I love information and economics... so I read through some of your material... but I'm really not sure what problem you're trying to solve.

Just create a subreddit for the meet up. You can post/vote(up/down) comments/questions/topics before/during/after the meeting.

Of course it would work even better if people could "quarters up" their favorite posts. Why would it work better? Because it would allow participants to quantify their interest in the various comments/questions/topics. Plus, how cool would it be to get paid for being an excellent poster?

In other words, you have this bizarre double standard [...]

Oh gods, you're doing that again. "How dare you be talking about something other than my pet issue! That proves you're on the wrong side of my pet issue, which proves you're inconsistent and insincere!"

There is a reason why you keep getting "swamped with downvotes". That reason is that you are wasting other people's time and attention, and appear not to care. As long as you continue to behave in this obnoxious and antisocial fashion, you will continue to get swamped with downvotes. And, not coincidentally, your rudeness and obtuseness will incline people to think less favourably of your proposal. If someone else more reasonable comes along with an economic proposal like yours, the first reaction of people who've interacted with you here is likely to be that bit more negative because they'll associate the idea with rudeness and obtuseness.

Please consider whether that is really what you want.

If categorical refusal is the only way to guarantee a gatekeeper's win, then there's no point in running the experiment. I'm not interested in seeing the obvious results of categorical refusal, I want to see the kind of reasoning, arguments, appeals, memes, manipulations, and deals (that mere humans can come up with) that would allow a boxed AI to escape. There's no point to the entire thing if you are emulating a rock on the floor.

GovA doesn't know why you exited and GovB doesn't know why you entered.

This is true for individual migrants. In case of large migration waves (e.g., East Germany to West Germany), the reasons are usually obvious.

So far as this is the case, it is evident that government, by excluding or even by superseding individual agency, either substitutes a less qualified instrumentality for one better qualified, or at any rate substitutes its own mode of accomplishing the work, for all the variety of modes which would be tried by a number of equally qualified persons aiming at the same end; a competition by many degrees more propitious to the progress of improvement than any uniformity of system. - J.S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy with some of their Applications to Social Philosophy

But have you ever asked yourselves sufficiently how much the erection of every ideal on earth has cost? How much reality has had to be misunderstood and slandered, how many lies have had to be sanctified, how many consciences disturbed, how much "God" sacrificed every time? If a temple is to be erected a temple must be destroyed: that is the law - let anyone who can show me a case in which it is not fulfilled! - Friedrich Nietzsche, The Genealogy of Morals

The usual touchstone, whether that which someone asserts is merely his persuasion -- or at least his subjective conviction, that is, his firm belief -- is betting. It often happens that someone propounds his views with such positive and uncompromising assurance that he seems to have entirely set aside all thought of possible error. A bet disconcerts him. Sometimes it turns out that he has a conviction which can be estimated at a value of one ducat, but not of ten. For he is very willing to venture one ducat, but when it is a question of ten he becomes aware, as he had not previously been, that it may very well be that he is in error. If, in a given case, we represent ourselves as staking the happiness of our whole life, the triumphant tone of our judgment is greatly abated; we become extremely diffident, and discover for the first time that our belief does not reach so far. Thus pragmatic belief always exists in some specific degree, which, according to differences in the interests at stake, may be large or may be small. - Immanuel Kant , The Critique of Pure Reason

It is thus that the private interests and passions of individuals naturally dispose them to turn their stocks towards the employments which in ordinary cases are most advantageous to the society. But if from this natural preference they should turn too much of it towards those employments, the fall of profit in them and the rise of it in all others immediately dispose them to alter this faulty distribution. Without any intervention of law, therefore, the private interests and passions of men naturally lead them to divide and distribute the stock of every society among all the different employments carried on in it as nearly as possible in the proportion which is most agreeable to the interest of the whole society. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations