BluffTHIS!
01-26-2007, 05:26 AM
Since Mason said in his followup comment that he/2+2 had no further comment at this time, I don't expect him to respond to this substantively. Also I really don't understand the "agreed to give them time" comment from Mason, as he hasn't expressed an interest in the political process overall, and his previous statement was merely as to why he/2+2 could not lend their support to the PPA in view of its shortcomings. So I really don't understand what Mason means as his views in the form of his attorneys' investigation are known, and there isn't another step that can be taken past that if the PPA doesn't address those shortcomings. So unless there is some other underlying legal issue between the PPA and 2+2, Mason's statement is somewhat confusing.
My comments therefore are in general, or maybe addressed to the PPA. The PPA has now indicated twice through private contacts, once through our moderator Berge, and now through Mason, that they intend to respond in some manner, and also now apparently are willing to recognize some concerns that should be addressed. And certainly as one of their most outspoken critics, I still would welcome the PPA addressing *all* of the issues raised in previous threads. However I am not interested in their only addressing a couple easier ones, and leaving the rest ignored, and then trying to claim they have addressed all of them. My hope though as I am sure is shared by all here, is that they are able to do all that is necessary to gain our support, as we certainly recognize the great practical obstacles in setting up a similar organization.
Nonetheless, I feel we should continue to discuss the goals and tactics for a new organization, because that *should* be helpful to the PPA as well assuming they are willing to make us participants in their organization, and not just part of a statistical number they bandy about as showing they represent a lot of players, when those players have no substantive input into their goals and strategy for attaining same.
Without rehasing all the subject matter of previous threads, let me restate briefly what many of us believe needs to happen with the PPA:
1) They reorganize their board to be more representative of its membership, and state that their primary accountability is to that membership, and NOT to the poker sites or advertising media dependant on same.
2) They take steps to be financially/operationally transparent.
3) They CLEARLY state what all their goals/objectives are, and that those include legalizing/expanding poker in B&M venues on a state level.
4) That any state organizations setup by them be operationally/financially independant enough to pursue state level initiatives regarding both online and B&M poker, and that such state organizations not just be regarded as fundraising funnels for the national PPA organization.
5) That the PPA provide a richer information resource online which can be contributed to by its members (like in wiki form perhaps), which will be a go-to resource for friendly legislators and media.
6) That the PPA in regards to its goals, state that it will not allow the primary goal of legalization of online poker to be dragged down by the wishes of certain online sites to also promote sports and casino gambling for their corporations. This doesn't mean we oppose same, but just that we can't commit ourselves to having to overcome the much greater opposition that exists to those forms of gambling.
Again, I sincerely wish that the PPA has the commitment to changing itself into the form needed in order to be most effectively achieve the goals of its membership. But until that becomes apparent, we should continue to discuss here other options.
My comments therefore are in general, or maybe addressed to the PPA. The PPA has now indicated twice through private contacts, once through our moderator Berge, and now through Mason, that they intend to respond in some manner, and also now apparently are willing to recognize some concerns that should be addressed. And certainly as one of their most outspoken critics, I still would welcome the PPA addressing *all* of the issues raised in previous threads. However I am not interested in their only addressing a couple easier ones, and leaving the rest ignored, and then trying to claim they have addressed all of them. My hope though as I am sure is shared by all here, is that they are able to do all that is necessary to gain our support, as we certainly recognize the great practical obstacles in setting up a similar organization.
Nonetheless, I feel we should continue to discuss the goals and tactics for a new organization, because that *should* be helpful to the PPA as well assuming they are willing to make us participants in their organization, and not just part of a statistical number they bandy about as showing they represent a lot of players, when those players have no substantive input into their goals and strategy for attaining same.
Without rehasing all the subject matter of previous threads, let me restate briefly what many of us believe needs to happen with the PPA:
1) They reorganize their board to be more representative of its membership, and state that their primary accountability is to that membership, and NOT to the poker sites or advertising media dependant on same.
2) They take steps to be financially/operationally transparent.
3) They CLEARLY state what all their goals/objectives are, and that those include legalizing/expanding poker in B&M venues on a state level.
4) That any state organizations setup by them be operationally/financially independant enough to pursue state level initiatives regarding both online and B&M poker, and that such state organizations not just be regarded as fundraising funnels for the national PPA organization.
5) That the PPA provide a richer information resource online which can be contributed to by its members (like in wiki form perhaps), which will be a go-to resource for friendly legislators and media.
6) That the PPA in regards to its goals, state that it will not allow the primary goal of legalization of online poker to be dragged down by the wishes of certain online sites to also promote sports and casino gambling for their corporations. This doesn't mean we oppose same, but just that we can't commit ourselves to having to overcome the much greater opposition that exists to those forms of gambling.
Again, I sincerely wish that the PPA has the commitment to changing itself into the form needed in order to be most effectively achieve the goals of its membership. But until that becomes apparent, we should continue to discuss here other options.