2+2 Ask the PPA [Archive] - Two Plus Two Newer Archives

DeadMoneyDad

09-04-2007, 12:26 AM

"I know this is going to hurt, I just don't know whom yet.."

This is what I say to myself playing AK(s) in a multi-way pot pre-flop.

I mentioned in a previous post that I might be meeting with John Pappas. Well we have scheduled a day later this week.

I am a member of this forum with little standing. I think I understand some of the issues this forum has with the past actions of the PPA. I have my own issues with the past actions of the PPA. I do however have a lot more confidence in the new direction John Pappas has outlined to me.

No I am not sure I would want any job that required dealing with some of you on a regular basis, even a paid one, I don't think a non-profit could afford what anyone might demand to do this on a regular basis! /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

But as a member of this forum I will take whatever questions you all put together and promise that John at least gets them. Of course I can not promise what might happen after he gets them......

I will hope to sumarize them and post the list for the group aproval in a couple of days. I will attempt to update my profile here to add my poker e-mail address so any may feel free to send any questions they as members may want to ask and may not for whatever reason feel like asking openly.

I do not hold myself out as "the one and only true spokesman" for 2+2 (or even close to it!). I just think this is a good time for these past issues to be addressed. As I have posted in the past, I have my own issues with lost opportunities of the PPA. I also have some ideas of how it might operate better in the future.

The reason for the meeting is I have some experience in the area of grassroots politics and I have offered to volunteer some time to help in whatever manner the PPA deems nessecary.

D$D

JPFisher55

09-04-2007, 12:59 AM

Ask him what, if any role, the PPA intends to take in litigation over online poker, including the iMEGA case, the Carruthers/Kaplan case and the case in the State of Washington challenging its ban on online gambling. Does the PPA have any plans to iniate litigation against the UIGEA and its regulations if and when it is appropriate?
Will the PPA lobby Congress about complying with the WTO decision on online gambling?
These are more important issues than any current bill in Congress concerning online gambling.

TheRedRocket

09-04-2007, 02:19 AM

Why are they not aggressively trying to minimize the pending regulations. This really pisses me off and makes me want to withdraw my membership.

Mason Malmuth

09-04-2007, 02:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I am a member of this forum with little standing. I think I understand some of the issues this forum has with the past actions of the PPA. I have my own issues with the past actions of the PPA. I do however have a lot more confidence in the new direction John Pappas has outlined to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a lot of problems with this. You're an individual, not a representative of Two Plus Two. If you meet with Papas or any other representative of the PPA you are speaking only on your own and not as any sort of representative of Two Plus Two.

The PPA knows how to contact me and I have had private conversations with a representative of theirs. If Papas wants to contact me he's welcome to do so. If he wants to come on this forum and hold a discussion, he's also welcome to do so. But you only speak for yourself.

[ QUOTE ]
But as a member of this forum I will take whatever questions you all put together and promise that John at least gets them. Of course I can not promise what might happen after he gets them......

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope that no one on this forum sends you a question. Again, if Papas wants to come on here and have a discussion, that's a different matter. I and Mat Sklansky, along with our moderators, will make sure that the response he gets will be professional in nature.

[ QUOTE ]
I will hope to sumarize them and post the list for the group aproval in a couple of days. I will attempt to update my profile here to add my poker e-mail address so any may feel free to send any questions they as members may want to ask and may not for whatever reason feel like asking openly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, you are not needed to do this. Plus it would be far better if Papas or some other official representative of the PPA came here and answered questions directly.

[ QUOTE ]
I do not hold myself out as "the one and only true spokesman" for 2+2 (or even close to it!).

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to make this very clear. You are not a representative of Two Plus Two Publishing LLC or www.twoplustwo.com (http://www.twoplustwo.com), and do not represent us in any way. Only I or my designates have that authority, and you are not in that category.

Mason Malmuth

TheRedRocket

09-04-2007, 02:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I hope that no one on this forum sends you a question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Feverishly trying to delete

coachkf

09-04-2007, 02:52 AM

I don't believe he's trying to represent 2p2 publishing. Just noting that he's going to be meeting with the PPA boss, and is happy to take a list of questions from legislation forum members here.

