If you read my post carefully, the suggestion is not any kind of dissing on non-subscribers, and yes it tries to do something for subscribers. It merely states that IF there are ever too many players to avoid SERVER lag, then the subscribers would be the priority game-enterers. (And if the total number of players at the moment doesn't overwhelm a server, then everyone gets in. With a timer on non-subscribers still.)
No, it's not like a club. It's like a preferential entry that kicks in when the restaurant reaches capacity. Anyone else wanting a table will be in a line, and only then will payers get in over non-payers. And anyone exiting will be back in line.
This was never meant as a battle of haves vs have-nots. Z put a price on the game so there would be money for new servers and programming time. Each of us gets to decide whether what he is delivering and what he might deliver in the future is worth the price. For some, yes; for some, no. There is an associated service level for paying vs non-paying, which granted Z is still figuring out the mix. And we all (pay and non) are trying to help him define that. No one is against anyone. Heck, I could be a non-pay tomorrow if I choose (ignore my lack of icon; we're still working on that). Once it's defined, everyone still gets to choose. If defined well, some non-pays may say Ok now it's worth it, and others will say Nope.
There does need to be a service level difference. We can still have a reasonable discussion about it. If we don't, we'll leave Z with no useful input and he'll just pick a way. I think we'd rather discuss it reasonably, and I mean pay and non-pay both. Let's avoid abrasiveness and blame, and get on with reasoned suggestions.
Manfred