[ACCEPTED - 1108] A Whisky Rebellion Brewing

[Verdant Haven]

Greetings, all. I've played a variety of nations on and off for a number of years, but I finally decided to take my first stab at writing an issue! I would definitely appreciate feedback from the more experienced folks here.

The name of the issue is, of course, a reference to The Whiskey Rebellion, with a play on the idea of home brewing (though yes, whiskey is distilled).

[TITLE] A Whiskey Rebellion Brewing

[DESCRIPTION] After several dozen citizens were hospitalized due to drinking from a contaminated batch of moonshine, the people have been at loggerheads over who should have the right to manufacture and sell spirituous beverages in @@NAME@@.

[VALIDITY] Invalid for nations that have prohibited alcohol


[CHOICE 1] "Let's be realistic here," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, President of the Manufacturing Alliance of Liquor Traders. "These home operations simply do not have the training, the experience, the equipment, or the political connections to be permitted to make their own whiskey! It's all well and good that they talk about freedom, but the members of my association paid good money for their manufacturing licenses, and we maintain the highest standards of quality and health. The government needs to protect us! People must not be allowed to make their own booze at home."

[FALLOUT 1] licensed bartenders prowl the streets at night to ensure no parties occur without their presence


[CHOICE 2] "This isn't just some kind of bathtub gin we're talking about," says devoted distiller @@RANDOMNAME@@, while monitoring the temperature and humidity of @@HIS@@ storage cellar using a phone app. "These are hand-crafted, artisanal, maker-made, environmentally-responsible, non-GMO, craft products, that are far better than anything put out by those big name distilleries! You can taste the difference! If some unscrupulous individual lets heavy metals leech in, or adds something unsafe, that's not the fault of we connoisseurs! The government needs to back off, and give us all the liberty to make what we want in the privacy of our own homes!"

[FALLOUT 2] many "craft whiskies" taste suspiciously like plumbing fixtures


[CHOICE 3] "The bracing effect of a strong drink is absolutely top-notch for getting through the day!" opines Ebrius Foppington, a bearded gentleman wearing a top-hat and monocle. "Why, I myself have several such drinks each morning, noon, and night! It helps keep the humors in balance, and makes socializing quite rather more tolerable. Really, we ought to require that everybody over the age of 10 make their own suds, and partake regularly to ensure they don't become phlegmatic. Bottoms up!"

[FALLOUT 3] classes are regularly interrupted by drunken children


[CHOICE 4] "Home distilling and compulsory drinking?" shrieks Citizens Against Drinking activist @@RANDOMNAME@@, clutching @@HIS@@ heart dramatically. "What kind of horrifying nightmare world are you trying to create? Did you know that, according to the Department of Made-Up Statistics, 47.2% of all crime is related to alcohol? Are you trying to increase that number? What @@NAME@@ needs is to remove alcohol not just from our homes, but from the whole nation! Enact prohibition - there can be no exceptions!"

[FALLOUT 4] hospitals scramble for new disinfectants following a ban on rubbing alcohol

I realize of course that there are a couple other issues that have the Prohibition option, so I don't know if that's overplayed, but since it seems to come up in every real-life conversation about alcohol-related issues, and has a major history in the US Constitution (as well as several counties in the US to this very day), it seems like it remains relevant. That, and I'm fond of the fallout text for that one :-D At any rate, I'm all ears!

[USS Monitor]

I just got home from work and can't think of any useful suggestions off the top of my head, but you've definitely got the writing ability for issues. Quality is not bad.

[Australian rePublic]

The problem with home brew is that there's a dangerous amount of alcohol which could lead to blindness, death and other alcohol-related diseases. I've never heard of hygine as a concern

[USS Monitor]

The problem with home brew is that there's a dangerous amount of alcohol which could lead to blindness, death and other alcohol-related diseases. I've never heard of hygine as a concern

It's not the amount of alcohol that causes blindness.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonshine

Poorly produced moonshine can be contaminated, mainly from materials used in the construction of the still. Stills employing automotive radiators as condensers are particularly dangerous; in some cases, glycol, products from antifreeze, can appear as well. Radiators used as condensers also may contain lead at the connections to the plumbing. These methods often resulted in blindness or lead poisoning[11] for those consuming tainted liquor.[12] This was an issue during Prohibition when many died from ingesting unhealthy substances. Consumption of lead-tainted moonshine is an important risk factor for saturnine gout, which is a very painful but treatable medical condition that damages the kidneys and joints.[13]

If you drink good quality vodka, that has a very high alcohol content, but won't cause blindness because it does not have contaminants.