Am I wrong? I don't get the vibe that he's trying to carry the flag of "the business" or the owners of 2p2. Just simply giving people who post in this particular subforum a chance to get questions in since he has access this week to a live meeting w/ John P.

To the O.P. :

My question (really a request). Communicate with your members like Engineer does here. Some type of "weekly action" to get folks moving is a great idea.

DeadMoneyDad

09-04-2007, 02:53 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Just to make this very clear. You are not a representative of Two Plus Two Publishing LLC or www.twoplustwo.com (http://www.twoplustwo.com), and do not represent us in any way. Only I or my designates have that authority, and you are not in that category.

Mason Malmuth

[/ QUOTE ]

I fully understand, and I thought I made it clear that both as only a member of this forum and only a member of the PPA, but NOT an offical of either I was making the offer.

If it's a bad idea then it's a bad idea. I think 2+2 has a lot to offer the PPA and the PPA 2+2.

Personally I feel and will express my personal opinion that the PPA needs to have an offical desiginated to "offically" communicate to the major poker forums.

I'm pretty sure I do not want any part of that effort given that I can't even seem to express a simple offer of attempting to offer a way to UNOFFICALLY improve communications between the two......

D$D

ericicecream

09-04-2007, 03:45 AM

PPA should have a representative on the forums to give regular updates, or better yet have a forum of their own for these questions. Ask them why they don't.

There should be regular dialogue and communication. The lack of this is the big problem with the PPA. There are alot of very smart and creative people in poker to draw ideas from, and not to do that is a shame.

DeadMoneyDad

09-04-2007, 04:11 AM

Uglyowl

09-04-2007, 09:53 AM

D$D- If your intentions are good, don’t get deterred, we need more active people on board. (I guess I am more trusting than a lot of people.)

My personal, individual (as only a member of this forum) question would be:

How will you communicate with your members better about what is going on with your organization and poker legislation?

TruePoker CEO

09-04-2007, 11:07 AM

This is unnecessary.

All PPA needs to do is post here directly, and answer questions. It is FREE, except for the effort made.

A number of poker sites recognize this opportunity and have posted here in the past to address issues.(I get my share of crap here, but it comes with the territory and is a worthwhile exercise.)

If the PPA does really value input from here, then send someone to read, post, and DISCUSS issues here.

It IS just that simple.

TruePoker CEO

09-04-2007, 11:09 AM

Amen.

Wynton

09-04-2007, 12:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
PPA should have a representative on the forums to give regular updates, or better yet have a forum of their own for these questions. Ask them why they don't.

There should be regular dialogue and communication. The lack of this is the big problem with the PPA. There are alot of very smart and creative people in poker to draw ideas from, and not to do that is a shame.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mentioned in a thread, sometime in the past few weeks, that I had stopped visiting this forum for months, but was very disappointed to learn that none of the people here who had been chosen to be State contacts by the PPA had been posting any updates.

I recall when the PPA made these choices that at least a couple of regular posters (or semi-regulars) indicated they had been chosen. But I guess even they have not been in a position to provide more information?

BluffTHIS!

09-04-2007, 02:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This is unnecessary.

All PPA needs to do is post here directly, and answer questions. It is FREE, except for the effort made.

A number of poker sites recognize this opportunity and have posted here in the past to address issues.(I get my share of crap here, but it comes with the territory and is a worthwhile exercise.)

If the PPA does really value input from here, then send someone to read, post, and DISCUSS issues here.

It IS just that simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

TP CEO,

Very nice post and 100% true. It really is that simple.

But let's note something important. Even if Mr. Pappas himself availed himself of this obvious opportunity, he is still just an employee of the board. That means he is not going to be in a position to answer any questions about the serious conflicts of interest and lack of expertise on the board, nor about why the PPA has a severely shortened list of goals that primarily cater to the business models of certain online poker sites, instead of the larger set of goals most members have. So all he is going to be able to speak to is grassroots tactics and PR (happy spin).

