1@@ responded to an opposition politician's colorful insults by saying "Maybe you should consider rinsing your dirty mouth with bleach. It might even help you get rid of that bad breath." But unfortunately some citizens took this 'advice' literally. Over night, thousands of people were hospitalized because they had accidentally swallowed bleach while gargling.

[validity]not autocratic, low intelligence

1. [option]"Look, it is not my problem that some people in this country are not the sharpest knives in the drawer," snorts @@RANDOMNAME1@@, throwing @@HIS1@@ arms up in exasperation. "Sarcasm, people! It shouldn't be so hard to understand. Even my 5-year-old niece gets the joke. Maybe it is time you invested some money in education so people could learn about rhetorical devices like sarcasm in their literature classes. Geez."

[effect]@@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ are getting armed and ready for a battle of wits

2. [option]"Nonsense, people holding public office need to have full accountability over their statements," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, a patient recently discharged from a local hospital after a gastric lavage, popping a mint-flavored bubble gum in your face. "If the Health Minister @@HIM1@@self comes up and says 'use bleach for bad breath', who am I to doubt @@HIS1@@ authority? I think we need to ban sarcasm and all forms of linguistic ambiguity from political discourse and prosecute this minister for jeopardizing our lives!"

[effect]@@DEMONYMPLURAL@@ find their politicians more boring than foreigners

3. [option]"Banning sarcasm? No way! This actually gives me a great idea!" exclaims @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Minister of Alternative Solutions, rubbing @@HIS@@ hands excitedly. "If anything, we should encourage our party members to use as much equivocation in their speeches as possible, so they have plausible deniability if a statement of theirs falls flat. Did you make an unfortunate remark about Bigtopians? Just say it was sarcasm, problem solved!"

[effect]authors of law proposals that get voted down claim that it had all been sarcasm anyway

[Lelscrep]

Another really solid one, Frieden. Honestly the only read feedback I can give is maybe some condensing of the description?

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Another really solid one, Frieden. Honestly the only read feedback I can give is maybe some condensing of the description?

Not sure how I could condense the description without losing the narrative. But rephrased the last sentence for better flow, as the previous version sounded too cumbersome.

[Fauxia]

Another really solid one, Frieden. Honestly the only read feedback I can give is maybe some condensing of the description?

Not sure how I could condense the description without losing the narrative. But rephrased the last sentence for better flow, as the previous version sounded too cumbersome.

You could probably preserve most of it without this sentence: What sent @@NAME@@ into a flurry was not @@HIS1@@ witticism, however, but rather that some people took this advice literally.

[Forlania]

Not sure how I could condense the description without losing the narrative. But rephrased the last sentence for better flow, as the previous version sounded too cumbersome.

You could probably preserve most of it without this sentence: What sent @@NAME@@ into a flurry was not @@HIS1@@ witticism, however, but rather that some people took this advice literally.

Agreed, you're on the right track.I think it would flow well if done similarly to:
"Unfortunately, some people took this advice literally. Over night, thousands of people were hospitalized because they had accidentally swallowed bleach while gargling."

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Not sure how I could condense the description without losing the narrative. But rephrased the last sentence for better flow, as the previous version sounded too cumbersome.

You could probably preserve most of it without this sentence: What sent @@NAME@@ into a flurry was not @@HIS1@@ witticism, however, but rather that some people took this advice literally.

You could probably preserve most of it without this sentence: What sent @@NAME@@ into a flurry was not @@HIS1@@ witticism, however, but rather that some people took this advice literally.

Agreed, you're on the right track.I think it would flow well if done similarly to:
"Unfortunately, some people took this advice literally. Over night, thousands of people were hospitalized because they had accidentally swallowed bleach while gargling."

OK, good suggestion. I trimmed that sentence.

[Australian rePublic]

The difference between this and what Donald Trump did was that this is clearly an insult, whilst Trump's actions could have been interpreted as legitimate Covid advice. "Go drink bleach you idiot" is different to "Bleach will cure the common cold"

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

The difference between this and what Donald Trump did was that this is clearly an insult, whilst Trump's actions could have been interpreted as legitimate Covid advice. "Go drink bleach you idiot" is different to "Bleach will cure the common cold"

Sure, I am aware of that. But it is not funny if a government official is as stupid as Trump and offers this as legitimate advice. It is just pathetic. In a desperate attempt to save his hide, Trump later claimed that his comments had been "sarcasm," but we know that this was not the case.

This issue tackles a different (and in my opinion, funnier) scenario - what if a person of authority really uses sarcasm and people just do not 'get' it?

[Australian rePublic]

The difference between this and what Donald Trump did was that this is clearly an insult, whilst Trump's actions could have been interpreted as legitimate Covid advice. "Go drink bleach you idiot" is different to "Bleach will cure the common cold"

Sure, I am aware of that. But it is not funny if a government official is as stupid as Trump and offers this as legitimate advice. It is just pathetic. In a desperate attempt to save his hide, Trump later claimed that his comments had been "sarcasm," but we know that this was not the case.

This issue tackles a different (and in my opinion, funnier) scenario - what if a person of authority really uses sarcasm and people just do not 'get' it?

Okay, carry on

[Baggieland]

'Maybe you should consider rinsing your dirty mouth with bleach. It might even help you get rid of that bad breath.'

Speech requires speech marks.

And you're giving the randomnames unnecessary numbers again! Only option 1 and the himself and his in option 2 require numbers.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

'Maybe you should consider rinsing your dirty mouth with bleach. It might even help you get rid of that bad breath.'

Speech requires speech marks.

And you're giving the randomnames unnecessary numbers again! Only option 1 and the himself and his in option 2 require numbers.

Fixed, thanks!