Your opinion of my arguments and how I press them is none of your business. All of your labeling doesn't change the fact that you can't point to a single direct relationship between PP and PvP. You making grand statements about how to view these issues has no effect on me. The basis for your assertions suits you, but fails to convince me. I am not going to just take your word for it.
You are typing blindly here, I already stated how the entire PP mechanic is PvP. We are trying to argue with reason, not rhetoric, since I can sit here all day claiming that your argument is nonsensical without even looking and reading your argument. That is what you're doing to me right now. How is a mechanic completely driven by player action in opposition to one another not PvP, answer that with reason.
By your definition you intentionally cripple your self in the PvE battle of PP, by choosing to do it in a mode you feel is less efficient. Your choice is the only thing holding you back. No one else should have to suffer for your individual choice. Open can and will sustain only the population that enjoys playing there.
That argument is absurd, it's like saying two states in America provide the same kind of living quality but one of them has higher taxes than the other. Then you tell me people have a choice where they want to live if they have little to no income?
No one is going to shoot themselves in the foot in a competition, everyone is going for all the advantages they can get, and that right now is solo/private mode. What can't you understand about this?
Open created it's own atmosphere you can't blame the players that have left it, now we have to see players penalized because they have taken the advice; "If you don't want to PvP, don't log in open". Well that sort of backfired, now we see the subject of bribing people into open again. Just let it die already.
Nope, under the competitive mechanic, it makes perfect sense to bring equality to modes. Anything outside of a competitive mechanic should stay the way it is.
Player interaction has been shown to not be a big, or tasty enough carrot to establish a healthy population in open, so it's obvious that something has to be done. So they throw out the incentives idea again. Obvious is as obvious does.
Because player interaction is too broad of a scope whereas PP is a specific mechanic and a competitive one. Like I said, you don't seem to sort out your argument before tossing it on here.