But it just so happens that there is a long time poster who is a member of the PPA board, Greg Fossilman Raymer. He could be the go between here and speak to the more important structural issues that have to do with the makeup of the board and the goals it subscribes to. But to my knowledge, never once has he posted about same in this forum. Though he doesn't post often in general, it is clear he reads the forums and keeps up with things, and has been gracious to talk about a lot of stuff in the past. And yet he doesn't about the PPA in this forum. Why is that? I would imagine it is because he realizes the truth of the criticisms that have been made here about the PPA board, and has too much integrity to lie to us by saying that isn't the case.

The bottom line is that the PPA has and has had, every opportunity to engage 2+2's posters and its site owners. But the reason they don't anymore is simply because they refuse to acknowledge the points that have been made in criticism of it, and have no intention of changing their focus on the sites and advertising media dependant on same being the PPA's de facto primary stakeholders, rather the broader membership.

(cue D$D's reply with repitition of: 1) more happy spin & 2) "we'll just have to see - time will tell")

DeadMoneyDad

09-04-2007, 02:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]

(cue D$D's reply with repitition of: 1) more happy spin & 2) "we'll just have to see - time will tell")

[/ QUOTE ]

"I just knew this was going to hurt." /images/graemlins/smile.gif

TruePoker CEO

09-04-2007, 06:30 PM

OP,

I took the time to raise a real substantive point about why your suggestion was unnecessary and how simple it IS for PPA to have a welcome presence in 2+2 forums ... i.e just post and respond substantively with respect to issues.

You could have addressed the substance of what I related, instead of some hissy-fit posturing because BluffThis was mean to you.

Sorry, but something is really stomach-churning about cutesy posts with smiley icons in a political discussion forum.

Uglyowl

09-04-2007, 06:36 PM

Wow is everyone over-reacting to what D$D wrote, you would have thought he was going to Pappas calling himself "President of Twoplustwo".

You are right though that Pappas should be here, but wow is everyone over-reacting.

TruePoker CEO

09-04-2007, 07:11 PM

Ugly ....

First, his post was counterproductive. Basically what D$D WAS doing was something that would gum up the works in the event that the PPA was really interested in someone posting something substantive here.

Secondly, I do not think anyone was over-reacting .... aside from BluffThis' always cogent asides about the flaws he sees in the PPA/CardPlayer/Tri-lateral Commission troika.

Tell you what, go back to D$D's first post in the PPA update and every single post of his since then. I will comp you a dollar for each substantive post.

With all due respect, D$D is not a substantive poster on the PPA. (If he WERE a PPA source, then why not take off the wraps ?)

Otherwise, his PPA posts smack of:

"geewhizgreatthingsarecoming butIcan'ttellyouwhat" because despite my access and contacts, it is "not my place".

I am always in favor of raising the standard of political discusion here, to maintain the levels reached with knowledgable posters like Nate, Mr. K, Berge and the October group that foresaw AND actively fought against the UIGE Act, and The Engineer and OBG today.

Sorry, but extremism in the defense of literacy is no vice, or something someone said like that about 40 years ago.

(To be fair, D$D does make substantive posts, in some areas, such as the IRS ... He can be articulate if he wants to be.)

fnurt

09-04-2007, 08:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Wow is everyone over-reacting to what D$D wrote, you would have thought he was going to Pappas calling himself "President of Twoplustwo".

You are right though that Pappas should be here, but wow is everyone over-reacting.

[/ QUOTE ]

But he's not even a representative of the 2+2 community, let alone some kind of "official" representative. He's an anonymous guy with 36 posts who just showed up here a few weeks ago, and the whole thing is a little weird, quite frankly.

DeadMoneyDad

09-04-2007, 10:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Ugly ....

First, his post was counterproductive. Basically what D$D WAS doing was something that would gum up the works in the event that the PPA was really interested in someone posting something substantive here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I want to avoid that at all costs!

I agree that 2+2 is an important forum. There are many people here with much more knowledge about poker and the finer points of poker legislation than I may ever have.

My only desire was to include in my conversation with John Pappas, MY sense, of both a vast untapped resource but also an problem area. The PPA's communications efforts on the web, at least from my point of view, are a major concern as an individual who would like to see real changes for poker in this country.

