JKPrevo over at PokerWorks adds his two cents to the multi-accounting debate, which I find particularly valuable because he …

1) admits that he, too, is a multi-accounter (and unlike Townsend in ’08, a winning player!)

2) gives a great real-world example of how the letter of this online poker law doesn’t exactly add up with the spirit of it:

At the WSOP this year, Joe Sebok showed up with a full prosthetic makeup by a Hollywood professional. He looked older than me by a bunch and certainly didn’t appear as himself. There was some confusion at the time he took his seat and a private conversation with one of the TD’s people got him the seat. No multi-accounting there but it does demonstrate the deception available with such a setup.

Not to discredit Prevo, but he does have one factual inaccuracy (unless there’s something Jen’s not telling us?):

OK, I have insulted Jen – a good looking girl – married to an attractive but folliclely challenged fellow. Let’s get back to trashing Brian.

Umm … though California Jen and DanM do love to bicker, she’s already let me know that she’s not really into dudes who insist on multi-accounting, no matter how bald they get.

CORRECTION: Oops, it was Phil Laak, not Joe Sebok, who did the make up thing. (Thanks, Jen, for pointing that out.) I still think Prevo’s point about brick-and-mortar anonymity applies. Not so sure about my marriage and multi-accounting metaphor.