NationStates Jolt Archive

Here it is...what do y'all think?
I sure hope this one sees the light of day...I think it's a funny one...lotsa of good, funny choices to make funny things happen...

Name: Cable Execs Get A "Charge" Out Of Proposed Execution Network

Description: Cable executives are excited about a propsal to launch a new pay-per-view channel, Execution TV, which will broadcast live executions.

Validity: Not valid for nations with no death penalty.

Options
[option] It's a win-win situation, exclaims cable executive @@RANDOMNAME@@ Citizens will pay to watch executions, and the extra tax revenue raised will help defray the government's cost in executing criminals say the excited execs. "We could even allow the victims' family members to actually pull the switch on these criminals," adds community activist @@RANDOMNAME@@ "This would give the families a chance for revenge! The death penalty isn't about deterrence, it's about revenge!"
[effect]Execution TV has begun broadcasting live executions. Crime victims families routinely pull the switch for broadcasted executions.
[stats]economy increases slightly

[option]Cable executive @@RANDOMNAME@@ has another idea: "Why have the victims' families pulling the switch? What happens if they are a bunch of bed-wetting, namby-pamby liberals who don't want to pull the switch? The government is missing a great potential source of revenue here - why not have the government start a lottery for people who want to pull the switch? We could make it into a huge hit show, 'Who Wants To Fry A Criminal' and think of all the money that would flow to the government! With that kind of money flowing to the government, the decent citizens could also be given a tax cut!"
[effect]Execution TV has the highest ratings in the nation with it's hit show "Who Wants To Fry A Criminal," and citizens are enjoying a recent tax cut as government coffers are filling up rapidly from record "execution lottery" ticket sales.
[stats]economy increases moderately, public depravity increases, Civil Rights decrease moderately, taxes decrease slightly

[option] "That is the most revolting idea I have ever heard!" screams human-rights activist @@RANDOMNAME@@ Only a truly depraved person would want to watch that sort of trash...to say nothing of the kind of person who would actually PAY for a chance to pull the switch! That's beyond sick! Besides, the death penalty is barbaric and wrong. We murder people to send the message that murder is wrong! The death penalty should be abolished!
[effect] The death penalty has been abolished. Crime is on the rise.
[stats] Economy decreases slightly, Civil Rights increase slightly. Crime rate rises slightly

[option]"Why stop there?" asks staunch conservative activist @@RANDOMNAME@@ "ALL crime should result in the death penalty! More lottery sales, and less crime! So what if a few people get wrongly convicted? Obviously, they were not good, upstanding citizens, or they wouldn't have stood accused in the first place! Even if they WERE innocent of the crime they were convicted of, they must've been guilty of something, or God would not let them be executed!"
[effect]Pickpocketers are regularly executed on live television.
[stats] Economy increases slightly, crime rate decreases slightly, civil rights decrease significantly

[option]"Obviously this is a very emotially-charged debate," notes criminologist @@RANDOMNAME@@ "Execution TV is a bad idea, but that doesn't mean the death penalty itself is! And we should be very careful to only execute people actually guilty of very serious crimes."
[effect] The death penalty is administered only for very serious crimes.
[stats]Crime decreases slightly.

I'm guessing a couple of the options might end up with more effects.

Option 1: What you listed, crime down, compassion way down, health might go down, happiness might go up.

Option 2: What you listed, plus compassion would really tank, happiness might go up.

Option 3: What you listed, compassion up.

Option 4: What you listed (possibly a large crime drop, and civil rights into the tank), Poli freedoms down (as protestors would likely be killed too), compassion is utterly nuked, happiness takes a nose-dive too.

Option 5: What you listed, minor drop in compassion (possibly), happiness up.

This issue has really improved, and I rather like it. Good variety of choices there, even though only two are remotely sane (#3 & #5). Of course, I can see people with evil nations gleefully picking #4. :)

Erm.. what he ^^ said.

I can't really add anything useful to the stats discussion since The Most Glorious Hack has covered it rather comprehensively, methinks, so I'll just fix your grammar and spelling instead. :)

Option 1:
"It's a win-win situation![/b] exclaims cable executive @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Citizens will pay to watch executions, and the extra tax revenue raised will help defray the government's cost in executing criminals." "We could actually even allow the victims' family members to pull the switch on these criminals," adds community activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. (fixed split infinitive, added missing full stops, added quotation marks, added exclamation mark)
[effect]Execution TV has begun broadcasting live executions and the families of crime victims routinely pull the switch for broadcasted executions

