NATION

PASSWORD

[Submitted] March Against The Museum

A place to spoil daily issues for those who haven't had them yet, snigger at typos, and discuss ideas for new ones.
User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 995
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Liberal Democratic Socialists

[Submitted] March Against The Museum

Postby Bisofeyr » Mon Jun 17, 2024 11:01 am

THE ISSUE: There have been mass protests outside the @@CAPITAL@@ Museum of Science and History in response to a new exhibit regarding a historic genocide from Smalltopia. The primary concern is that there is no condemnation of the event accompanying the presented artifacts. Woefully unprepared to face public pressure, the Museum's administrator, @@RANDOMNAME@@, has come to your administration for help responding to the situation.
VALIDITY: Nation allows public protest.

OPTION ONE: "I have to say, this is a travesty," mutters your Undersecretary for Righteousness and Goodness, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "The Smalltopian Genocide is one of the most tragic events the world has ever faced, and it is disgraceful for any institution, let alone a museum, to showcase the tools of destruction used to perpetrate it. The public is right on this one, @@LEADER@@, this exhibit should not exist, and it must be taken down at once!"
EFFECT ONE: the museum is no place for sad things

OPTION TWO: "While I agree about the problem, I cannot agree with abandoning these artifacts altogether," says your Minister of Moderate Solutions, pantomiming tossing an artifact over their shoulder. "What the public really wants are statements of disapproval. Let's institute strong condemnations, wishes for such a tragic event to never happen again, trigger warnings, the whole shebang! That way we can preserve history while still maintaining our morals!"
EFFECT TWO: museums helpfully tell their patrons how to feel

OPTION THREE: "I'm sorry, has everyone else gone insane?" clamors ever-frustrated national historian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "It may not be pretty, but it's a part of history! If we stop people from seeing the horrors of the past, they are doomed to repeat them. I mean, what are people even talking about? Everyone is clearly too sheltered about the world, which shows the need for museums! You ought to fund more exhibits highlighting the horrors of the world, lest we follow in their footsteps."
EFFECT THREE: live munitions are prominently displayed in @@CAPITAL@@ museum

OPTION FOUR: "I, for one, don't see what has everyone's knickers in a bunch," says a well-dressed man you've never seen before, with a mildly unsettling smile. "The former regime in Smalltopia was one of glory, back when the righteous were in power and made others bend to their will. Much better than what we see these days, those protesters are a bunch of sniveling whiners. If you ask me, @@NAME@@ could take a page from old Smalltopia's book, and we could put those 'artifacts' to use instead of leave them sitting around!"
EFFECT FOUR: playing the devil's advocate is a legitimate academic perspective

THE ISSUE: There have been mass protests outside the @@CAPITAL@@ Museum of Science and History in response to a new exhibit regarding a historic genocide from Smalltopia. The primary concern is that there is no condemnation of the event accompanying the presented artifacts. Woefully unprepared to face public pressure, the Museum's administrator, @@RANDOMNAME@@, has come to your administration for help responding to the situation.
VALIDITY: Nation allows public protest.

OPTION ONE: "I have to say, this is a travesty," mutters your Undersecretary for Righteousness and Goodness, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "The Smalltopian Genocide is one of the most tragic events the world has ever faced, and it is disgraceful for any institution, let alone a museum, to showcase the tools of destruction used to perpetrate it. The public is right on this one, @@LEADER@@, this exhibit should not exist, and it must be taken down at once!"
EFFECT ONE: the museum is no place for sad things

OPTION TWO: "While I agree about the problem, I cannot agree with abandoning these artifacts altogether," says your Minister of Moderate Solutions, pantomiming tossing an artifact over their shoulder. "What the public really wants are statements of disapproval. Let's institute strong condemnations, wishes for such a tragic event to never happen again, trigger warnings, the whole shebang! That way we can preserve history while still maintaining our morals!"
EFFECT TWO: museums helpfully tell their patrons how to feel

OPTION THREE: "I'm sorry, has everyone else gone insane?" clamors ever-frustrated national historian @@RANDOMNAME@@. "It may not be pretty, but it's a part of history! If we stop people from seeing the horrors of the past, they are doomed to repeat them. I mean, what are people even talking about? Everyone is clearly too sheltered about the world, which shows the need for museums! You ought to fund more exhibits highlighting the horrors of the world, lest we follow in their footsteps."
EFFECT THREE: museums are just collections of instruments of war

OPTION FOUR: "I, for one, don't see what has everyone's knickers in a bunch," says a well-dressed man you've never seen before, with a mildly unsettling smile. "The former regime in Smalltopia was one of glory, back when the righteous were in power and made others bend to their will. Much better than what we see these days, those protesters are a bunch of sniveling whiners. We must preserve these relics of a bygone era, until we can return the world to its former glory!"
EFFECT FOUR: playing the devil's advocate is a legitimate academic perspective

THE ISSUE: There have been mass protests outside the @@CAPITAL@@ Museum of Science and History in response to an exhibit that showcases artifacts from a previous fascist regime in Smalltopia responsible for the genocide of several minority groups, presented with no accompanying condemnation of the genocide. Woefully unprepared to face public pressure, the Museum's administrator, @@RANDOMNAME@@, has come to your administration for help responding to the situation.
VALIDITY: Nation allows public protest.

OPTION ONE: "I have to say, this is a travesty," mutters your Undersecretary for Righteousness and Goodness, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "The Smalltopian Genocide is one of the most tragic events the world has ever faced, and it is disgraceful for any institution, let alone a museum, to showcase the tools of destruction used to perpetrate it. The public is right on this one, @@LEADER@@, it's time to help the world heal by removing these artifacts at once."
EFFECT ONE: the museum is no place for sad things

OPTION TWO: "While I agree about the problem, I cannot agree with abandoning these artifacts altogether," says your Minister of Moderate Solutions, pantomiming tossing an artifact over their shoulder. "We clearly just need stronger disclaimers about the exhibits we showcase! Clearly we must sometimes showcase bad things, but stating that the institution in no way supports the genocide is a step in the right direction."
EFFECT TWO: museums helpfully tell their patrons how to feel

OPTION THREE: "I'm sorry, has everyone else gone insane?" clamors ever-frustrated national historian. "It may not be pretty, but it's a part of history! If we stop people from seeing the horrors of the past, they are doomed to repeat them. I mean, what are people even talking about? We obviously need to put more funding into our museums so that people are able to see how important they are!"
EFFECT THREE: museums are just collections of instruments of war

OPTION FOUR: "Hol'i'righ'there," proclaims proud fascist sympathizer and genocide apologist as they stumble into the room, missing a tooth. "I hafta say, ya havit all wrooooong, @@LEADER@@... These art'facts were a parta one-a the most succ'ss'ful regimes in history! We must preserve'em in their rite-chiss glory!"
EFFECT FOUR: playing the devil's advocate is a legitimate academic perspective
Last edited by Bisofeyr on Fri Jun 28, 2024 8:03 am, edited 6 times in total.
If you are interested in using any drafts/writing of mine, please telegram me and I will give permission on a case-by-case basis. Good luck with your writing endeavors!

User avatar
Khardsland
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1896
Founded: Jun 10, 2022
New York Times Democracy

Postby Khardsland » Mon Jun 17, 2024 11:05 am

You might need to have a low Culture validity since only mid to highly cultured nations seem to care about museums
“When I feed the poor they call me a saint, but when I ask why the poor are hungry they call me a communist” -Hélder Câmara
"We liberated Europe from fascism, but they will never forgive us for it" -Marshal Zhukov

Equality > Freedom
From the river to the shining sea, the natives shall be free!
My LeftValues Score

All NS Policies canon except AI Personhood, Affirmative Action, Metricism, Human Sacrifice and AI Planning
A Class 1.14 nation according to this index
Population: 371,508
No NS Stats are considered canon

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 995
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Mon Jun 17, 2024 3:51 pm

Khardsland wrote:You might need to have a low Culture validity since only mid to highly cultured nations seem to care about museums

Maybe; I feel like a MOSH would be more correlated with high intelligence than high culture, as opposed to an art museum or similar.
If you are interested in using any drafts/writing of mine, please telegram me and I will give permission on a case-by-case basis. Good luck with your writing endeavors!

User avatar
Heboill Scheshia
Secretary
 
Posts: 38
Founded: Mar 08, 2024
Ex-Nation

Postby Heboill Scheshia » Mon Jun 17, 2024 6:40 pm

why is there no option on removing the artifacts from the museum?

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 995
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Mon Jun 17, 2024 7:39 pm

Heboill Scheshia wrote:why is there no option on removing the artifacts from the museum?

Uh, there is. Option 1: "The public is right on this one, @@LEADER@@, it's time to help the world heal by removing these artifacts at once."
If you are interested in using any drafts/writing of mine, please telegram me and I will give permission on a case-by-case basis. Good luck with your writing endeavors!

