>I thought about a way to make an "improvement" on the Jim Bell AP.

I think that this will make it "cheaper", faster and so more effective.

It starts from the part that as there could be more assassins competing for the prize.

Some of them can be uncertain that the prize could be too much low for the risk of killing the politician.

Presumably, the reward would gradually increase.  Some potential collectors would want to wait, to see that reward get higher.  But they know that there are potentially thousands of others who want to collect the prize, some who would want to ensure they get it, first.

>But at the same time, because of the possible competing killers, everyone of them can even be afraid that another assassin could be brave, skilled or just lucky to being able to kill the politician for a lower prize.

So this is already a good incentive to push all the killers to try to kill the politician for a lower prize.

What I thought is a way to make this incentive even more effective.

Yes.  

>"Shared money"

Everyone should be able (if they want) to put their money on more politicians "contemporary", even on every politicians on the service or others that they can add later.

Those shared money should be pubblic visible to everyone, so even killers should be able to see them at any time.

If I understand this correctly, you want to have a given reward payable towards the death of more than one person.  I don't think I wrote this as part of my original AP idea, but I have considered this as a (good!) variant.  

Years ago, probably 2013, I speculated that a Silk-road organization might offer (hypothetically) a million dollars, per trial, to be paid to anybody who participates in a criminal trial of a Silk-Road-linked defendant.  Say, $250K for the judge, $250K to any prosecutor.  $125K to any (unwilling) prosecution witness, $125K for any investigator, etc,   This would deter any such potential prosecution.

It would not be necessary to name the specific trial, which the donors don't know because the prosecution hasn't (yet) been initiated.

If a Silk-Road organization made $1 billion in gross sales, and 1% was kept as a "defense fund", that would be $10 million per year.  This would fund $1 million for each of 10 trials.  And as the fund continued to build, the reward per-trial would increase.

>On the possible interface of the service, it should be possible, by clicking on a politician, to see how much money on him are shared with other politicians.

>So what happen when if one of the politicians that has some shared money on him gets killed?

>Those shared money will obviously get removed by all the prize of all the other selected politicians (chosen before by the users that have put their own money) and will go to the winning killer.

>Yes, the potential collector(s) will have to check for this eventuality. 

With this, I think that all killers will then know that while they are thinking about killing "Politician A", if the money on his prize is shared with other 4/5 politicians, they will be now even worried that another killer will terminate one of the other politicians, and so then lowering the prize of their selected politician as a possible target.

Users will still be happy because another politician has been killed anyway.

Absolutely!  You are definitely on the right track!

>Users will then be able to put even 1$ contemporary on every politician of their country (or the entire world), waiting that the first one of them gets killed.

Then again, 1$ over all the remaining politicians and so on ...

What do you think about this idea/improvement?

Is it clear enough?