Option 2:
Cable executive @@RANDOMNAME@@ has another idea: "Why have the victims' families pulling the switch? What happens if they are a bunch of bed-wetting, namby-pamby liberals who don't want to pull the switch? The government is missing a great potential source of revenue here -- why not have the government start a lottery for people who want to pull the switch? We could make it into a huge hit show: 'Who Wants To Fry A Criminal?'. Think of all the money that would flow to the government! The decent citizens could then be given a tax cut!"
[effect]Execution TV has the highest ratings in the nation with its hit show "Who Wants To Fry A Criminal?" and citizens are enjoying a recent tax cut as government coffers are filling up rapidly from record "execution lottery" ticket sales

Option 3:
"That is the most revolting idea I have ever heard!" screams human-rights activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Only a truly depraved person would want to watch that sort of trash...to say nothing of the kind of person who would actually PAY for a chance to pull the switch! That's beyond sick! Besides, the death penalty is barbaric: we murder people to send the message that murder is wrong! The death penalty should be abolished!
[effect] the death penalty has been abolished and crime is on the rise

Option 4:
"Why stop there?" asks staunch conservative activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "ALL crime should result in the death penalty! More lottery sales, and less crime! So what if a few people get wrongly convicted? Obviously, they were not good, upstanding citizens, or they wouldn't have stood accused in the first place! Even if they WERE innocent of the crime they were convicted of, they must've been guilty of something, or God would not let them be executed!"
[effect]pickpocketers are regularly executed on live television

Option 5:
"Obviously this is a very emotially-charged debate," notes criminologist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Execution TV is a bad idea, but that doesn't mean the death penalty itself is! We should be very careful only to execute people that are actually guilty of very serious crimes."
[effect] the death penalty is administered only for very serious crimes


Yeah, I know. Pedantic. I do this for a living (editing copy, not being pedantic...although most people probably don't see the difference...)

I really like the issue, though. Good stuff!

Again the death penalty is not a good deterrant, there is no evidence to suggest it is any better than prison at deterring criminals and many believe that to stop crime you must deal with the social issues that cause it rather than punish those who commit it. The issues should not show any political bias yet at the moment this one clearly favours those who support the death penalty (or at least supports the myth that the death penalty will reduce crime) The crime rate should not increase if the death penalty is banned, nor should it decrease with the other options. Instead for the pro death penalty options things like whatever the moral decency UN category does should increase while civil rights/compassion or whatever should decrease. The opposite for the anti death penalty option.

I'm guessing a couple of the options might end up with more effects.

Option 1: What you listed, crime down, compassion way down, health might go down, happiness might go up.

Option 2: What you listed, plus compassion would really tank, happiness might go up.

Option 3: What you listed, compassion up.

Option 4: What you listed (possibly a large crime drop, and civil rights into the tank), Poli freedoms down (as protestors would likely be killed too), compassion is utterly nuked, happiness takes a nose-dive too.

Option 5: What you listed, minor drop in compassion (possibly), happiness up.

This issue has really improved, and I rather like it. Good variety of choices there, even though only two are remotely sane (#3 & #5). Of course, I can see people with evil nations gleefully picking #4. :)

Ah, but that was the point of adding option #4. gotta give them evil guys something to have fun with. I could also see a family member of a victim of a violent crime picking #1. Evil nations might also pick #2...but I agree, 3 and 5 ARE the only SANE choices here, but since when did totally sane issue options make for an issue that got vetted and accepted in this game? I'm trying to get published here! :lol:

Erm.. what he ^^ said.

I can't really add anything useful to the stats discussion since The Most Glorious Hack has covered it rather comprehensively, methinks, so I'll just fix your grammar and spelling instead. :)

Option 1:
"It's a win-win situation![/b] exclaims cable executive @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Citizens will pay to watch executions, and the extra tax revenue raised will help defray the government's cost in executing criminals." "We could actually even allow the victims' family members to pull the switch on these criminals," adds community activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. (fixed split infinitive, added missing full stops, added quotation marks, added exclamation mark)
[effect]Execution TV has begun broadcasting live executions and the families of crime victims routinely pull the switch for broadcasted executions

Option 2:
Cable executive @@RANDOMNAME@@ has another idea: "Why have the victims' families pulling the switch? What happens if they are a bunch of bed-wetting, namby-pamby liberals who don't want to pull the switch? The government is missing a great potential source of revenue here -- why not have the government start a lottery for people who want to pull the switch? We could make it into a huge hit show: 'Who Wants To Fry A Criminal?'. Think of all the money that would flow to the government! The decent citizens could then be given a tax cut!"
[effect]Execution TV has the highest ratings in the nation with its hit show "Who Wants To Fry A Criminal?" and citizens are enjoying a recent tax cut as government coffers are filling up rapidly from record "execution lottery" ticket sales

Option 3:
"That is the most revolting idea I have ever heard!" screams human-rights activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Only a truly depraved person would want to watch that sort of trash...to say nothing of the kind of person who would actually PAY for a chance to pull the switch! That's beyond sick! Besides, the death penalty is barbaric: we murder people to send the message that murder is wrong! The death penalty should be abolished!
[effect] the death penalty has been abolished and crime is on the rise

Option 4:
"Why stop there?" asks staunch conservative activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "ALL crime should result in the death penalty! More lottery sales, and less crime! So what if a few people get wrongly convicted? Obviously, they were not good, upstanding citizens, or they wouldn't have stood accused in the first place! Even if they WERE innocent of the crime they were convicted of, they must've been guilty of something, or God would not let them be executed!"
[effect]pickpocketers are regularly executed on live television

Option 5:
"Obviously this is a very emotially-charged debate," notes criminologist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Execution TV is a bad idea, but that doesn't mean the death penalty itself is! We should be very careful only to execute people that are actually guilty of very serious crimes."
[effect] the death penalty is administered only for very serious crimes


Yeah, I know. Pedantic. I do this for a living (editing copy, not being pedantic...although most people probably don't see the difference...)

I really like the issue, though. Good stuff!

Excellent! With your skills, maybe YOU should be vetting some issues. We could get more out faster! Thanks. Hopefully, whoever eventually gets my issue to vet will take your corrections, and Hack's suggestions and incorporate them into this.

I noticed one other misspelliing myself...in the description part, I misspelled "proposal" as "propsal"

Again the death penalty is not a good deterrant, there is no evidence to suggest it is any better than prison at deterring criminals and many believe that to stop crime you must deal with the social issues that cause it rather than punish those who commit it. The issues should not show any political bias yet at the moment this one clearly favours those who support the death penalty (or at least supports the myth that the death penalty will reduce crime) The crime rate should not increase if the death penalty is banned, nor should it decrease with the other options. Instead for the pro death penalty options things like whatever the moral decency UN category does should increase while civil rights/compassion or whatever should decrease. The opposite for the anti death penalty option.

Had to throw the conservatives a bone there. I agree with you about the death penalty not being a deterrent, hence option number one.

It is not easy to write an issue that has absolutely NO political slant whatsoever. in fact, I don't think it is possible. So I wrote options that slanted both ways equally. The crime rate rising thing was my bone toss to the conservatives to slant that option their way, so that my option 2 slanting left would not be so offensive, and possibly get the issue flicked off the pile.
Again...a matter of trying to balance off the options...so that there are basically 2 right-center slant options, 2 left-center slant options, and one more centrist.
I imagine whoever vets the issue may take your issues to heart and edit my issue a bit. That is what happens when issues are vetted. They are sometimes changed slightly. To improve them. My goal here was to at least give te vetters something they could work with, and not necessarily something that was completely perfect right off. No one is going to think every issue, or even most of them are perfect.
Example, I don't like ANY of the choices on "Violent Violetists" so I dismiss the issue when I get it.
Likewise, I don't trust the choices in the issue that involves an option abiut releasing an untested A.I. into the computer net. I don't like any of the choices offered, and don't trust what some of them might do to my country, so I dismiss that one.
See how that works?

Excellent! With your skills, maybe YOU should be vetting some issues. We could get more out faster! Thanks. Hopefully, whoever eventually gets my issue to vet will take your corrections, and Hack's suggestions and incorporate them into this.

Thank you. I was actually thinking of submitting a proposal to the mods to volunteer in assisting in the issue process (even if it's only at the final "approved, but let's fix the spelling" stage). I've noticed there are other people on the board that would like to do so as well. Maybe I'll start a thread about it later today.

As for the death penalty, I have to say that over the years my mind has changed a number of times as to what is a better option (and, I guess, I'm still undecided). We (South Africa) used to have the death penalty, which, in retrospect, seemed to be a deterrent. At the time I was anti it. We now no longer have the death penalty, and crime has risen remarkably, but it's probably only a small factor in a much larger socio-economical-political issue (the start of which goes back decades) that now involves overcrowded prisons and repeated releasing of dangerous prisoners (hey...I've just had an idea for an issue!), well, those that haven't escaped already, anyway, a demoralised, understaffed, underequipped, and undertrained police force, and a lack of respect for life. The right (and, now, increasingly the left) are now screaming for the death penalty to be reinstated, certainly for major crimes such as murder and rape (which, sadly, seem to be our national pastime).