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I do not think anyone was over-reacting .... aside from BluffThis' always cogent asides about the flaws he sees in the PPA/CardPlayer/Tri-lateral Commission troika.

Tell you what, go back to D$D's first post in the PPA update and every single post of his since then. I will comp you a dollar for each substantive post.

With all due respect, D$D is not a substantive poster on the PPA. (If he WERE a PPA source, then why not take off the wraps ?)

Otherwise, his PPA posts smack of:

"geewhizgreatthingsarecoming butIcan'ttellyouwhat" because despite my access and contacts, it is "not my place".

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't speak for another. I am not an employee of the PPA. I think I've been pretty clear about my position as an individual as well as my intentions.

I don't think I can be any more transparent than I have been. I did not think it was in any way in the spirit of my original post to this thread to answer each and every post. I did reply to posts with comments or questions directed directly towards me.

Virtue or vice I don't know about being able to see both sides of an issue. I was told once it was because I am a middle child. Personally I blame it, as I do with all of my faults on the Jesuits! I'd put a smiley face there just to show humor incase it is lacking in the reading or writing, given the nature of internet communication, but that seems out of bounds in a political forum.......

[ QUOTE ]
I am always in favor of raising the standard of political discusion here, to maintain the levels reached with knowledgable posters like Nate, Mr. K, Berge and the October group that foresaw AND actively fought against the UIGE Act, and The Engineer and OBG today.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is my hope that I can communicate my experience in this sub-fourm with enough conviction to convince the PPA of my strong PERSONAL feelings that regular and open communication here is a nessecary vital part of any future plans.

You all each in your own way have helped me better define my PERSONAL sense of how to suscintently communicate my individual feelings on this matter.

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but extremism in the defense of literacy is no vice, or something someone said like that about 40 years ago.

(To be fair, D$D does make substantive posts, in some areas, such as the IRS ... He can be articulate if he wants to be.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's called "faint praise". I really wish I had more of substance to offer. Unless I am severly restrained by any rules Mr. Pappas may put on our conversation, I'll be happy to report back my personal views of that conversation as an individual. I've been in D.C. too long to even suggest that someone said exactly something verbatum, only to find out I got left holding the end of a trial ballon. Best case senario I convince Mr. Pappas of the need for some sort of offical regular participation, hopefully directly with officals of this group. I sure that the offers of an open and professional dialouge are genuine.

djrion

09-04-2007, 10:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'll be happy to report back my personal views of that conversation as an individual.

[/ QUOTE ]

And there are those of us who are quite interested in what you have to say. Please do not let the pessimistic views of some slow you down! I must thank you for coming to this forum and posting what you have, as I personally have been intrigued. Have fun at your meeting and I look forward to a report in the "Poker Legislation" forum when you are done!

ryDog

TruePoker CEO

09-04-2007, 11:05 PM

"I've been in D.C. too long to even suggest that someone said exactly something verbatum, only to find out I got left holding the end of a trial ballon."

Good. This statement probably does a lot to put your posts in context.

Do everyone a favor, don't report PPA/Pappas conversations as such unless they are on the record or not subject to "severe restraint". Let them speak for theselves, or better yet, act.

Yes, it was "faint praise", but posters come in all types. I wanted to be clear that your other stuff would lead me to expect a more substative contribution to the discourse here. That you evidently understand the nature of planting stories and items into circulation, hence the "trial balloon" comment; you mightunderstand better the sensitivity some folks have to approaches from the blue by someone saying "Gosh, good news coming".

PPA may have turned a corner toward effective action, but while time is passing legitimate issues raised by sincerely interested posters here get no substantive PPA response.

The answer to that problem IS simple, get the PPA itself to send a poster over here. People like to be asked for more than just money. TheEngineer seems to have beaten down the PPA door, that is positive. Let's hope you can do what you indicate.

I am sure of the sincerity of Mason's posts. I have never known him to be insincere.... politically shy and reticent perhaps, but always sincerely so. He acts to promote a marketplace of ideas, rather than his own political agenda.

