This is a severe problem of political and social science method. The answers aren't likely to be very useful. Our model, that is, has interchangeable parts, and much that has been said so far about two or several people could stand for a great many more. The idea of using permutations and combinations came to me in the 1950s from Professor Ithiel Pool of M.I.T., who wrote a paper, still unpublished, on the significance of probability theory in access-analysis. Concerning anarchism, the term rules implies power more than influence.
Anarchists usually draw the line at coercive power.
I shall continue to be impossible so long as people who are possible remain possible. A certain stress on F may be needed here. When an engineer builds a bridge, he has to be a social scientist, for he contends with politicians who want it faced with marble, with traffic flow studies, with the opinions of his profession on how a bridge has to be made, with architects who will find his design repulsive, with workers who logically will strike, if they have reason to, in the week before its scheduled opening to the public, and so on. His mechanics will carry him only so far. A habit is a repetitive pattern of actions.