Um...I lost track of what I was trying to say (it happens a lot). I guess it's just that the death penalty and its results aren't black and white and there really seems to be no proof either way. I really liked this issue (seeing the effects and stats, especially Hack's comments) because it is well rounded for most view points, including the "evil" NS nations.

Had to throw the conservatives a bone there. I agree with you about the death penalty not being a deterrent, hence option number one.

It is not easy to write an issue that has absolutely NO political slant whatsoever. in fact, I don't think it is possible. So I wrote options that slanted both ways equally. The crime rate rising thing was my bone toss to the conservatives to slant that option their way, so that my option 2 slanting left would not be so offensive, and possibly get the issue flicked off the pile.
Again...a matter of trying to balance off the options...so that there are basically 2 right-center slant options, 2 left-center slant options, and one more centrist.
I imagine whoever vets the issue may take your issues to heart and edit my issue a bit. That is what happens when issues are vetted. They are sometimes changed slightly. To improve them. My goal here was to at least give te vetters something they could work with, and not necessarily something that was completely perfect right off. No one is going to think every issue, or even most of them are perfect.
Example, I don't like ANY of the choices on "Violent Violetists" so I dismiss the issue when I get it.
Likewise, I don't trust the choices in the issue that involves an option abiut releasing an untested A.I. into the computer net. I don't like any of the choices offered, and don't trust what some of them might do to my country, so I dismiss that one.
See how that works?

It still seems very pro death penalty, there are enough right wing issues already, do not feel you need to deliberatly make this one biased in favour of the right just because there are a few loud extremists who get annoyed about it.

Why would banning the death penalty see a decrease in the economy? Ok so maybe the tv thing would lead to an increase but not doing something is hardly going to make it get worse. The only way economy could get worse would be if you also included something about rehabilitation programmes/some other government funded crap.

Crime does not increase with the abolition of the death penalty. What is the point of submitting an issue you know to be inaccurate? Would you make an issue where accepting evolution theory meant you got a crap economy and your people hated you in order to appease fundamentlist christians?

Oh and it is not two left two right, it is one left, four right. How is that balanced?

[option] "That is the most revolting idea I have ever heard!" <snip> Crime rate rises slightly

[option]"Why stop there?" <snip>crime rate decreases slightly

[option]"Execution TV is a bad idea, but that doesn't mean the death penalty itself is!<snip>
[stats]Crime decreases slightly.
The death penalty is statisticallly shwn to have no effect one way or the other on crime rates, so options 3&5 should have that changed, and or option 4, think for a sec. You have just been wrongly accused of a crime that you are likely to be execcuted for. Why not commit a slew of crimes when you are ot on bail, and then attack the judge and the jury.

Option 4 should have crime rise significantly.

No such thing as a perfect issue. Tis up to the Mods to "vet" the issues, and perhaps whoever does will take some of your suggestions too mind.

I only did the best I could.

I didn't ask people to pick it apart and complain about it...I only was asking, do you like the CONCEPT?? Maybe I shoulda been clearer. Seems people usually only speak up when they got something to bitch about. :(

No such thing as a perfect issue. Tis up to the Mods to "vet" the issues, and perhaps whoever does will take some of your suggestions too mind.

I only did the best I could.

I didn't ask people to pick it apart and complain about it...I only was asking, do you like the CONCEPT?? Maybe I shoulda been clearer. Seems people usually only speak up when they got something to bitch about. :(

Well its an interesting idea but it needs work. It is not the concept behind it I have problems with (though it is a little silly) it is the results of the options which seem to clearly favour using the death penalty. I do not know how much editing the mods do but if you know there is something wrong with it then you should at least correct that before submission.

I didn't ask people to pick it apart and complain about it...I only was asking, do you like the CONCEPT?? Maybe I shoulda been clearer. Seems people usually only speak up when they got something to bitch about. :(
Yeah, I like the general concept.

No such thing as a perfect issue. Tis up to the Mods to "vet" the issues, and perhaps whoever does will take some of your suggestions too mind.

I only did the best I could.

I didn't ask people to pick it apart and complain about it...I only was asking, do you like the CONCEPT?? Maybe I shoulda been clearer. Seems people usually only speak up when they got something to bitch about. :(

Well its an interesting idea but it needs work. It is not the concept behind it I have problems with (though it is a little silly) it is the results of the options which seem to clearly favour using the death penalty. I do not know how much editing the mods do but if you know there is something wrong with it then you should at least correct that before submission.

Sure, but it is already submitted, and nothing I can do about it now...that's my point.
I was merely asking if people liked the concept...because I so badly want an issue of mine to see the light of day... :)