[SUBMITTED] Friends Close, Enemies Closer.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

This is a proposed policy reversal issue for Proportional Representation, as per the Writers Block sticky. Please don't take this as the job now being done - until an issue gets published, any suggested topic on the list is open for all to compete for.

So the premise here is that if you have proportional representation, then coalition governments are pretty much par for the course. This issue is about deciding to ally with someone whose beliefs differ from your own.

The validity criteria are theoretically meant to establish that the potential allies aren't representative of your current politics. The only options that don't have validity criteria are the last option (the reversal choice) and the first option (which instead has its validity moved to the issue as a whole, and thus ensures that the issue always has at least TWO choices). Making the first option always appear also lets me introduce the chocolate cake as the narrative framing device.

4th Draft:

[title]Friends Close, Enemies Closer.

[desc]The General Election result is in, and your party has outperformed all others, but is only in a position to form a minority government. However, a coalition with a smaller and less popular party would let you form a majority government, but only if you can agree to a deal.

[validity] democracy with proportional representation

[option validity] capitalist nation
[option]"Give us a slice of the action, and we can make a deal," smiles Communist Party Chair @@randomname@@, placing a large chocolate cake in front of you, and cutting @@HIM@@self the merest slither. "Look, we're not expecting you to end capitalism overnight, we just want a little bit more wage equality and regulation of the free market. A little cake for everyone. That's pretty fair, right?"
[effect]@@LEADER@@ seems to wear red a lot these days

[option validity] non-capitalist nation
[option]"Give us a slice of the action, and we can make a deal," smiles Capitalism Party Char @@randomname@@, placing an enormous chocolate cake in front of you, and cutting @@HIM@@self a decent wedge of it. "Look, we're not expecting you to end communism overnight, we just want a little bit of economic freedom, and the opportunity for private wealth. A bigger share of the cake for folk like me, but in return, we make sure the cake itself keeps getting bigger. That's pretty reasonable, right?"
[effect]a frenzy of stock trading has followed @@NAME@@'s return to capitalism

[option validity] Immigration NOT banned
[option]"You don't need them! You don't need someone polluting the purity of your policies!" spits @@DEMONYM@@ Nationalist @@randomname@@, seemingly disgusted by the brown-coloured dessert in front of him. "All we ask is that you close the doors to those immigrants. They're stealing our jobs and using up our resources! Put @@NAME@@ first! Then, we'll promise to support you on every other thing."
[effect]a giant 'No Entry' sign is being erected at the borders of @@NAME@@

[option validity] Government has fairly high spending on welfare
[option]"Why not ally with a party that has no interest in ruling?" asks Libertarian @@randomname@@, who has brought @@HIS@@ own strawberry cupcake, and doesn't look keen to share. "All we want is for you to shrink government a little bit. Just halve government spending in general, ring-fencing just the police and the military, as morally this is all we need government for. Then, we can support your new, leaner administration."
[effect]the government seems embarrassed to be seen to be governing

[option validity] has a national faith and some religious freedom
[option]"Heaven knows who is your best ally," comments @@FAITH@@ First party leader @@randomname@@, drawing a holy symbol on the cake's icing with @@HIS@@ finger, "and as it turns out, I've got heaven on speed-dial. Increase spending on promoting @@FAITH@@ and in recognising our state religion, and you'll have our support."
[effect]many believe that @@LEADER@@ rules by divine right

[option validity] has a poor environment
[option]"Do you really need to make a deal with extremists?" scolds Green Party representative @@randomname@@, calculating the carbon footprint of the proffered pudding. "Look, all we want is a little more environmental regulation of big business, and a little green thinking. Unlike those other lunatics, our approach will actually make you MORE popular with the mainstream."
[effect]manufacturers are annoyed that they're not allowed to dump industrial waste into the nearest lake any more

[option validity] has WMDs and a large military
[option]"If you're looking for people that play well with others, then look no further," suggests Pacifist Party member @@randomname@@, taking the moral high ground by declining cake despite @@HIS@@ audible hunger-induced tummy rumbles. "Give peace a chance. Cut back military spending a little, disarm your WMDs and become a better person. Like me." @@HE@@ smiles at you smugly.
[effect]each infantry rifle come pre-loaded with a single white carnation in the barrel

[option]"Just an observation, but by my calculations, if we had a more traditional first-past-the-post system then you'd be in a position right now to form a 65% majority government, with no coalition needed," comments Party Whip @@randomname@@, helping @@HIM@@self to the remaining eight slices of cake. "Let's go back to that system, and we can send these extremist parties back to the fringes of politics where they belong."
[effect]@@LEADER@@ has declared that too much democracy gets in the way of sensible leadership

[option]"Oh... no cake left," says one of your glummest but most loyal MPs, trying to gather up some of the crumbs "Well, I know it's a bit of a downer, but why don't we just form a minority government? We can seek support on individual bills and votes as we go. I mean, there's always someone who wants something, and if you're careful you can always cut a deal somewhere."
[effect]@@LEADER@@ often must plea for votes from members of other parties in order to pass important legislation

3rd draft:

[title]Friends Close, Enemies Closer.

[desc]The General Election result is in, and your party has outperformed all others, but is only in a position to form a minority government. However, a coalition with a smaller and less popular party would let you form a majority government, but only if you can agree to a deal.

[validity] proportional representation

[option]"Power is like a cake," says loyal MP @@random_name@@, placing a large chocolate cake on the table and cutting it into unevenly sized slices. "If we form a minority government, we get almost half the cake, and if we need to get people on side to pass a key vote, we just offer them a little bit of cake, or maybe just a few crumbs. I mean sure, you run out of cake sooner or later, and you get mess everywhere but...Hmm. This metaphor seems to have broken down. Anyway, minority government. Let's go with that."
[effect]@@LEADER@@ often must plea for votes from members of other parties in order to pass important legislation

[option validity] capitalist
[option]"Give us a slice of the action, and we can make a deal," smiles Communist Party Chair @@randomname@@, selecting a piece of cake that is ever so slightly larger than the average. "Look, we're not expecting you to end capitalism overnight, we just want a little bit more wage equality and regulation of the free market. That's pretty fair, right?"
[effect]@@LEADER@@ seems to wear red a lot these days

[option validity] Immigration NOT banned
[option]"If you're forced to make deals all the time, you'll end up polluting the purity of your policies!" spits @@DEMONYM@@ Nationalist @@randomname@@, seemingly disgusted by the brown-coloured dessert in front of him. "On the other hand, strike a one-off deal with us and we'll support you throughout your administration. All we ask is that you close the nation to immigrants. They're stealing our jobs and using up our resources! Put @@NAME@@ first! Then, we'll give you your majority government."
[effect]a giant 'No Entry' sign is being erected at the borders of @@NAME@@

[option validity] Government has fairly high spending on welfare
[option]"Why not ally with a party that has no interest in ruling?" asks Libertarian @@randomname@@, who has brought @@HIS@@ own strawberry cupcake, and doesn't look keen to share. "All we want is for you to shrink government a little bit. Just halve government spending in general, ring-fencing just the police and the military, as morally this is all we need government for. Then, we can support your new, leaner administration."
[effect]the government seems embarrassed to be seen to be governing

[option validity] has a national faith and some religious freedom
[option]"Heaven knows who is your best ally," comments @@FAITH@@ First party leader @@randomname@@, drawing a holy symbol on the cake's icing with @@HIS@@ finger, "and as it turns out, I've got heaven on speed-dial. Increase spending on promoting @@FAITH@@ and in recognising our state religion, and you'll have our support."
[effect]many believe that @@LEADER@@ rules by divine right

[option validity] has a poor environment
[option]"Do you really need to make deals with extremists?" scolds Green Party representative @@randomname@@, calculating the carbon footprint of the proffered pudding. "Look, all we want is a little more environmental regulation of big business, and a little green thinking. Unlike those other lunatics, our approach will actually make you MORE popular with the mainstream."
[effect]manufacturers are annoyed that they're not allowed to dump industrial waste into the nearest lake any more

[option validity] has WMDs and a large military
[option]"If you're looking for people that play well with others, then look no further," suggests Pacifist Party member @@randomname@@, taking the moral high ground by declining cake despite @@HIS@@ audible hunger-induced tummy rumbles. "Give peace a chance. Cut back military spending a little, disarm your WMDs and become a better person. Like me." @@HE@@ smiles at you smugly.
[effect]each infantry rifle come pre-loaded with a single white carnation in the barrel

[option]"Just an observation, but by my calculations, if we had a more traditional first-past-the-post system then you'd be in a position right now to form a 65% majority government, with no coalition needed," comments Party Whip @@randomname@@, helping @@HIM@@self to the remaining eight slices of cake. "Let's go back to that system, and we can send these extremist parties back to the fringes of politics where they belong."
[effect]@@LEADER@@ has declared that too much democracy gets in the way of sensible leadership

2nd draft:

[title]Friends Close, Enemies Closer.

[desc]The General Election result is in, and your party has outperformed all others, but is only in a position to form a minority government. However, a coalition with a smaller and less popular party would let you form a majority government, but only if you can agree to a deal.

[validity] capitalist democracy with proportional representation

[option]"Give us a slice of the action, and we can make a deal," smiles Communist Party Chair @@randomname@@, placing a large chocolate cake in front of you, and cutting @@HIM@@self the merest slither. "Look, we're not expecting you to end capitalism overnight, we just want a little bit more wage equality and regulation of the free market. That's pretty fair, right?"
[effect]@@LEADER@@ seems to wear red a lot these days

[option validity] Immigration NOT banned
[option]"You don't need them! You don't need someone polluting the purity of your policies!" spits @@DEMONYM@@ Nationalist @@randomname@@, seemingly disgusted by the brown-coloured dessert in front of him. "All we ask is that you close the doors to those immigrants. They're stealing our jobs and using up our resources! Put @@NAME@@ first! Then, we'll promise to support you on every other thing."
[effect]a giant 'No Entry' sign is being erected at the borders of @@NAME@@

[option validity] Government has fairly high spending on welfare
[option]"Why not ally with a party that has no interest in ruling?" asks Libertarian @@randomname@@, who has brought @@HIS@@ own strawberry cupcake, and doesn't look keen to share. "All we want is for you to shrink government a little bit. Just halve government spending in general, ring-fencing just the police and the military, as morally this is all we need government for. Then, we can support your new, leaner administration."
[effect]the government seems embarrassed to be seen to be governing

[option validity] has a national faith and some religious freedom
[option]"Heaven knows who is your best ally," comments @@FAITH@@ First party leader @@randomname@@, drawing a holy symbol on the cake's icing with @@HIS@@ finger, "and as it turns out, I've got heaven on speed-dial. Increase spending on promoting @@FAITH@@ and in recognising our state religion, and you'll have our support."
[effect]many believe that @@LEADER@@ rules by divine right

[option validity] has a poor environment
[option]"Do you really need to make a deal with extremists?" scolds Green Party representative @@randomname@@, calculating the carbon footprint of the proffered pudding. "Look, all we want is a little more environmental regulation of big business, and a little green thinking. Unlike those other lunatics, our approach will actually make you MORE popular with the mainstream."
[effect]manufacturers are annoyed that they're not allowed to dump industrial waste into the nearest lake any more

[option validity] has WMDs and a large military
[option]"If you're looking for people that play well with others, then look no further," suggests Pacifist Party member @@randomname@@, taking the moral high ground by declining cake despite @@HIS@@ audible hunger-induced tummy rumbles. "Give peace a chance. Cut back military spending a little, disarm your WMDs and become a better person. Like me." @@HE@@ smiles at you smugly.
[effect]each infantry rifle come pre-loaded with a single white carnation in the barrel

[option]"Just an observation, but by my calculations, if we had a more traditional first-past-the-post system then you'd be in a position right now to form a 65% majority government, with no coalition needed," comments Party Whip @@randomname@@, helping @@HIM@@self to the remaining eight slices of cake. "Let's go back to that system, and we can send these extremist parties back to the fringes of politics where they belong."
[effect]@@LEADER@@ has declared that too much democracy gets in the way of sensible leadership

[option]"Oh... no cake left," says one of your glummest but most loyal MPs, trying to gather up some of the crumbs "Well, I know it's a bit of a downer, but why don't we just form a minority government? We can seek support on individual bills and votes as we go. I mean, there's always someone who wants something, and if you're careful you can always cut a deal somewhere."
[effect]@@LEADER@@ often must plea for votes from members of other parties in order to pass important legislation

1st draft

[title]Friends Close, Enemies Closer.

[desc]The General Election result is in, and your party has outperformed all others, but is only in a position to form a minority government. However, a coalition with a smaller and less popular party would let you form a majority government, but only if you can agree a deal.

[validity] capitalist democracy with proportional representation

[option]"Give us a slice of the action, and we can make a deal," smiles Communist Party Chair @@randomname@@, placing a large chocolate cake in front of you, and cutting @@HIM@@self the merest slither. "Look, we're not expecting you to end capitalism overnight, we just want a little bit more wage equality and regulation of the free market. That's pretty fair, right?"
[effect]@@LEADER@@ seems to wear red a lot these days

[option validity] Immigration NOT banned
[option]"You don't need them! You don't need someone polluting the purity of your policies!" spits @@DEMONYM@@ Nationalist @@randomname@@, seemingly disgusted by the brown-coloured dessert in front of him. "All we ask is that you close the doors to those immigrants. They're stealing our jobs and using up our resources! Put @@NAME@@ first! Then, we'll promise to support you on every other thing."
[effect]a giant 'No Entry' sign is being erected at the borders of @@NAME@@

[option validity] Government has fairly high spending on welfare
[option]"Why not ally with a party that has no interest in ruling?" asks Libertarian @@randomname@@, who has brought @@HIS@@ own strawberry cupcake, and doesn't look keen to share. "All we want is for you to shrink government a little bit. Just halve government spending in general, ring-fencing just the police and the military, as morally this is all we need government for. Then, we can support your new, leaner administration."
[effect]the government seems embarrassed to be seen to be governing

[option validity] has a national faith and some religious freedom
[option]"Heaven knows who is your best ally," comments @@FAITH@@ First party leader @@randomname@@, drawing a holy symbol on the cake's icing with @@HIS@@ finger, "and as it turns out, I've got heaven on speed-dial. Increase spending on promoting @@FAITH@@ and in recognising our state religion, and you'll have our support."
[effect]many believe that @@LEADER@@ rules by divine right

[option validity] has a poor environment and cars
[option]"Do you really need to make a deal with extremists?" scolds Green Party representative @@randomname@@, calculating the carbon footprint of the proffered pudding. "Look, all we want is a little more environmental regulation of big business, and a little green thinking. Unlike those other lunatics, our approach will actually make you MORE popular with the mainstream."
[effect]manufacturers are annoyed that they're not allowed to dump industrial waste into the nearest lake any more

[option validity] has WMDs and a large military
[option]"If you're looking for people that play well with others, then look no further," suggests Pacifist Party member @@randomname@@, taking the moral high ground by declining cake despite @@HIS@@ audible hunger-induced tummy rumbles. "Give peace a chance. Cut back military spending a little, disarm your WMDs and become a better person. Like me." @@HE@@ smiles at you smugly.
[effect]each infantry rifle come pre-loaded with a single white carnation in the barrel

[option]"Just an observation, but by my calculations, if we had a more traditional first-past-the-post system then you'd be in a position right now to form a 65% majority government, with no coalition needed," comments Party Whip @@randomname@@, helping @@HIM@@self to the remaining eight slices of cake. "Let's go back to that system, and we can send these extremist parties back to the fringes of politics where they belong."
[effect]@@LEADER@@ has declared that too much democracy gets in the way of sensible leadership

[Trotterdam]

Can someone give me the abridged version of why it's necessary to form a coalition up front, rather than just voting individually on any particular law you want to pass? Is it just a matter of efficiency?

The validity criteria are theoretically meant to establish that the potential allies aren't representative of your current politics. The only options that don't have validity criteria are the last option (the reversal choice) and the first option (which instead has its validity moved to the issue as a whole, and thus ensures that the issue always has at least TWO choices). Making the first option always appear also lets me introduce the chocolate cake as the narrative framing device.

You could accomplish this with a less restrictive issue-wide validity by adding a communist-only option as an alternative first option, so that you always get exactly one of the two, and having that one also introduce the chocolate cake in its own way.

Though the libertarian option would be really radical for a communist nation, more than the current text suggests. The green option also talks about business. Aside from that the options seem equally relevant for a communist democracy.

[desc]The General Election result is in, and your party has outperformed all others, but is only in a position to form a minority government. However, a coalition with a smaller and less popular party would let you form a majority government, but only if you can agree a deal.

I suggest removing the "however". You're just continuing to explain the situation.

Also, I think that should be "agree to a deal".

[option validity] has a poor environment and cars
[option]"Do you really need to make a deal with extremists?" scolds Green Party representative @@randomname@@, calculating the carbon footprint of the proffered pudding. "Look, all we want is a little more environmental regulation of big business, and a little green thinking. Unlike those other lunatics, our approach will actually make you MORE popular with the mainstream."
[effect]manufacturers are annoyed that they're not allowed to dump industrial waste into the nearest lake any more

Why cars? Nothing about the option or effect line mentions cars.

True, cars have a big influence on how much pollution you're making, but they're not the only influence, so going directly by the relevant stat seems more sensible. There are reasons to ban cars other than environmentalism.

However, going by Eco-Friendliness may be better than Environmental Beauty, if you want to emphasize the difference from the nation's current policy.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Can someone give me the abridged version of why it's necessary to form a coalition up front, rather than just voting individually on any particular law you want to pass? Is it just a matter of efficiency?

Within the issue you mean?

IRL, it's because minority governments find it hard to get anything done, as every time they want to carry a vote they have to make concessions and deals at the time.

I think you raise a good point though, and I'll add an option about just forming a minority government instead.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

You could accomplish this with a less restrictive issue-wide validity by adding a communist-only option as an alternative first option, so that you always get exactly one of the two, and having that one also introduce the chocolate cake in its own way.

Great idea, will think it over. Right now though, it doesn't feel to me like an issue that I'd expect a communist nation to deal with.

Also, I think that should be "agree to a deal".

"Agree a deal" sounds colloquially right to me, but I suspect your edit is sensible for internationalism.

Why cars? Nothing about the option or effect line mentions cars.

Point.

However, going by Eco-Friendliness may be better than Environmental Beauty, if you want to emphasize the difference from the nation's current policy.

Was going to go for the backstage aggregated stat of environmental policy positioning, so don't worry too much there.

Cheers for comments.

[Trotterdam]

Great idea, will think it over. Right now though, it doesn't feel to me like an issue that I'd expect a communist nation to deal with.

That's because we expect communists to be single-party states. However, the Soviet Union need not be a model for all communist nations in NationStates. Plenty of people believe - and run their game nations accordingly - that a socialist democracy is possible and desirable. Some of the other policies discussed in this issue - such as stances on immigration, religion, and the military - are not obviously related to economic policy, and so would plausibly be points of contention even in a nation where 100% of politicians and voters support communism. Plus, a communist nation with enough political freedom would likely have a capitalist party that's trying to reintroduce private enterprise, and the government running all industry means there might be multiple views on exactly how the government should run industry.

"Agree a deal" sounds colloquially right to me,

Yeah, that's why I said "I think" rather than "I'm sure". I could imagine it being valid in some dialects, but it's not standard English.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Hmm, I think I'm happy to keep it as one for capitalist nations only.

A socialist democracy that manages to get to a position where it can democratically sustain communism just doesn't seem compatible with a nation that runs on the basis of proportional representation as we've meant it in issues to date. Two-tier systems where one half is PR (like Russia) seem to be the sorts of PR models that could sustain a state-centred socialist system.

Plus, as you say, it's not just one option that would need an alternative, it's several of them.

I think it's an interesting discussion, but I'm going to keep it relatively simple, and keep this as an issue for democratic capitalist nations that use PR.

[Laeral]

A few suggestions and notes:

The effect on the last issue could be: "@@LEADER@@ often must plea for votes from members of other parties in order to pass important legislation."

Another option you could add would be to have a representative from a national Monarchist Party seek to form a coalition. These parties actually do exist, but are generally regarded as crazy by voters.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

A few suggestions and notes:

The effect on the last issue could be: "@@LEADER@@ often must plea for votes from members of other parties in order to pass important legislation."

Thanks, I'll use that.

Another option you could add would be to have a representative from a national Monarchist Party seek to form a coalition. These parties actually do exist, but are generally regarded as crazy by voters.

As a Brit with a Queen in place, that didn't occur to me. Good one. Will do some research on it and possibly add to next draft.

[Australian rePublic]

Wow this issue is long. Long and varies too much between nations. Someone like me would probably be able to recieve most of the options on here, whilst someone else may only recieve three. Also, option 3, why would a party enter politics if they had no interest in ruling? Unless it was one of those single issue parties. That would be funny! Also, why does it have to be a capitalist democracy?

[Helaw]

Also, option 3, why would a party enter politics if they had no interest in ruling?

They are not interested in being the dominant party of the coalition.

[Trotterdam]

Libertarians don't want to rule, and they also don't want anyone else to rule. That's their party platform. They want the government to do as little as possible, and so if voted into office themselves, they won't do much.

[Drayxaso]

Hmm, I think I'm happy to keep it as one for capitalist nations only.

A socialist democracy that manages to get to a position where it can democratically sustain communism just doesn't seem compatible with a nation that runs on the basis of proportional representation as we've meant it in issues to date. Two-tier systems where one half is PR (like Russia) seem to be the sorts of PR models that could sustain a state-centred socialist system.

Plus, as you say, it's not just one option that would need an alternative, it's several of them.

I think it's an interesting discussion, but I'm going to keep it relatively simple, and keep this as an issue for democratic capitalist nations that use PR.

Doesn't it weaken the point of a reversal if this can't reach everyone who has proportional representation?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Doesn't it weaken the point of a reversal if this can't reach everyone who has proportional representation?

That's a very good point.

Some number crunching tells me that one third of nations with proportional representation don't have capitalism. I can't leave them out.

Okay, draft 3 incoming.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Wow this issue is long. Long and varies too much between nations. Someone like me would probably be able to recieve most of the options on here, whilst someone else may only recieve three.

Well, now it's two to eight options, and I'd say that's a feature, not a bug.

Precedent exists for this structure, with #625 Delivering The Goods, which can be anything 3 and 11 options, and that ones been pretty well received, with one of the lowest dismissal rates of any issue.

[Australian rePublic]

The religion option. Considering that maby people put their real religions into this, do you think it's wise for a priest to say that he has the Supreme Being on speed dial? Even as a joke/exaggeration

[Candlewhisper Archive]

The religion option. Considering that maby people put their real religions into this, do you think it's wise for a priest to say that he has the Supreme Being on speed dial? Even as a joke/exaggeration

He says he has heaven on speed-dial. It's a metaphor, it's fine.

[Trotterdam]

The new first option is kinda rambly to the point of being incomprehensible. You acknowledge that in the speech, but I don't think ackowledging it makes it any better.

I really suggest going back to the old minority government option at the end, and adding a new option specifically for communist nations in which the Capitalist Party is asking you to legalize small-scale private enterprise.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Yes, you're right, I think.

Rolled back to Draft 2, then added these two to replace option 1:

[option validity] capitalist nation
[option]"Give us a slice of the action, and we can make a deal," smiles Communist Party Chair @@randomname@@, placing a large chocolate cake in front of you, and cutting @@HIM@@self the merest slither. "Look, we're not expecting you to end capitalism overnight, we just want a little bit more wage equality and regulation of the free market. A little cake for everyone. That's pretty fair, right?"
[effect]@@LEADER@@ seems to wear red a lot these days

[option validity] non-capitalist nation
[option]"Give us a slice of the action, and we can make a deal," smiles Capitalism Party Char @@randomname@@, placing an enormous chocolate cake in front of you, and cutting @@HIM@@self a decent wedge of it. "Look, we're not expecting you to end communism overnight, we just want a little bit of economic freedom, and the opportunity for private wealth. A bigger share of the cake for folk like me, but in return, we make sure the cake itself keeps getting bigger. That's pretty reasonable, right?"
[effect]@@LEADER@@ often seems to be checking his stock portfolio these days

[Australian rePublic]

This issue needs an option where you form a coalition with a radicia [url-https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-issue_politics] single issue party [/url] such as the Australian motoring enthuisests, who want their one law passed and don't give a shit about anything else **Gets inspired to write issue inspired by Australian Sex Party**

[Candlewhisper Archive]

This issue needs an option where you form a coalition with a radicia [url-https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-issue_politics] single issue party [/url] such as the Australian motoring enthuisests, who want their one law passed and don't give a shit about anything else **Gets inspired to write issue inspired by Australian Sex Party**

Isn't that pretty much every option I've included so far?

[Trotterdam]

[effect]@@LEADER@@ often seems to be checking his stock portfolio these days

You can't assume @@LEADER@@ is male.

I suggest something like "@@LEADER@@'s stock portfolio has been mysteriously growing" or "@@LEADER@@'s stock portfolio has been deemed the most equal", etc.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Good point. Gone for this instead:

[effect]a frenzy of stock trading has followed @@NAME@@'s return to capitalism

[Australian rePublic]

Good point. Gone for this instead:

[effect]a frenzy of stock trading has followed @@NAME@@'s return to capitalism

Or you can just use @@HIS@@

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Good point. Gone for this instead:

[effect]a frenzy of stock trading has followed @@NAME@@'s return to capitalism

Or you can just use @@HIS@@

I admit, that thought crossed my mind too, but I managed to pause, think about it, and stop myself before posting that as a solution.

Honestly, mate, think it through.