Edit History (Oldest to Newest)
Version: 1
Fields Changed (Original)
Updated
Content

Well, if they don't tell any other Counts about it, maybe they can have some of the ill-gotten stuff of the other Counts who didn't go quietly.

Version: 2
Fields Changed Content
Updated
Content

Well, if they don't tell any other Counts about it, maybe they can have some of the ill-gotten stuff of any extra-'extractive' Counts who didn't go quietly.

Version: 3
Fields Changed Content
Updated
Content

Well, if they don't tell any other Counts about it, maybe they can have some of the ill-gotten stuff of any extra-'extractive' Counts who didn't go quietly.

Keltham does remember how all coalitions are unstable because a subcoalition can kick somebody out and redivide that person's gains among themselves, if for some odd reason they're not using logical decision theory.

Version: 4
Fields Changed Content
Updated
Content

Well, if they don't tell any other Counts about it, maybe they can have some of the ill-gotten stuff of any extra-'extractive' Counts who didn't go quietly.

Keltham does remember how all coalitions are unstable because a subcoalition can kick somebody out and redivide that person's gains among themselves - if for some odd reason they're not using logical decision theory, that is.

Version: 5
Fields Changed Content
Updated
Content

Well, if they don't tell any other Counts about it, maybe they can have some of the ill-gotten stuff of any extra-'extractive' Counts who didn't go quietly.

Keltham does remember how all majority-ruled coalitions would be theoretically unstable because a subcoalition could kick somebody out and redivide that person's gains among themselves - if for some odd reason they weren't using logical decision theory, that is.

Version: 6
Fields Changed Content
Updated
Content

Well, if they don't tell any other Counts about it, maybe they can have some of the ill-gotten stuff of any extra-'extractive' Counts who didn't go quietly.

Keltham does remember how all majoritarian coalitions should be theoretically unstable because a subcoalition could kick somebody out and redivide that person's gains among themselves - if for some odd reason they weren't using logical decision theory, that is.

Version: 7
Fields Changed Content
Updated
Content

Well, if they don't tell any other Counts about it, maybe they can have some of the ill-gotten stuff of any extra-'extractive' Counts who didn't go quietly.

Keltham does remember how all majoritarian coalitions are theoretically unstable because a subcoalition could kick somebody out and redivide that person's gains among themselves - if for some odd reason they weren't using logical decision theory, that is.