RLS cases

Ideally, all Groups will be considered for the Coalitions' arrangement. It may be more practical to consider only the available. The result is similar with placing non-participants in Pseudo-Coalitions. We will examine an example to make it better understood. The arrangement can be done with a) agreement b) DMPR or RLS. We will use RLS at its simplest of the three versions and without veto.

Most likely, Western European Group E1 will not participate in decision making because it is the main supporter of NWO's plan. Recently, they made two trade deals, with Mercosur and India. Southern European Group A3 is Mercosur plus Bolivia, Peru, Chile. India and A3 will not participate in decision making, if they do not cancel the deals with EU and renounce NWO's failed plan. 

We do not know the Groups that will not participate. In this example we will assume that only three Groups are non-participants, India (I), Southern American A3 and Western European E1. Of course, it could be other groups, more or less. In "Very challenging game" a table was shown. It has the ranking lists of the three leaders, C, A1 and E2. In the lists, E1 and A3 are included.

Above, there is a new table, after E1 and A3 are taken out. There are two options for the three non participants a) not considered b) placed in a Pseudo-coalition. These are similar but not the same. In the first case, these are not placed in a Coaltion. By following the process that was explained in "More on RLS and DMPR" without veto, the five rounds of assignment are as follows.

So the three Coalitions will be C-M3-R4, A1-A2-M2-S4-R3-S1, E2-R1-M1-S2-R2-S3. If I, E1, A3 are not considered for the arrangement, they will be in no Coalition. Of course, since the other Coalitions are complete, they will have no other alternative but to form a Coalition. This is very similar with considering them and placing them in the Pseudo-Coalition I-E1-A3. The end result is the same.

Ranking List Selection has three variations. So far we have presented two of them. We will use an example with India's participation this time (shown below) to demonstrate how different the result can be with each version. The first variation was presented without India in "Ranking List Selection". Based on the ranking order, the four Coalitions are formed; C-M3-R4, I-E1-R2, A1-A2-R4-R1-E1-A3, E2-R1-E1-M1-M2-M3.

There is overlapping though, four Groups are common, M3, E1, R1, R4. These will be taken out. So the remaining incomplete Coalitions will be C, I-R2, A1-A2-A3, E2-M1-M2. The common Groups will be granted to the Coalitions where they have higher ranking on the list. The number of grants will be also counted. If one leader has one grant, it can't get another until all the rest have one grant also.

M3 is first in C's list, third in I's and fifth in E2's. M3 is granted to C which has one grant. E1 is first in I's list, second in E2's, fourth in A1's and fifth in C's. E1 is granted to I which also has one grant. R1 is first on E2's list and third on A1's and C's. E2 gets R1 and has one grant. R4 is second in C's and A1's list. The assignment order in the example is C-I-A1-E2.

But C has already one grant. So A1 will get R4. If the number of grants is not taken into account, R4 will go to C. So far, the four Coalitions are C-M3, I-R2-E1, A1-A2-A3-R4, E2-M1-M2-R1. India's Coalition is complete. Each one of the other three will get the available Groups in its list to become complete; C) S3 A1) S4-R3 E2) S2-R3. Only R3 is common. The rest can be given to the Coalitions.

China's will be also complete, C-M3-S3. The other two will be A1-A2-A3-R4-S4, E2-M1-M2-R1-S2. There is only one Group missing in each one. Both have one grant. R3 is in ninth place in A1's list and in tenth in E2's. A1 will get R3. The only Group left is S1 which will be given to E2. So finally, the four Coalitions will be C-M3-S3, I-R2-E1, A1-A2-A3-R4-S4-R3, E2-M1-M2-R1-S2-S1.

The version without counting grants was explained very thoroughly in "More on RLS and DMPR". We will examine the first one, without veto, which is simpler. In each round, the leaders got the next available Group in their list. In the third round, A1 got M2 because it was the next available on its list. But it is in sixth place while in E2's list, it is in fourth place. So A1 got M2 even if it is higher in E2's list.

We wil present a third version in which the ranking in all lists is considered. The five rounds of assignment are shown below. M3, E1, A2, R1 have the highest ranking in C's, I's, A1's and E2's list. R4 is in second place in C's and A2's list. The assigning order used in the example is C-I-A1-E2 and there is no veto. R4 goes to C and is replaced by next available A3 in A1's list. R1 is in E2's list and E1 in I's.

A3 is in fourth place in I's list, in fith in A1's and in ninth in E2's. But I's list is complete I-E1-R2. China's and India's Coalitions are complete after the second round and do not participate in the three remaining rounds. Next available Group in A1's list is M2. But M2 is in sixth place in A1's list while it is in fourth place in E2's. Additionally, E2's list is not complete yet. So, M2 goes to E2. Next available Group for A1 is S4. It is in the last place in E2's list.

R3 is in ninth place in A1's list and in tenth in E2's. S2 is in eight place in E2's list and in tenth place in A1's. In the fourth round, the two Coalitions will be A1-A2-A3-S4-R3 and E2-R1-M1-M2-S2. S1 is in thirteenth place in A1's list but it is in twelveth in E2's, plus E2's list is not complete. So S1 will go to E2. S3 is higher in E2's list but it is the only remaining Group and it will go to A1.

The four Coalitions will be C-M3-R4, I-E1-R2, A1-A2-A3-S4-R3-S1, E2-R1-M1-M2-S2-S3. The ones we got in "More on RLS and DMPR" were C-M3-R4, I-E1-R2, A1-A2-A3-M2-S4-S1, E2-R1-M1-S2-R3-S3. China's and India's are the same but the other two are different. The reason is that in the case we just examined, a condition is added. The leader gets the next available Group in its list, if it does not have a higher ranking in another list.