Secret Hitler (Voting)

[Aronis]

Drench if I elect u do u promise 2 ban all guns and never pass any facist policies that would lead to the president having the power to kill somebody?

Also, what's your stance on abortion?

[Drench]

the more the merrier

[Drench]

ok legitimately so what are we doing here
should i just nominate someone after everyone checks in or what

[Aronis]

I am trying to ask you srs questions regarding what your policies would be as president and your lack of legitimate answers has me srsly concerned about your qualifications for this position.

[Drench]

australia is a scary and left place aronis

[ForWhomTheJellyRolls]

Maybe when srs questions are asked, you'll get srs answers.

[shos]

ok
so MR. President, why did you choose Drench?

[JDGA]

You should probably just nominate someone, yes!

[shos]

Come on people, start talking!

[MrTrow]

@shos: any preferred topic?
You were the first to request the game to start.
Second to actually post when it did, directly after an 'i want to be investigated'-post
You then asked the d10, why it rolled 3 and now are asking others to get this started.

Since you effectively declared the 'i want to be investigated'-post, not worth discussing.
Who should Drench nominate as chancellor and why?
My other pick: lillith, her assistance in BEs tactic might be null-read stuff, but at least she is doing something
Picks on which i will consider voting nein: BE 'gut says play mafia', followed by doing nothing and you (see above)

[shos]

the d10 was choosing the PRESIDENT. then, the president chose Drench by himself, without random dice. Now we have to vote if we agree or disagree for Drecnh-counsellor.

[lilith2013]

Er no...? Drench is the presidential candidate and needs to choose a chancellor to run with.

[ForWhomTheJellyRolls]

I think Drench should just nominate whoever he feels like. Maybe someone whose presidential turn is coming up. We might be able to suss out whether trusting someone in an upcoming round is a good idea.

[MrTrow]

literally everything in that post is incorrect.

Current Phase

:

Election, Chancellor Nomination

Presidential Candidate

Drench

ok legitimately so what are we doing here
should i just nominate someone after everyone checks in or what

Reads like, 'must double down'-approach.

@Drench: i changed my mind, if you pick shos as your chancellor i WILL vote 'nein'

@shos:
who did you think the president was?
why did you skim half the posts sofar?
why didn't you provide your input on the 'should drench be counesllor'-question?

ow and ofcourse:
the questions in my previous post.

@lilith (Pretty much at everyone):
Who should Drench nominate as chancellor and why?

[shos]

because they don't matter yet, lol

and this is wierd on forum lol

[MrTrow]

Come on people, start talking!

because they don't matter yet, lol

[Blackberry]

And there we have it.
Our first request for facist-policies.
Still, gut says town.

Berry: given how we can't know we can trust the president doing the investigating, why you?

Uhhh, if you're referring to me in your second sentence, no I am not advocating that we INTENTIONALLY select racist-policies. I have seen this game played out enough to know it's practically a guarantee that we will get 3 fascists policies.

I want investigated because I want a TOWN to be cleared and I also am cognizant enough that I can come off incredibly strongly and would prefer to be cleared than people be afraid to elect me because they have no solid reason to know what I am. If someone investigates a Facsist, although it'll be useful, it won't help us at all when we're in our dire situation after 3 Facsists policies to know who to trust, whereas having a guaranteed town investigated at least gives us a basis on whom to trust at that point in the game.

Also, I think the (logical) way to do the investigating is person A investigates person B, then person C investigates person B, if Both A & B are liberals then Person B is practically double-confirmed whereby still clearing "two people" and the only way this method falls apart.

[Blackberry]

THAT SHOULD SAY FACIST NOT RACIST - lololololol #Fail

[shos]

NOMINATE: SHOS

[MrTrow]

Yup, the entire post was referencing you.
This was also spot-on the response i expected. (and i agree with the C inspects B approach)
Despite it being exactly the 'hey look i am town, because i want to be investigated'-claim (and actually presents a case why you would want this outcome even as a facist) it looked like.
the gut-town read still stands

You do realize you've just excluded yourself from the position of president, until at least 2 fascist policies are in place right?
as for 'FACIST NOT RACIST', the 2 aren't really mutually exclusive.

My last question directed at 'Pretty much at everyone', is also directed at you.

[lilith2013]

I think we should go down the line (Drench picks me as Chancellor, then I pick Piggy as Chancellor, and so on). It would give us the most connection between ballots and voting patterns, at least until we have a better idea of who could be a fascist.

[Aronis]

Ummm no. I object. That's a dumb plan that clearly benefits lilith the most. If you pick her I am voting no.

[lilith2013]

Obviously yes I want to be elected, because I know I'm a liberal and it allows me to figure out whether the other person in my ballot is too. At least I'm trying to contribute here. Do you have a better idea?

[shos]

people should start nominating and all

[MrTrow]

@lilith: I too am against this particular structure.
Any structure that cuts short the phase that has the widest deadline for a reason basically,
but especially a structure that instantly results in 2 failed elections for a single objectionable candidate.

You want to know who supports which government? ASK.
eg.

@lilith (Pretty much at everyone):
Who should Drench nominate as chancellor and why?

@shos: i know you have decided to not read posts and not give any reasoning what so ever for any preferred groups of government.
But could you at least: read the fuckin rules.