Not nonsense, but a workable compromise that respects the desire of some people to dress like slobs/bums despite knowing they will be at a televised Final Table and the desire of the Event and those that respect the game to want to see the Final Table portrayed in a professional light.

As said, if you meet a stated dress code demanded by the Event for its TELEVISED Final Table you get your buyin (or part of it) refunded back. If not, because you have chosen to dress like a slob/bum, you don't and the money that was going to be refunded to you from the prize pool goes back into the prize pool to be won by anyone at your Final Table (even the slob that could not be bothered to dress like a professional to get it by simply dressing like a professional for a televised appearance)

Why is that hard to understand?

It's entirely unacceptable to take money out of the prize pool for this, and that should be obvious tbh.

Why?
If that is stated prior to entry just as the level of rake is stated, why is this an issue.

The condition could state that the Event expects the Final Table to be televised and, as such, a dress code is in effect. Players that make the televised Final Table and meet the standard of dress expected of the Event will have their buyin (or part of it) refunded from the available Final Table prize pool. Those that choose not to meet that standard will not receive a refund/rebate.

Simple and workable "adult" solution that respects your freedom to forgo money in order to dress like a slob for a TELEVISED Event and the Event's desire to be portrayed in the best light possible for television by rewarding players that meet that standard at the Final Table with their buyin or part of it returned to them.

They're poker players, not politicians...
They want to play poker and most of them probly don't really care to appear on TV. Maybe 10 years ago things would have been different since there was a sponsorship war but now ?

I don't think it's their role to "promote" the game if they're not especialy sponsored to do it.
Poker is and always was a selfish game, and to think that other people should dress in a way that suits YOU just proves my point about selfishness.

Personally, I don't especially like suits and fancy stuff, I find them boring and snob and I wouldn't like to identify my favorite hobby with white-collar a**holes.

^^^^
"suits and fancy stuff"

If I could change my screen name to that I would.

English isn't my native language and you're probably making fun of me about something not very "english" in my sentences but you totally understood the meaning of what I've said.
Very smart guy

No offense intended if English is not your first language. I just found it amusing that someone would equate dressing professionally for a televised Final Table of your profession on display as being "forced" to wear "suits and fancy stuff."

As noted, I believe my suggested solution respects both sides: the Events that want a professional appearance for their televised Final Table and the players that want to look like slobs/bums.

Rebate the buyin to those that meet the dress/appearance code and return that money to the Final Table prize pool for those that consciously choose to forgo that money and do not. Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

This is generally true, but those chess players are getting paid to play in those events.

Show me any group of athletes/competitors who suit up and I'll show you someone who's collecting pay, not risking their own money. Someone here in this thread is suggesting taking money out of the prize pool (!) to give to the snappy dressers. Good lord no.

I can't believe anyone thinks it would make a difference. You know what corporations like more than collared shirts? Exposure. Present a product that people actually watch in large numbers and maybe you have something.

WCGRider picked my question from the chat at 1h25min35sec, about the dress code.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kPDSTXad2g

I think it would help poker if the announcer didnt talk like a hillbilly hick.