2+2 has a poker legislation forum precisely to provide a place for the sort of dialogue and discourse needed to inform readers and shape possible action, on either side of an issue. It is a resource offered for FREE to the posters.

whangarei

09-04-2007, 11:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
And there are those of us who are quite interested in what you have to say. Please do not let the pessimistic views of some slow you down! I must thank you for coming to this forum and posting what you have, as I personally have been intrigued. Have fun at your meeting and I look forward to a report in the "Poker Legislation" forum when you are done!

[/ QUOTE ]

Berge20

09-05-2007, 12:17 AM

"I've been in D.C. too long to even suggest that someone said exactly something verbatum, only to find out I got left holding the end of a trial ballon."

Uh oh. Welcome to the club /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Merkle

09-05-2007, 12:43 AM

HEY!!!!

How come Berge gets to use smily faces in a legislative forum???

<grin> jk

uphigh_downlow

09-05-2007, 08:07 AM

As a longtime lurker of the legislation forum this is the second time I'v seen an attempt at communication being aggresively bashed. The first was with The engineer, but of course regular opsters couldnt lay into him, cos he had the rep. DaD is just an easy trget.

Anyway my personal feeling is of disgust at this grandstanding. Basic idea , they should come here. We are important. No need to take our queries there.

And then I read somewhere about objections to the PPA board composition.

Why would you hope that noone sends any questions?
Why is this unnecessary?
Why does Papas need well crafted and professional replies from the moderators/owners?
Why is it far better if Papas came here and answered questions?

I'm quite disillusioned with these old ideas expresed by the so called " elite" of this forum.

This is a simple case of a poster asking members for questions that they wish answered, not suggestions as so readily flow from TPCEO and BluffThiss.

You guys can make your own thread for your "thinking out loud" moments, and not spam/hijack other threads and clutter their readability.( Surely moderators will notice and address this... or mebbe not)

The more I read about this, more this seems to be about politics and business of Twoplustwo, than of the interests of pokerplayers.

The least you can do is stay out of any grassroot level approch( this thread). BUt wait, what if PPA goes grassroot on the TpT membership. Shrinking leverage. Cant command/demand things with significant authority. Ouch that hurts the business of tpt. No Good.

So bash any grassroot effort towards communication. To hell with the interests of poker players.

So even in the extreme case of DaD being a PPA stooge, who is just trying to build goodwill amongst the tpt community, even somehow adding to the membership base, by accepting a bunch of questions and bringing us the PPA answers to them, there is absolutely no reason to look at this as anything but forward movement for the poker playing community here.

For commercial and political interests here at TPT, it might be different story, and hence the attempt to weed out any such attempts.

Of Course if PPA and its entire board , and their staff, and ... came here in person, and said to the great wise man himself," We submit to your superior authority". Show us the light!! It might just become a different story.

uphigh_downlow

09-05-2007, 08:17 AM

YoureToast

09-05-2007, 08:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
As a longtime lurker of the legislation forum this is the second time I'v seen an attempt at communication being aggresively bashed. The first was with The engineer, but of course regular opsters couldnt lay into him, cos he had the rep. DaD is just an easy trget.

Anyway my personal feeling is of disgust at this grandstanding. Basic idea , they should come here. We are important. No need to take our queries there.

And then I read somewhere about objections to the PPA board composition.

Why would you hope that noone sends any questions?
Why is this unnecessary?
Why does Papas need well crafted and professional replies from the moderators/owners?
Why is it far better if Papas came here and answered questions?

I'm quite disillusioned with these old ideas expresed by the so called " elite" of this forum.

This is a simple case of a poster asking members for questions that they wish answered, not suggestions as so readily flow from TPCEO and BluffThiss.

You guys can make your own thread for your "thinking out loud" moments, and not spam/hijack other threads and clutter their readability.( Surely moderators will notice and address this... or mebbe not)

The more I read about this, more this seems to be about politics and business of Twoplustwo, than of the interests of pokerplayers.

The least you can do is stay out of any grassroot level approch( this thread). BUt wait, what if PPA goes grassroot on the TpT membership. Shrinking leverage. Cant command/demand things with significant authority. Ouch that hurts the business of tpt. No Good.

