Yes, it would probably be funnier, but I got some concerns.
It would be hugely committing, for all, and especially for players B that already have to listen, think, reply to what the other 6 B-players say. Letting them to do the same with 8 more people (that could become 20) would be cruel, IMHO.
So traders would probably get less benefits than they expect, with this new rule.
Also, the way I read rule 7 makes me think that there's a reason why traders must be anonymous ("play under a pseudonym"). IMO, this reason is that A and B players must not communicate. Probably, on Dip2000.com, they discovered some issue or unfairness having the 2 groups talking.
Do we really want to leave these already-tested rules?
I'd be ok both ways. Just please let's think deeply what we're doing.
________________________
PS. What Sacred Digit just said (lol, btw) may hide a valid reason to keep things as they are now.
)
Submitting a diplomacy variant
)
)
)