[Candensia]

I don’t normally slap my stamp of approval on issue drafts, and I’m not going to do it here either.

What I will do, however, is slap my sticker of approval on it.

Good work on the formatting. I do enjoy a quality offering from a new colleague.

Do continue to recieve feedback on this one.

[Sacara]

[DESCRIPTION] The rise of home whiskey-making kits, and the spread of cheap homemade hooch, has the people at loggerheads over who has the right to manufacture and sell spirituous beverages in @@NAME@@.

What are the people at loggerheads doing?

[Verdant Haven]

Monitor and Candensia, thanks! I appreciate the kind words :-D

rePublic - Things like blindness from alcohol isn't related to the proof, but rather to the type. It's methanol that causes blindness and other horrible death-related conditions affiliated with Moonshining. It forms naturally in small quantities when you distill, and wise distillers discard the first quantities of hooch that they draw (called foreshots) to eliminate the majority of it. Dishonest moonshiners have been known to add tiny amounts to their product to try and give it more of a kick, but even an extra couple milliliters can be fatal, and is typically what is behind blindness and death one hears about resulting from illicit booze. Ethanol doesn't have that effect (though excessive consumption can certainly hospitalize a person). In ethanol products, the ill effects beyond drunkenness are typically because ethanol is a great solvent, and readily leeches all kinds of heavy metals like lead from shoddily built or improvised stills. If you ran water across your engine block and drank it, it wouldn't be bad because of anything inherent in water - it would be from the crap it picked up from where it flowed. Same issue with bad home spirits.

Sacara - to "be at loggerheads" over something is a phrase meaning "to argue stubbornly" over that thing. It carries implications of a long drawn-out argument where neither aide is willing to yield, and neither side has won any ground.

[Verdant Haven]

I tweaked the wording of Options 1 and 3 to more clearly reflect the hygeine concerns as being specifically related to bad equipment and adulterated product - hopefully that is more acceptable now :-D

Any further feedback?

[Palos Heights]

Well hello there, looks like we've got a nice little issue here don't we?

For option 1, I like where you're going in terms of painting the picture of what's going on. Instead of vegan-friendly, I'd throw in non-GMO instead since that's a better buzzword for what you're going for. I wouldn't change much about option 1, except I think you should actually push the bathtub gin bit in your fallout. You've got the perfect set up with the devoted distiller saying that it isn't bathtub gin you're talking about, so the fallout being something like, "it is not uncommon to find bits of porcelain in home-brewed spirits". Something like that would work perfectly for that option and be a great punchline for the set-up in option 1, while still being in-line with the wacky and unexpected outcome that NS issues tends to produce.

Option 2 is solid, though I think you should name the gentleman and use that for a reference right there. Nice to follow-up a wordier option with a shorter one.

Option 3, I'd reword the fallout, maybe something like, "the party don't start till the licensed bartender walks in". I feel like you could take it a step further though, maybe find an even crazier situation where a bartender would be legally required to be present. I have no idea how feasible it'd be for your issue, and I'm not suggesting you put it in there by any means, but for example, under this law a licensed bartender might be required at a Catholic mass to assist the priest in watering down the Communion wine. Love the M.A.L.T. throw in.

Option 4 you might want to be careful with because some nations have banned cars. I think either add that validity in there or change the group name and you should avoid any issues with that down the line.

All-in-all, great first issue!

[Verdant Haven]

Well hello there, looks like we've got a nice little issue here don't we?

For option 1, I like where you're going in terms of painting the picture of what's going on. Instead of vegan-friendly, I'd throw in non-GMO instead since that's a better buzzword for what you're going for. I wouldn't change much about option 1, except I think you should actually push the bathtub gin bit in your fallout. You've got the perfect set up with the devoted distiller saying that it isn't bathtub gin you're talking about, so the fallout being something like, "it is not uncommon to find bits of porcelain in home-brewed spirits". Something like that would work perfectly for that option and be a great punchline for the set-up in option 1, while still being in-line with the wacky and unexpected outcome that NS issues tends to produce.

Ahhhh, yes, "non-GMO!" I knew I was forgetting one of the meaningless buzzwords I usually joke about. Thanks! Added. Also, I like your suggestion regarding the fallout, and have modified accordingly.

Option 2 is solid, though I think you should name the gentleman and use that for a reference right there. Nice to follow-up a wordier option with a shorter one.

