We could always just vote no on anyone Rabla chooses anyways
CJ, consider Rabla chooses somebody nobody asked for. Chances are high they will be elected. Why?
Itās 5 progressives to 4 radicals. You can bet the 4 radicals will vote YES, which means only one progressive needs to vote YES for it to pass. Thatās very risky.
And Pepe, your argument doesnāt counter mine. Youāre just saying āWhy didnāt you act like this before?ā Thatās has nothing to do with whether or not itās the safest option for the progressives right now.
1 Like
For all the radicals to vote yes is a very dangerous move. I highly doubt that will happen because it narrows down the amount of people to suspect.
1 Like
Leaving it up to Rabla is still avoiding the problem though. For his case, too, I would like him to act in a way that casts the least amount of suspicion on him.
Iāll resign from the nominations, but only on the condition that someone at least a little trustworthy gives their own nomination for Rabla to follow.
1 Like
Iāll agree with you this once, Yerian and DaBackpack could have done that, especially since they were the first ever president and chancellor, it wouldāve been risky for them to appear suspicious from the start.
Also @Pepe, Aspiretyās right, your argumentās not sounding so valid anymore, youāre clinging hard to an irrelevant fact. If youāre a radical and want to make Aspirety look suspicious or something, Iāll be very nice and advise you to use a different strategy. 
Sorry I havenāt been around often fam! I was playing on two separate sites which took up my time. After work I might read through everything and solve the game for us.
1 Like
Again, youāre not factually wrong. I agree with your logic.
I donāt agree with your attitude and find it very suspicious. The lack of consistency is what irks me, and if you thought the same way all steps of the way here, I wouldnāt be so bothered about it. But I am, and here we are.
For the last time. Rabla is already responsible for a a radical policy, so I have more reason to suspect him that any other president so far. If it were a neutral player who hasnāt done anything yet, then by all means, take the risk and weāll see where their allegiance lies. I donāt trust Rabla, so that risk is not worthwhile. I take risks, but I wonāt play a game Iām convinced Iāll lose. Moreover, I can trust myself, but not Rabla. My approach hasnāt changed, thatās your misunderstanding.
I wonāt repeat myself again. Go ahead and suspect me if you must.
Could someone else please nominate a candidate? This whole drawn out conversation is pointless if nobody makes a nominationā¦
I thought it doesnāt really matter because Rabla ultimately decides. He hasnāt even asked for a nomination. Also I wanted to know from Yerian and dabackpack what policies they got. We know a progressive policy was enacted but how many radical ones were in the mix to begin with?
1 Like
Yeah I think this is where we draw the line. I canāt be convinced of the trust that you offer (or anyone else, for that matter), so I treat you in the same regard that I treat rabla. Thus I feel that whatever logic applied to the previous round should similarly apply to this round. Itās hard to argue against someone who knows their own allegiance, whereas I am left in the dark.
This is a personal thing, not related to the game, but I believe itāll take a few more days until Rabla sees this topic. So all we can do until then is argue 
Bravo, re-stating the obvious. I know you donāt know my allegiance, and you probably never will. Thatās not what Iām arguing for. Iām explaining that my MO hasnāt changed since then.
The same logic applies as did back then. Donāt give the suspicious any more power to push an extremist victory, but give the not yet suspicious a chance. We have to decide on SOMEONE, and that priority should go to the least suspicious.
If you suspect me, thatās fine, donāt trust me then. But I donāt trust Rabla, and I donāt think you should either. Thatās why we, the ones suspicious of Rabla, have the right to nominate a candidate for Rabla to decide on.
But if nobody is interested in doing that, then fuck it, let the extremists win~
hi what now
I did originally want to nominate @Pepe to play off my apology but he dropped his character, or @cjlim2007 so he can finally participate outside of voting āNoā and making his own play, but he finally voted Yes so shrug.
I donāt really have any reason to go against the idea of being suggested a Chancellor, since I want to earn some trust back after Eisenās stunt/accident/unfortunate result/whatever. So if you guys want to pick one, Iāll do my best to make sure we can earn back some steps in a positive direction.
1 Like
Yes, thatās definitely the best option to regain some trust. But itās apparent that people here donāt trust me, so Iāll refrain from nominating anybody myself.
@Aspirety It was a pleasure working with you and Iām glad that everything worked out fine.
Just to confirm what Aspirety said, I got a radical and a progressive policy and I discarded the radical.
Since Rabla is fine with the suggestion that we choose the chancellor, I also want to nominate @DaBackpack. He seems like the most logical choice at this point.
2 Likes
I donāt want rabla to choose yerian or dabackpack because I want dabackpack to choose yerian. (Unless repeat governments arenāt allowed. is it allowed @Karifean?) Idk if you guys believe in self nomination or not. If no one wants to Chancellor job Iāll do it. I really want to know where Rabla 's allegiance lies and this will tell meā¦ Probably. Unless probability is weird. If self nomination is not a thing, you obviously donāt want to pick eisen so Iād choose sapphire, i find him more trustworthy than Pepe. I could be wrong though.
Sure they are. The only restriction on governmental candidates is that the president and chancellor of the previously (successfully) elected government cannot be nominated chancellor. Once another vote succeeds, the president and chancellor of the previous government are relieved from being banned from the chancellor position and the president and chancellor of the new government take their place. Though I should clarify, if a vote fails, the president and chancellor of the previous government are not relieved of their chancellor nomination ban. They will remain impossible to be nominated until another government actually succeeds in being elected.
Councilmembers, please, please. You are all thinking about this the wrong way. There are more progressive policies in place than radical. There is no immediate risk. We are winning.
I am slowly developing a mindset and strategy on to maneuver this game. It is not complete yet, but I will give you an immature version: If everything was really as simple as āyou can trust those who implement progressive policies, and you cant trust those who implement radical policiesā then this wouldnt even be a game. There are reasons for radicals to want progressive policies, and there are even reasons for progressives to want radical ones.
Im done with all this bickering about such ridiculous bullshit as āwho do we trustā. We have gained absolutely nothing since the last policy was installed almost two days ago. @Rabla, youāre the candidate. Do your job and pick someone.
1 Like
Since my days of travelling home delayed this game more than enough already, Iāll go ahead and officially nominate @cjlim2007 after all.
Iād assume heās itching for some influence, anyway.
If you have any problems, feel free to vote No. Iāll have to take one of the suggestions at that point.
1 Like
Ooh this is interesting. Also cool 200th post
1 Like