Although the original paper didn’t mention this, I think your description makes sense! Indeed “the game must go on” even in case of stopping. One simpler idea of how to model the situation with moderator: there are just two players who have actions (1) adhere to (crypto) mediator’s advice (2) deviate from advice.
Thanks for the insight about adding uncertainty to avoid ending with defection!
Although the original paper didn’t mention this, I think your description makes sense! Indeed “the game must go on” even in case of stopping. One simpler idea of how to model the situation with moderator: there are just two players who have actions (1) adhere to (crypto) mediator’s advice (2) deviate from advice.
Thanks for the insight about adding uncertainty to avoid ending with defection!