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 3523
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Wed Jun 19, 2024 8:02 am

This particular topic is one in which I'm pretty well versed, and I'm pleased to see it coming up in a draft. What I'd like to ask is whether it makes sense for the protests to be about the *existence* of these objects in a museum, or if it is some specific aspect of their *interpretation* that is causing protests? In my experience, pretty much everybody agrees that things of the nature you're describing belong in collections, but where a lot of ink has been spilled is over how they placed on exhibition.

Does the exhibition condemn the events? Does it seem to glorify them? Is the presentation perfectly neutral, leading people on both sides to claim it favors the other side, or that this is not something it is acceptable or possible to be neutral on? Are survivors of the original horror demanding that they be given editorial oversight? Are apologists and deniers of the horror claiming it's all fake? Are outside parties claiming they had some part in resolving the issue, and are angry that their side isn't being represented?

Based on your choice of topic, I'm guessing you may be familiar with the public blow-up about the exhibition of the Enola Gay by the US National Air and Space Museum, but if you're not, check that out – the end result is a thoroughly neutral presentation, and a lot of people pissed off on both sides. What's the actual source of conflict in this draft's incident?

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 995
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Wed Jun 19, 2024 5:02 pm

Verdant Haven wrote:This particular topic is one in which I'm pretty well versed, and I'm pleased to see it coming up in a draft. What I'd like to ask is whether it makes sense for the protests to be about the *existence* of these objects in a museum, or if it is some specific aspect of their *interpretation* that is causing protests? In my experience, pretty much everybody agrees that things of the nature you're describing belong in collections, but where a lot of ink has been spilled is over how they placed on exhibition.

Does the exhibition condemn the events? Does it seem to glorify them? Is the presentation perfectly neutral, leading people on both sides to claim it favors the other side, or that this is not something it is acceptable or possible to be neutral on? Are survivors of the original horror demanding that they be given editorial oversight? Are apologists and deniers of the horror claiming it's all fake? Are outside parties claiming they had some part in resolving the issue, and are angry that their side isn't being represented?

Based on your choice of topic, I'm guessing you may be familiar with the public blow-up about the exhibition of the Enola Gay by the US National Air and Space Museum, but if you're not, check that out – the end result is a thoroughly neutral presentation, and a lot of people pissed off on both sides. What's the actual source of conflict in this draft's incident?

I've updated this to hopefully address these issues, and have made it more about their lack of disclaimer of atrocities. The description is a bit of a mess right now but I'll keep chipping away at it to see if I can make something more coherent.
If you are interested in using any drafts/writing of mine, please telegram me and I will give permission on a case-by-case basis. Good luck with your writing endeavors!

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 3523
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Fri Jun 21, 2024 10:45 am

This scenario makes abundantly more sense to me – excellent adjustment.

As a note/reminder for edits, it is helpful if you retain old drafts under a spoiler, so it's easier to see what changes have been made!

Description: "A bit of a mess" perhaps, but really not too bad. Mainly it's just that the first sentence feels quite long. It may be easier to read and parse if it is divided in two, or otherwise punctuated into smaller clauses. The final sentence doesn't contribute much, so if you feel like the description gets too long after doing the above, you could look at paring this sentence down or removing it.

Option 1: I'm interested in clarity about what is meant by "removing these artifacts?" Are we talking removal from exhibition, or removal from the collections?

Option 2: Just as a thought (from personal experience), an additional suggestion might be the addition of "trigger warnings" for sensitive patrons.

Option 3: It looks like there was possibly meant to be a name macro in the dialogue tag. The final argument of this speaker is weak – provide more funding so that people can see how important museums are in what way? Maybe something about financing the display of other horrors, so that people are forced to learn from them?

Option 4: Looks like this one is also missing a name macro. As much as this speaker is a horrible human being, the aspect of the missing a tooth stumbles into the negative caricature category a bit much. To quote from the guide: "Do not present one speaker (who just so happens to agree with you…) as a debonair, intelligent, universally-loved expert, while presenting the opposition as a buck-toothed, ignorant, widely-mocked hick. Present opposing arguments the way supporters of those arguments would. Allow the player to then choose who is right or wrong."

This is several big steps in the right direction – keep it up!

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 995
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Fri Jun 21, 2024 12:35 pm

Verdant Haven wrote:This scenario makes abundantly more sense to me – excellent adjustment.

