CatDancer

Then live frugally, like a college student. The 100K will support you for the next four years. To be able to devote 100% of four years of youthful, intelligent energy towards one of the world's problems without other major life distractions (school, job) would be an amazing resource and you could have a tremendous impact. (An important component of this should be finding something that excites you, rather than just responding only to a feeling of guilt).

I disagree with the commentors who suggest you should invest your money. You're an entrepreneur. If you want another 100K, you can go out and do something to make that. (I would however recommend never, ever, going into debt: never spend money you don't have on the assumption that you'll be able to make more later; this is a powerful reality check that ensures that you really are doing what you think you can).

I expect other commentators to voraciously disagree with my suggestion that you spend the money supporting yourself instead of saving it; I'll just note that in advance so I won't feel like I need to respond to any of the responses.

I have a desire to not just stand here and take it on the chin as mahmud publicly proclaims that I'm pandering, a Lisp newbie, irrational, a blind fanboy, hypocritical, dismissive, and unfair. On the other hand I don't want to waste everyone's time with a tedious flamewar.

Thoughts?

I'm not saying that Arc has better libraries than other Lisps, I'm saying that for me the advantages of Arc outweigh for me the disadvantages of not having the libraries that other languages do.

[Actually, scheme's hygienic macros shift the burden of capture-avoidance to the compiler. It's CL that has to use gensym.]

Yes, what I was saying was that when I learned about hygienic macros I thought they were a good idea for that reason.

Richness is usually a good thing

If I can choose to use a feature or not (as it typical with libraries: I can choose to use a library or not) then the cost to me of a feature that I don't want is zero; if I have to use a feature or it is harder to avoid then it matters to me whether the cost to me of that feature outweighs the benefit to me.

A personal opinion

Not at all. While it wasn't the purpose of my thank-you to do such a demonstration, it's easy to compare the relative length of code needed to do a particular implementation in different languages.

feel trolled

Yes, perhaps it is common for people who like X to be mad if I say that I prefer Y.

DWIM kind

I'm not following you.

and the Lisp programmer collective is surprised by your surprise

Perhaps they have had better luck than I have at writing hygienic macros.

(I appreciate your suggestion to say that I wish another Lisp dialect was more like Arc, but I'm not sure how I'd choose one since I don't really have a favorite aside from Arc).

Then there's a macro in Arc, for example,

  (mac awhen (expr . body)
    `(let it ,expr (if it (do ,@body))))

I imagine that a Scheme programmer who was experienced in writing hygienic macros and so could write them quickly, and who was more bothered by the lack of hygiene than I am, could well reach a different cost/benefit decision than I do and decide they'd rather go with hygienic macros.

So how about doing an experiment. The purpose of the experiment is to gather information, without doing any more programming. First explain to your players that you're going to run an experiment: you're looking for ways for the site to be self-supporting so it can continue to grow and meet the needs of its players. The experiment isn't going to affect game play, and that it's just an experiment: you'll take it down if it doesn't work out.

Every business faces the issue price differentiation between customers: some customers have little money and some have a lot, so how do you get the customers with money to pay more without turning away the customers who have little (or, in your case, no money).

For the experiment add a tiered membership: free (what you have now) and patron ($5/month). Both are identical in terms of gameplay (both for fairness and so you don't have to do any programming). By becoming a patron a member has their name listed on the homepage as a patron of Particracy (which is literally true). During new user sign up prominently display the patron option "you can become a patron for $5/month, or join for free". On the homepage above the patron list have a button "Join the Patrons of Particracy".

If anyone signs up, that tells you that there are people eager enough the support the game that they'll give you money even though they don't get any tangible extra features.

Next you might try running a Google ads campaign, max $5 total and max $0.05 per click, using a keyword of "political simulation game". This will deliver 100 people to your landing page. Track how many of the 100 become users (if any) and how many become patrons (if any). This will tell you how easy it will be to draw in new users when you have a way to make money.

Now you look at your conversion rate (is it 0%? 5%? 1%?) and get a sense of what it would take to get to $200/month (40 paying customers). For example, if your conversion rate is 1% then you'd need 4,000 customers to get the 40 paying ones. Then you can look at a) if you want to go for that, or b) do you think that doing things like more programming and adding the premium service you're thinking about might get the conversion rate up.

The point of the experiment isn't for it to make money by itself (though of course it will be nice if it did :), it is to gather information and to give you encouragement.