Publisher's Note and online play

[pzhon]

I mainly play online, so I usually don't pay much attention when Mason Malmuth discusses B&M cardrooms. However, the June publisher's note contains a gem:

[ QUOTE ]

the manager decided that he would give $25,000 to the first player who played 500 hours on graveyard shift...
the additional games he would create every night would drop more than the $25,000 that he would give away.
... every broke poker player in town showed up, and these disgusting, smelly people drove off their regular customers. The room was shut by the casino a few months later.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is analogous to many online situations.

Many poker servers are in the process of learning the same lesson: A promotion that seems to pay for itself in rake may not be profitable.

One controversial position I (and some others) have maintained is that the value of a player to a poker server is not the nominal amount of the rake paid. A winning multitabler may not be as valuable as a collection of casual gamblers who pay the same amount of rake.

What is the online equivalent of being "disgusting and smelly?" Obviously, berating fish is one way to be worth less to a poker site than the rake you pay. Less obviously, winning too efficiently is another.