So bash any grassroot effort towards communication. To hell with the interests of poker players.

So even in the extreme case of DaD being a PPA stooge, who is just trying to build goodwill amongst the tpt community, even somehow adding to the membership base, by accepting a bunch of questions and bringing us the PPA answers to them, there is absolutely no reason to look at this as anything but forward movement for the poker playing community here.

For commercial and political interests here at TPT, it might be different story, and hence the attempt to weed out any such attempts.

Of Course if PPA and its entire board , and their staff, and ... came here in person, and said to the great wise man himself," We submit to your superior authority". Show us the light!! It might just become a different story.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. I am particularly disturbed by Mason's pronouncement that he hopes no one gives OP questions. Mason doesn't like the PPA because, presumably among other things, there are people (a person) on the board that he doesn't like for whatever reason. Quite frankly, I don't get what the agenda is on 2+2s part here. The comment above about elitism certainly seems appropriate.

Cactus Jack

09-05-2007, 08:58 AM

Pappas has quite the hurdle to overcome if he's to be successful. Bolcerek didn't exactly build more bridges than he seemed to burn.

4_2_it

09-05-2007, 09:16 AM

uphigh, toast,

I think you guys are missing Mason's basic point: This forum is free and the PPA is welcome to have a representative post here. Berge and the other Legs mods will make sure that they are treated like any other member and not flamed, bashed or ridiculed. This is not a hard concept to understand and it's not a huge burden on the PPA to do this.

Do you guys really think that we would be better served having an ambassador to go to the PPA with our questions? That's really silly while this board exists. I'm glad D$D is meeting with Pappas and it appears that he has some of the same concerns as many posters here, but as he has stated (and Mason reiterated), he is merely speaking for himself. If the PPA is really concerned or interested in what this community thinks, then the PPA should come here, not expect each individual poster to come to them.

Just to be clear. I am not employed by 2p2 or associated with them in any manner except that I mod a few forums without remuneration. The views expressed above are my personal views and may not agree with those of 2p2 management or anyone else.

Uglyowl

09-05-2007, 09:22 AM

I think Mason is 100% correct in that the PPA needs to be on these boards. That being said, the following comment by Mason really struck a nerve yesterday with me and I gave it a day to reflect and am still a bit put off by it:

[ QUOTE ]
Just to make this very clear. You are not a representative of Two Plus Two Publishing LLC or www.twoplustwo.com (http://www.twoplustwo.com), and do not represent us in any way. Only I or my designates have that authority, and you are not in that category.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason’s thoughts could have been more constructive, instead of jumping down D$D’s throat. At worst, D$D stated he was a member of the forum?

Who knows if D$D is a PPA “fan-boy” or could become a valuable ally in this fight, but if never give him a chance to establish himself here we will never know.

And yes the word “elite” does seem to fit a lot here.

4_2_it

09-05-2007, 09:48 AM

Uglyowl,

D$D is welcome to post here as long as he follows the forum rules (and I think he has done that so far). I am reserving judgement until I have a better idea of exactly what he brings to the table. Others would do well to take this approach.

I can't blame Mason for protecting his business. You can disagree with his delivery method, but his point was valid and I'd probably do something similar if I were in his place. I know I wouldn't want an anonymous Internet poster potentially being construed as a representative of my business.

Offtopic --- Your avatar brings back fond memories. If only Virgil could get some screen time.

TruePoker CEO

09-05-2007, 10:46 AM

Were people who asked D$D some very pointed questions to feel him out being eltitist ? No.

I think D$D has acquited himself well and seems well-versed in the action aspect of politics, especially DC. He should be a valued contributor to both 2+2 discussions and everyone's efforts to "right" the current political/legal climate around poker.

What would it mean to "right" the current legal framework ?Opinions are universal and posting them is what 2+2 is for.

What D$D was discussing went beyond posting and into action. That runs into a different standard. Sorry, if I did not accept his messenger offer at face value, but, through discourse here I think it has been refined and improved. Instead of D$D likely getting bogged down as a go-between between posters here and the PPA, it seems likely (?) tha PPA will directly put in a presence here.

