Generally speaking, if you never disagree with someone, it's only because you don't know em well enough...glad we finally got there
1) Sure, change 'free' to 'a ridiculously huge return to the point where they're virtually free'...with the overlays involved, it's more or less the same thing, and not like poker is the only benefit to membership.
2) They could advertise X active players, but what those players are doing is relevant to keeping people around. Saying 'we have 100 active players' won't do much when new people see that 50% are flipping and unwilling to play poker; the new players will (rightfully) conclude that it isn't worth their time and leave.
3) Given Drew's statement, 'never' seems like too strong of a statement. Certainly a challenge given assumed capabilities of software, but it remains that if they don't, it will continue to undermine the purpose of handing out poker points.
4) Yeah, 20 was a generous estimate of who has played with real points/for fun over the years...I don't do so anymore myself. Hell, I'm still losing rollovers because I can't find the time/interest to get on here and roll em over
5) I'm actually pretty fond of provoking debates (or 'argumentative shitshows'
), but not really trying here. I'm acknowledging that flipping being against the spirit of what SBR is trying for probably isn't enough by itself to keep people from doing it. Until they ban it, I wouldn't judge someone as a terrible person for flipping for example. As for the company, that's just a comment that associating with people too scared to play cash games doesn't make you one, but doesn't look good...same as associating with stiffs, or morons (and it doesn't help when the biggest advocate for flipping is all three
)
6. Funny you should mention it, the only reason I logged on today was to delete some! Too busy lately to even refresh my browser to log in daily...a thriving poker community would certainly change that for me, but we'll see.