This whole concept is a bit of a CF, but I don't think player opt-in/out is a big deal, and in fact I feel it's an important option. IMHO it'd be much better if player opt-in happened directly at the IFPA level (e.g. players pay a $10 annual fee directly to the IFPA if they wish their points to be tallied) -- that would take multiple pressures off the TD, who already has a lot to deal with. But either way works -- this is just an extra checkbox "IFPA paid" on the tournament sign-in sheet.
No different from today. Hopefully TD's always explain how player funds are distributed -- we've had this discussion about "tournament transparency" many times. And if a player wishes to opt-out they can ask to be suppressed, just as they can today.
Simple. Abbie won the tournament. Period. Donna was the top-ranked WPPR participant in the tournament.
Very few tournaments have a guarantee of how many participants there will be, so no one should ever be "expecting" a certain number of WPPRs. For WPPR purposes, a high opt-out rate is similar to something like bad weather causing a lot of people to bail on the tournament... except more fun, because the competition part actually happens with all the participants.
Again, I don't see any confusion about this. There are no two sets of photos or announcements. The tournament was won by Abbie, Ben came in second, and Charlene was third. Period. As far as the tournament is concerned, it's irrelevant if these players did or didn't opt-in to WPPR's.
No, it doesn't. Look, just pretend that the opted-out players haven't yet met their minimum of 5 WPPR events to be "counted". The opted-out players are still participating in the tournament, maybe they're kicking ass, maybe they're getting their ass kicked, but they're still part of the event, and influence the final rankings.