#5 Child Casino Shock

[Liliumtopia]

First off, I hope his is the right place, if it's not, apologies!

I've always felt that issue 5, Child Casino Shock, was not complete. The issue revolves around the problem of child gambling- with the two options being to either fully allow it, or to ban gambling outright. Aside from in a very specific puppet nation, neither of these options have ever appealed to me.

I believe what it is missing is a third option; that is, to allow gambling, but for adults only. It's a lot less drastic than banning it entirely, but allows a response that is against allowing children to gamble.

Thoughts?

[Dark Soulosius]

I think that is a great idea, this might be a way to do it:


Option 3: "Well what about the adults?" Exclaims @@RANDOMNAME@@, “I enjoy gambling myself, so of a few kids gamble, I loose all of my fun! I agree that children should not gamble, they dont know the value of things, but the adults are responsible.” She then says that “I dont want my children gambling, but if I want to I should be able to, and you might be able to give casinos a bit more funding, so they can gen more games?

[Jutsa]

Hello! Yes, you've come to the right forum to ask this.

You are certainly right that the issue does feel somewhat incomplete, with only two options that often times aren't super appealing,
but there are a couple of things to note as to why it's not had any modifications. I'll box it and you can skip it if you want a tl;dr version.

Firstly, it's one of the originals, and the editors don't like to touch the ones our all-mighty creator, Max Barry, set forth before us.
(ftr he's the guy who made this site and the book it's supposed to promote. idk what he does these days)

Secondly, while your idea seems very sensible, there is a slight problem with it.
In order to get this issue, you have to already let adults gamble without letting children gamble(I think, anyways),
which means that the option you propose is essentially the dismiss button.
Don't feel bad dismissing issues - they're considered a valid option irl, and if you don't like any other option/the issue itself or don't wanna change anything,
that'll suffice. Old issues often times do have options like that, but these days it's not considered standard practice for the sake of narrative length and repetition.

Plus, it's rare these days to add a really sensible compromise. People like to have a crazy compromise instead, these days.

Put simply, your idea certainly has merit, but for future reference, the dismiss button is essentially what you'd want to pick, and don't feel bad for picking it.
(unless that's all you do for every issue... maybe )

(Note to Shwe: I used no em dashes on account of I was trying to restart the program I use to make them and I somehow crashed it, so no em dashes or squashy derp faces all day)

Edit: Just read the AN's post. A third option is entirely viable if you can come up with something else to go with it, although, again, idk if the editors want to edit old issues.

[Liliumtopia]

I dismiss issues all the time, don't worry .

Didn't realise it was one of Max Barry's- though that makes sense, given the low number. Thanks!

[Phydios]

I dismiss issues all the time, don't worry .

Didn't realise it was one of Max Barry's- though that makes sense, given the low number. Thanks!

The first 31 issues in the game were all written by Max. I think there's a couple more, but I don't know the numbers.

[Jutsa]

M'pleasure.

[Trotterdam]

In order to get this issue, you have to already let adults gamble without letting children gamble(I think, anyways),

The issue specifically states that children are already gambling, though.

[Jutsa]

Oh, it does?

Huh... I stand corrected. I literally assumed otherwise but yeah now I really see why the issue feels incomplete >_>

You may be onto something, Liliumtopia... though, again, I have no idea if the editors would wanna touch that issue.

[Liliumtopia]

Oh, it does?

Huh... I stand corrected. I literally assumed otherwise but yeah now I really see why the issue feels incomplete >_>

You may be onto something, Liliumtopia... though, again, I have no idea if the editors would wanna touch that issue.

Guess we'll wait to see what they say- it's not really a big deal if it gets preserved for historical reasons.

[Ransium]

Yes, it would be a very different issue if written today. Jutsa’s summary of why we’re unlikely to change things reflects my feelings though.

[Liliumtopia]

Yes, it would be a very different issue if written today. Jutsa’s summary of why we’re unlikely to change things reflects my feelings though.

That pretty much clears it up then. Thanks!