Look, you may have some bone to pick with Mason's political style, or lack thereof, but he has done a great service by providing a forum for ideas to surface. Within that forum, posts and ideas are critiqued and generally constructively reviewed. That is not elitist, it is political discourse.

I spent years both in DC and working for labor unions and other populist-based political organizations. Grassroots does not mean sheep-like donations of money, but real democratically shaped policies and agendas. Pollyanna populism cannot survive or be effective. Democratically based efforts are difficult and rough to form and maintain.

The PPA came from Michael B's sincere beliefs, it definitely strayed thereafter and was co-opted along the way. Dedicated workers like TheEngineer and, mabe D$D, can help shape it back to serving the interests of poker players, not their advisors, suppliers or vendors.

(I clearly have an interest in how or whether there is "poker reform" legislation. As an offshore operator, I likely would have ZERO to gain from the Frank Bill. I would have a lot to gain from the Wexler Bill. We all, meaning operators, players and vendors, would stand to gain most rom a watering down of possible adverse regulatory language to secure a poker exclusion by definition.

I happen to think a regulatory effort is in the interests of "poker players". Is my personal/company interest necessarily that of "poker players", not really ... if players would prefer a US-based brick and mortar running the online poker market.)

I do support discussion of poker, politics and the legislative and it will never be a tea party if it is truly open and frank.

YoureToast

09-05-2007, 12:25 PM

MiltonFriedman

09-05-2007, 01:39 PM

"For whatever reason, no one from the PPA has joined. ...

I am curious, how "elitist" might it be of PPA to avoid 2+2 posters' direct questions for "whatever reason" ?

"WTF is wrong"? Leaving aside any philisophical point, like hosting a forum for posters to participate in discourse directly, Mason puts up a forum for people to come and post on. That builds traffic, which sells ads. Why would you want him to give up the traffic to be generated by a PPA direct appearance ?

Grasshopp3r

09-05-2007, 01:57 PM

The inertia that is the PPA is not acceptable. I want action. I want grass roots organizing. I want our agenda advanced every day. If the PPA is not going to do that, with the zeal that is necessary, something else needs to take the flag.

On the other hand, I can't figure out why Mason is so opposed to the PPA if he is unwilling to take the flag. This board provides him with the tools to organize and take control of the opposition to the gambling moralists.

Inaction is a losing strategy.

Now, unless this violates some sort of law, here is what 2+2 should do:

1. Set up forums for every state or major metro area for the purpose of grass roots organization. Set up forums for organization methods. There are willing and able leaders amongst our ranks.
2. Advance the issues through local, grass roots means. Organize members to act through both parties.
3. National structures will follow, whether it is 2+2 taking control of the PPA or being stronger and more effective than the PPA.

uphigh_downlow

09-05-2007, 03:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
uphigh, toast,

I think you guys are missing Mason's basic point: This forum is free and the PPA is welcome to have a representative post here. Berge and the other Legs mods will make sure that they are treated like any other member and not flamed, bashed or ridiculed. This is not a hard concept to understand and it's not a huge burden on the PPA to do this.

Do you guys really think that we would be better served having an ambassador to go to the PPA with our questions? That's really silly while this board exists. I'm glad D$D is meeting with Pappas and it appears that he has some of the same concerns as many posters here, but as he has stated (and Mason reiterated), he is merely speaking for himself. If the PPA is really concerned or interested in what this community thinks, then the PPA should come here, not expect each individual poster to come to them.

Just to be clear. I am not employed by 2p2 or associated with them in any manner except that I mod a few forums without remuneration. The views expressed above are my personal views and may not agree with those of 2p2 management or anyone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no issue with the 'demand' for PPA to have a rep communicate here. But I do have a problem with anyone who insists on an "all or nothing" approach, and while they do nothing constructive to achieve the end-result, they pounce on every half-measure.

A start is better than nothing. Usually thats how things get done.

Bashing the PPA and posters soft to PPA just seems like the favourite pastime of some armchair generals here, and thats what was the last straw for me today.

