[Oski]

Your conclusions do not fit your theory. You state that the poor players get help to the tune of 20% better cards.

Conclusion 1: House wants to increase the handle by keeping rake-paying money on the table, longer. Fine. But then you end up with:

Conclusion 2: The poor players become happy because they are now winners, and somehow they are "children of Party Poker."

The problem is that these poor players are going to bust out, anyway. Because they are poor, unsophisticated players, they don't notice any "20% help" on sucking out. Everything would seem the same ... they play nearly every hand, they lose most, they suck out once in awhile. Having one or two suckouts extra per session would not make them say, "Wow! I really love Party Poker ... even though I lose all my money, I really feel much luckier here."

This is one of the reasons most people here think you have your head in your ass. You leave little to the imagination because your rantings are so absurd.