iLikeToSnipe

We have two parties, status quo and pluralism. We have effectively negotiated a compromise that I'd be interested in extending tomorrow as well. A status quo member will have access to the vault and a pluralism issue will be passed. We all need to cooperate and vote for the soft pluralism option for this to work. On the next day we can switch it up. A pluralist member gets access to the vault and the soft status quo is passed. After we've raised stability and seen what's happened we can figure out where to go from there. Neither side wants abolishment, we need to work together for now to keep us from both losing. Anybody opposed to this for no good reason without offering any kind of counter-plan is highly suspicious in my eyes.

It looks like we're going with political, but I have no preference right now. I think political has a 1-2 vote lead.

##nominate Jeod

If Jeod agrees I will change my nomination to him.

I do want to investigate her, but not today. It almost seems like a gambit to get the investigation onto her. I'd be fine with investigating Retaliation today and her tomorrow.

I believe that there is no cost to changing the target of your nomination/investigation.

I'll be back to post in 2-3 hours. I do think we need to start working together and making deals rather than skulk around and only vote for our party. In other words, negotiate and compromise.

If you mean using me as a middleman for somebody else's deal, I definitely agree. But I would have no "ill will" against you if you turn the deal down and vote whatever you want to. I'm not going to strong arm you into doing something you don't want to.

Do you feel it's too one-sided one way or the other? Or you just have a better idea/application?

Time to investigate that political guy and reform Retaliation...

Then if you are against abolishment I suggest you vote for pluralists today.

Because the only voting options are for status quo and pluralism I think you're on the right track. Since Jeod claims to be status quo and is pushing radical votes I would think that causing a civil war is not the victory condition for abolishment, it's what they need to do in order to have a chance at winning.

You are correct... I'm tired and I've been out of it trying to catch up after power outage. Take your time to think it over. To make sure there's no confusion, here's what I'm proposing: I will nominate you for the vault If you get access to the vault you will vote for whatever the soft pluralism option is You have no risk at all with me backing out since you will vote after your nomination (hopefully) succeeds. But I will find out tonight what you voted for and I will target you during the next day or night phase with an action if you agree to this and fail to meet your end of the bargain.

If I win the game with 10 points and you win the game with 9 points who's the winner between the two of us?

Out of game/character comment: I'm playing to win all of my conditions because I think that will make the game more fun. We could all cooperate, gang-up, beat the other side, and be content with silver; but that wouldn't really be fun.

What you're saying is that if your radical counterpart wins you get second place and do not win first place. I'm willing to cooperate with status quo and even with radicals for the time being, but we should be under no illusion about what will have to happen down the road. I'm guessing that there's a wild card (i.e. the abolishment side) that would force us to work together so that they don't win and we all lose. Otherwise, everything would turn into a deadlock of stubbornness. If Jeod is willing to help me with his vote then I'm willing to help him with a nomination.

So he says. Yet he is a doctor with a seemingly radical agenda. Again, don't think of this as mafia. If you aren't part of the radical status quo you aren't on his team.

Stuff that will only affect him.

I wouldn't be offering this deal if I didn't have a way of verifying it or making sure there are repercussions for breaking it. I had planned to start doing something like this on the next day, but if Jeod is going to propose it then I'm willing to go forward. @Jeod I've got about 1 hour before I head out. If you want to go forward with voting for soft pluralism let me know before that and I will nominate you. Be warned though, if you fail to follow through on your end I will find out and you will have consequences to face.

How about soft pluralism?

It seems that a few people aren't getting this... Also, good to know that you need an evidence key to frame somebody. In that case I'm not really sure who should go into the vault.

Since we can't seem to agree on military or economy I propose that we try some political reform. ##reform political As for who should be in the vault, I'd also like to propose that nobody gets access. With what I understand, access to the vault opens it up for framing others. I'm more comfortable with Orange and FRAYDO keeping each other accountable. ##nominate nobody I'm also in favor of investigating Retaliation. If he's a thief, I want to know more about him. And if he's suspicious he'll be unable to steal anything. ##investigate Retaliation

So you're saying there's a 1% chance you're neither of those three...

As I've said earlier, we need to stop playing like this is mafia. There are mafia elements, but this is a political game.