As a note/reminder for edits, it is helpful if you retain old drafts under a spoiler, so it's easier to see what changes have been made!

Description: "A bit of a mess" perhaps, but really not too bad. Mainly it's just that the first sentence feels quite long. It may be easier to read and parse if it is divided in two, or otherwise punctuated into smaller clauses. The final sentence doesn't contribute much, so if you feel like the description gets too long after doing the above, you could look at paring this sentence down or removing it.

Option 1: I'm interested in clarity about what is meant by "removing these artifacts?" Are we talking removal from exhibition, or removal from the collections?

Option 2: Just as a thought (from personal experience), an additional suggestion might be the addition of "trigger warnings" for sensitive patrons.

Option 3: It looks like there was possibly meant to be a name macro in the dialogue tag. The final argument of this speaker is weak – provide more funding so that people can see how important museums are in what way? Maybe something about financing the display of other horrors, so that people are forced to learn from them?

Option 4: Looks like this one is also missing a name macro. As much as this speaker is a horrible human being, the aspect of the missing a tooth stumbles into the negative caricature category a bit much. To quote from the guide: "Do not present one speaker (who just so happens to agree with you…) as a debonair, intelligent, universally-loved expert, while presenting the opposition as a buck-toothed, ignorant, widely-mocked hick. Present opposing arguments the way supporters of those arguments would. Allow the player to then choose who is right or wrong."

This is several big steps in the right direction – keep it up!

I've made some changes. For the fourth speaker, I have changed it to be more representative of modern-day fascism, dressed in a suit with slight condescension, and speaking mostly in dogwhistles. It feels a bit more accurate and like a fairer depiction.
If you are interested in using any drafts/writing of mine, please telegram me and I will give permission on a case-by-case basis. Good luck with your writing endeavors!

User avatar
Verdant Haven
Director of Content
 
Posts: 3523
Founded: Feb 26, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Verdant Haven » Mon Jun 24, 2024 3:08 pm

This is looking quite good - I have only two notable points of feedback:

- Effect 3: This effect line is a bit dull. The first couple effect lines feel nicely tongue-in-cheek, but this one is a bit dull and literal.

- Option 4: This is a *much* better presentation of a repugnant character. What remains for me is to ask what the government action is here, as distinct from in the previous two options which also preserve the artifacts in various ways. Does this guy want Leader to adopt the artifacts for use by the nation? To take inspiration from them and change the tone of governmental communications? What steps does selecting this option lead to? Accompanied by whatever your choice is there, the effect line can be adjusted accordingly.

User avatar
Bisofeyr
Diplomat
 
Posts: 995
Founded: Nov 26, 2023
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Bisofeyr » Mon Jun 24, 2024 7:33 pm

Verdant Haven wrote:This is looking quite good - I have only two notable points of feedback:

- Effect 3: This effect line is a bit dull. The first couple effect lines feel nicely tongue-in-cheek, but this one is a bit dull and literal.

- Option 4: This is a *much* better presentation of a repugnant character. What remains for me is to ask what the government action is here, as distinct from in the previous two options which also preserve the artifacts in various ways. Does this guy want Leader to adopt the artifacts for use by the nation? To take inspiration from them and change the tone of governmental communications? What steps does selecting this option lead to? Accompanied by whatever your choice is there, the effect line can be adjusted accordingly.

Alright, I've made some changes in these departments. I am proud of my new effect line 3, but it may need to be trimmed down as it feels a bit bulky right now.

The change to option four may be a bit drastic, but the idea is that a neo-Nazi would likely look at the Nazi Germany with the perspective that it is something modern society ought to emulate, instead of warding against, which is essentially what the first three options lean into.
If you are interested in using any drafts/writing of mine, please telegram me and I will give permission on a case-by-case basis. Good luck with your writing endeavors!

User avatar
National Coraland of Fishery
Envoy
 
Posts: 243
Founded: Nov 12, 2022
Democratic Socialists

Postby National Coraland of Fishery » Wed Jan 15, 2025 6:44 am

This has been selected and approved into a real issue, Congrats.
The Island Paradise and Aquarium Zoo of Fishery
"When the sun comes up...I couldn't tell where heaven stopped and the Earth began."
Current Parliament Member and Citizen of The Region That Has No Big Banks, Former Lt Gov of Covenant Shores, Former Founder and Sec of Law of The Global Union Consr, Former Vice President of Gravy


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Got Issues?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads