  Modeling the conditions for the emergence of extremism is a very important
problem, with clear applications for describing the interaction among
individuals. Traditional models either are not suited for the task, as in the
case of discrete models, or, like Bounded Confidence models, are built with
rules that make opinions tend to a common ground between agents or not change
at all. Continuous Opinions and Discrete Actions (CODA) model allowed us to
observe the emergence of extremist agents, even when every agent was initially
a moderate, due to local influence effects. In this paper, the problem of
emergence of extremism will be addressed by introducing a middle discrete
option in the CODA model, making it similar to a Potts model. Different
scenarios for the third option will be discussed: when it is equivalent to
withholding judgment, when it is a real third option and when it is a real,
middle option. The effects on the opinions will be studied and its effects on
extremism discussed. Withholding judgment seems to have an unexpected effect,
causing the diminishing of moderate opinions in the long run. For a central
third opinion, we find that, under specific conditions, this new choice can act
as a buffer between the extreme choices.
