ISSUE IDEA: 5G-ood Reasons to Reject New Technology

[Australian rePublic]

[title] 5G-ood Reasons To Reject New Technology

[validity] must allow phones and internet, extremely low intelligence

[desc] After the latest 5G phone was recalled for supposedly spreading Covid to users, the public is demanding you to do something about it

[option] "This is a travesty!" complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, wearing a "no, I'm not vaxxed" t-shirt "Ever since I've started working at a technology warehouse three years ago, I’ve contracted Covid twice! TWICE! We can’t let this continue! Ban 5G technology!"
[effect] light has been blamed for spreading viral disease

[option] “Science has failed to establish a link between the 5th generation of mobile internet technology and the novel coronavirus.” Informs scientist @@RANDOMNAME@@, wearing a lab coat covered in blood. "In fact, the contrary has proven to be the case. 5G technology does not lead to spreading the SARS-COV-2 virus. We need to invest more in education to dispel such ludicrous claims!"
[effect] half the nation’s tax revenue has gone to fund the new CLAIMBUSTERS show on TV.

[option] "Imagine my shock!" announces well known conspiracy theorist Jo Pauly Whatnot, sticking "fake news" stickers over all your files. "Of coarse the establishment wants us to believe that faster internet gives you the flu, so that all the chin-diaper bedwetters can take something else from us. Meanwhile, your minister of health was seen carrying a 5G phone. Imagine my shock! Well Covid supposedly hurts kids less than adults, if Covid is as bad as the establishment claims it is, we should be giving kids more 5G phones to make sure that they get it and get over it quickly. After all, it can't be as bad for their brains than the mercury in the vaccines!"
[effect] kids are often punished for having too little screen time

[title] 5G-ood Reasons To Reject New Technology

[validity] must allow phones and internet

[desc] After the latest 5G phone was recalled for supposedly spreading Covid to users, the public is demanding you to do something about it
[option] “This is a travesty!” complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, wearing a “no, I’m not vaxxed” t-shirt “Ever since I’ve started working at a technology warehouse three years ago, I’ve contracted Covid twice! TWICE! We can’t let this continue! Ban 5G technology!”
[effect] light has been blamed for spreading viral disease

[option 2] “Science has failed to establish a link between the 5th generation of mobile internet technology and the novel coronavirus.” Informs scientist @@RANDOMNAME@@, wearing a lab coat covered in blood. “In fact, the contrary has proven to be the case. 5G technology does not lead to spreading the SARS-COV-2 virus. We need to invest more in education to dispel such ludicrous claims!"
[effect] half the nation’s budget has been spent on helping the big tech giants promote their products (a socialist version of this validity would be much appreciated)

[option] "Imagine my shock!" announces well known conspiracy theorist Jo Pauly Whatnot, sticking "fake news" stickers over all your files. "Of coarse the establishment wants us to believe that faster internet gives you the flu, so that all the chin-diaper bedwetters can take something else from us. Meanwhile, your minister of health was seen carrying a 5G phone. Imagine my shock! Well Covid supposedly hurts kids less than adults, if Covid is as bad as the establishment claims it is, we should be giving kids more 5G phones to make sure that they get it and get over it quickly. After all, it can't be as bad for their brains than the mercury in the vaccines!"
[effect] kids are often punished for having too little screen time

[Australian rePublic]

Bump

[The Vooperian Union]

for the option 2:

[option 2] “Science has failed to establish a link between 5th edition internet technology and sickness.” Informs scientist @@RANDOMNAME@@, wearing a dirty lab coat. “In fact, the contrary has proven to be the case. 5G technology does not lead to illness, but instead has been proven to increase access to potentially life-saving advice. We need to create a government program debunking these unfounded claims!"
[fallout 2] Taxes have been raised to fund the new CLAIMBUSTERS show on TV.

[Lelscrep]

I feel a nation would need a low intelligence validity to be recalling phones for spreading COVID.

[Socialist Ancomistan]

Sorry but the idea that 5G would spread Covid-19, or any virus for that matter, is not a valid issue description because it has been proven false and hardly anyone believes it. At least not enough for a large group of people to recall their own product. A minimum amount of truthiness is required for issue descriptions, so I’d focus on something more reasonable, like tech companies profiting off people’s data.

Some antivaxxer who sees 5G as a means of spreading Covid-19 (or whatever conspiracy they are into these days) is a good issue OPTION, but not a good issue DESCRIPTION

[Australian rePublic]

for the option 2:

[option 2] “Science has failed to establish a link between 5th edition internet technology and sickness.” Informs scientist @@RANDOMNAME@@, wearing a dirty lab coat. “In fact, the contrary has proven to be the case. 5G technology does not lead to illness, but instead has been proven to increase access to potentially life-saving advice. We need to create a government program debunking these unfounded claims!"
[fallout 2] Taxes have been raised to fund the new CLAIMBUSTERS show on TV.

Fixed thanks

[Australian rePublic]

I feel a nation would need a low intelligence validity to be recalling phones for spreading COVID.

Sorry but the idea that 5G would spread Covid-19, or any virus for that matter, is not a valid issue description because it has been proven false and hardly anyone believes it. At least not enough for a large group of people to recall their own product. A minimum amount of truthiness is required for issue descriptions, so I’d focus on something more reasonable, like tech companies profiting off people’s data.

Some antivaxxer who sees 5G as a means of spreading Covid-19 (or whatever conspiracy they are into these days) is a good issue OPTION, but not a good issue DESCRIPTION

Changed to extremely low intelligence, thanks!

[Australian rePublic]

bump

[Urine Town]

/bump again

[Candlewhisper Archive]

How about more than one sane option?

A good rule of thumb is to present an actual dilemma where the answer isn't obvious. Then present one fairly reasonable position, one fairly reasonable position opposed to the first, and one "third way" solution with craziness as needed on that one.

[Australian rePublic]

What if I go the opposite way and have NO sane options

[Verdant Haven]

What if I go the opposite way and have NO sane options

That tends to lead to complaints, and to most people simply dismissing the issue. That doesn't contribute to the game (and can actually hurt it, by supplanting an issue that people *are* interested in answering), so we try to avoid it.

[Smugquazland]

What if I go the opposite way and have NO sane options

That tends to lead to complaints, and to most people simply dismissing the issue. That doesn't contribute to the game (and can actually hurt it, by supplanting an issue that people *are* interested in answering), so we try to avoid it.

There are issues without sane options. I think there was one called “Doubleplusungood” which was literally 1984. There was also one on polygamy where it was either polygamy or banning homosexuality. That’s why I think there are exceptions to that rule.

[Trotterdam]

There are issues without sane options. I think there was one called “Doubleplusungood” which was literally 1984.

Sanity is relative. If your nation already has a weird policy, then its options that build on this policy that would be considered "sane", while its the "hey guys maybe we shouldn't have this policy" option that would be considered "insane". The issue you're referencing works because it's only ever given to nations that are already tyrannical enough that they would find those options sensible.

[Australian rePublic]

There are issues without sane options. I think there was one called “Doubleplusungood” which was literally 1984.

Sanity is relative. If your nation already has a weird policy, then it's options that build on this policy that would be considered "sane", while it's the "hey guys maybe we shouldn't have this policy" option that would be considered "insane". The issue you're referencing works because it's only ever given to nations that are already tyrannical enough that they would find those options sensible.

Maybe I could change this for odd nations?

[Juansonia]

Is there still a moratorium on COVID-19 references?

[Australian rePublic]

Is there still a moratorium on COVID-19 references?

If there were, I assume that CWA would have told me as such