Thanks! I wasn't quite sure about how much should be "hard coded," but as I'd already gone with male and wasn't using a name, I may as well put the name in. Introducing Ebrius Foppington, a distinguished gentleman of leisure, whose first name happens to mean "drunk" in Latin.

Option 3, I'd reword the fallout, maybe something like, "the party don't start till the licensed bartender walks in". I feel like you could take it a step further though, maybe find an even crazier situation where a bartender would be legally required to be present. I have no idea how feasible it'd be for your issue, and I'm not suggesting you put it in there by any means, but for example, under this law a licensed bartender might be required at a Catholic mass to assist the priest in watering down the Communion wine. Love the M.A.L.T. throw in.

Glad you liked the MALT :-D I did step up the absurdity of the fallout description, though didn't really change its meaning too much. I like the idea of people in their own home having to hire a bartender to pour their drinks as about the most extreme extension of this I could think of, but there was definitely room to enhance to absurdity level of the descriptors. Thoughts?

Option 4 you might want to be careful with because some nations have banned cars. I think either add that validity in there or change the group name and you should avoid any issues with that down the line.

Good catch! I've dropped a D and CADD is now CAD (which is what I was hoping to imply anyway).


Thank you for the excellent feedback.

All-in-all, great first issue![/quote]

[Palos Heights]

Just a heads up, but I'd try not to delete your previous drafts when doing feedback. It can cause confusion for people coming in and reading your draft, and it also deprives people from seeing what you had there previously. Sometimes things you had before were better than new things, since not all feedback is created equally.

One way to do that is to spoiler your previous drafts! You can do that by using the spoiler brackets and having (in brackets) spoiler= DRAFT x, where x is the number of that draft, leading things off.

Love the new fallout lines and the changes. Good stuff here.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Good premise and writing. You're concise, have a good sense of humour, and excellent pacing to your writing.

I think I'd be definitely interested in editing and publishing this one, and hope that you'll be a regular contributor.

[Verdant Haven]

Good call again, Palos. Thanks! I'll bear that in mind for future drafting purposes :-D

@Candlewhisper - Praise from Caesar! Thank you very kindly :-D With that feedback from you, USS Monitor, and other experienced folks here, I think I'll submit this shortly! I'll give it another day or two for suggestions or catching of errors, and will put it in the system :-D

[Sacara]

I know CWA has already commented that he likes the premise, but I have a nitpick with the description. I feel like there isn't any reason as to why this is now an issue? DId a report come out showing the rise in in-home whiskey making, or did an accident occur? Are beer companies upset at declining sales? I feel like it should be stated why in fact this is now an issue.

Overall, I like this draft. Keep up the good work.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

For sure, even though I like it, I'd rather see it stay in draft for at least 2-3 weeks before submission. You can miss feedback by submitting too early.

[Verdant Haven]

@CWA - Fair enough! I'm still learning the process here :-) I shall hold off and continue to take feedback!

@Sacara - I'll work on some tweaks for why this is an issue at this time in particular :-D

[Chan Island]

This is a wonderful issue.Very good first try.

[Verdant Haven]

Thanks, Chan!

I've slightly edited the description text to suggest a bit more of why this issue has come to the government's attention at this time. By having big industry lobbyists involved, it should be more apparent how it made it on to the legislative plate!

[Sacara]

My quite the route I was thinking, but not awful.

My personal suggestions is something bad happens to someone who made their own whiskey at home, and that case has brought it to the national headlines.

Besides the description, the rest of the issue looks good.

[Verdant Haven]

Hadn't even thought of that. Perhaps something like:

"After several dozen citizens were hospitalized due to drinking a contaminated batch of moonshine, the people have been at loggerheads over who should have the right to manufacture and sell spirituous beverages in @@NAME@@."

[Sacara]

That’s what I had in mind. Looks good.

[Verdant Haven]

I like how that looks, and it fits the modified effects line of option 1 a bit more than the current one. I'll give it an update.

[Sacara]

Each option is a little on the longer side of things, but nothing unreasonable. You make up for this by having good quality and you make the most of your words. Probably going to be my last comment on this draft -- nice work Verdant.

[Krogon]

I don't think the options fit the description now. It just kind of jumps to arguing about why their whiskey is better. That doesn't solve the main problem: who should be allowed to.

[Verdant Haven]

While I feel that the choices still do reflect the issue, I can see that the choice narrative didn't flow as nicely with the reworded description. I have re-ordered them, placing former Option 3 (the MALT representative) first, and bumping the others down. That ensures the first option is a direct and rational reply to the specific wording of the description, while the new Option 2 (home distiller) now works better as a reply to the MALT rep than it did before.