That is because the gas (currency) transfers must be atomic with the script block confirmation
As I understand it, gas is paid within the script activating transaction.
You didn't understand.
Yet we also explained above (and even monsterer agrees on this point fwiw) that cross-partition spending breaks the Nash equilibrium.
You're putting words into my mouth there - I agree that there is a disincentive to merge partitions yet partition merger is essential for consensus; that is the basic problem facing all trustless p2p currencies and is particularly acute when there is no mining incentive.
Obviously from the context of our discussion, I meant in the context of a block chain that allows multiple partitions to persist in the longest chain. In that case, you have agreed. Of course with Bitcoin's LCR, only one partition sustains within the LCR, so obviously I didn't mean that since the Nash equilibrium isn't broken for Bitcoin.
monsterer all I can say to you is sigh. You sure know how to fill up a thread with needless discourse.