I really like the story, but I don’t like the ABC format.

A is too scrambled – you mean to say that there’s one or more genie in the area with malicious predatory intent towards humans.

C is a conclusion (A and B are the analysis that get you to the conclusion C). The way its written A, B, and C are all elements of the same list.

There’s also some tense consistency issues, but those are less important.

Thanks very much for your feedback (the tense inconsistency was me being indecisive; I noticed it first time around but didn’t bother to change it. Should be better now).

As for the list, I cleaned up A. In essence it’s meant to imitate the bureaucratic jargon of lawyer language, but I could see how it became a case of imitative fallacy. I’ll work on it.

In case I do end up making a large change, here’s the original text for people who want to see the editing process (I know I usually do, so earlier comments make sense):

*"A) There is either one genie increasing activity in the immediate area; or (A.1) multiple genii working together or alone with malicious predatory intent towards humans.

B) Tradition holds that genii tricks are bound only insofar as their masters can anticipate and guard against them.

C) Most people are too stupid and horny to do this."*

A contract lawyer who specializes in supernatural bargains is a brilliant idea! He could have a lucrative side business in negotiating demon/human soul transactions and fairy adoptions.

I disagree with Mark, maybe better to italicize the entire line, not just the line title. This is fucking funny, I laughed my ass off. Rogue Genii ala Ponzi scammers. There could be, as a sequel, a rating agency, like Angies list, and so forth.