Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
NAME_1: You are too absolute; Though therein you can never be too noble, But when extremities speak. I have heard you say, NAME_2 and policy, like unsever'd friends, I' the war do grow together: grant that, and tell me, In peace what each of them by the other lose, That they combine not there. NAME_3: NAME_4, NAME_4! MENENIUS: A good demand. NAME_1: If it be NAME_2 in your wars to seem The same you are not, which, for your best ends, You adopt your policy, how is it less or worse, That it shall hold companionship in peace With NAME_2, as in war, since that to both It stands in like request? NAME_3: Why force you this? NAME_1: Because that now it lies you on to speak To the people; not by your own instruction, Nor by the matter which your heart prompts you, But with such words that are but rooted in Your tongue, though but bastards and syllables Of no allowance to your bosom's truth. Now, this no more dishonours you at all Than to take in a

Summary:
1. NAME_1 urges NAME_3 to speak to the nobility in a more diplomatic manner, emphasizing the importance of winning their support rather than stubbornly sticking to his own principles.
2. Despite his reluctance, NAME_3 eventually agrees to adopt a more appeasing tone in order to gain the favor of the nobles, aiming to return as consul.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer  Make sure to only use capital letters in your entire response.
user