Its quite obvious to me now that tpt ownership have their own agenda which is not completely aligned with the agenda of the poker playing community And while I cannot have any objections to it( who could fault Mason etal to look out for their personal interests), I do hope that more in the community are aware of the distinction and the power struggle, so we can make decisions that are in our best interests, rather than putting blind faith in places, it doesnt belong.

This is clearly obvious when you see that Mason hopes no questions get sent to PPA thru DaD. The player community needs to see that Mason is watching out for his interest, and we should watch out for our own. And there might be overlap in some areas, but they surely are different sets of interests. I dont think that distinction has been made out in the past, and I hope to cause some more debate on it.

What I have more of a problem is with some posters who are part of the community, and yet act out in a way that benefits ownership and hurts the player community.

The community wants dialogue, and if it can be initiated one way or the other without the whole shebang, then there is no need to jump posters for making such suggestions. It sounds like intellectual, elitist, rhetoric without application in the real world.

Either these posters do not care about 'our' ( player) interests, or they just like the sound on their own voice.

And for that reason I suggested that they make their own threads for their ramblings, instead of hijacking others' threads that are action based.

BluffTHIS!

09-05-2007, 04:29 PM

ughigh et al.,

Some of you really don't seem to have a grasp of the situation. It is precisely Mason and 2p2 that does not have a vested interest in any particular business model of poker, whether it be B&M or online. If anything, he is as unbiased as it comes regarding these things (and I do realize that 2p2 takes ads but that is a small part of their biz). However when he is asked to give an unequivocal backing of the PPA in order to help that organization, his reputation is on the line if he should vouch for them to the posters of 2p2 and that endorsement isn't 100% warranted. And since he has had and still does have strong reservations, as I do, about the structure and makeup of the PPA board as well as other issues, he has said he still can't give that endorsement, though he is willing to continue to engage the PPA in dialogue. If you and others had followed everything here the past year you would know all this.

Also I want to make a critical point. The critics of the PPA like myself are not badgering them just because of ineffectiveness, or a "half start" as you call it, but rather because the PPA does not support all of the goals that many of us believe it should have. So then what you have is not only a political ineptness in the past year, but a strategy that doens't even attempt to achieve the goals most of us have.

Instead, the PPA, whose board is dominated by CP magazine and online sites, seeks only to advance the narrowest of agendas, and not even competently at that.

The reason so many of you dislike this criticism is because you are so damn desparate that you can't see the forest for the trees. There are many competing business interests in the gaming industry. But we poker players have an interest in having the widest possible choice of legal options to play, be it online or in our own states at B&M venues. And by promoting such a broad agenda, the individual elements could lend each other a synergistic strength that any one individual goal would have a hard time gaining.

The bottom line is that Mason and 2p2 generously provide this forum for 100% honest and open conversation. But if you or others expect an uncritical/unmerited endorsement of the PPA, then you are the ones being unrealistic. And it is unrealistic as well, as pointed out by others in this thread, to expect anything productive even for grassroots action to come of using middlemen, when the PPA is welcome, as it always has been, to have an official rep or reps here to talk to us. But they have to be willing to discuss 100% of the issues openly and honestly.

For all of you who seem to have some anger at Mason or other critics, I would suggest that you direct a healthy portion of that at the owners of CP magazine who have hijacked the PPA in order to look out primarily for their own interests and those of certain online sites whose advertising they depend on. Ask them why they need 4 out of 6 non-chairman positions on the board, with the other two filled by players who have contracts with online sites. Ask them whether they are willing to give up that control of the PPA and allow the board to have a wider range of members who represent the average joe players, and who have relevant expertise in the law and politics. Some of you wish to ignore these issues because they are difficult. But the very best grassroots political tactics in the world won't help an ill-conceived overall strategy.

YoureToast

09-05-2007, 04:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"For whatever reason, no one from the PPA has joined. ...

I am curious, how "elitist" might it be of PPA to avoid 2+2 posters' direct questions for "whatever reason" ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps elistist, perhaps lazy, perhaps stupid....Who knows? But who cares? Thats not the point.

[ QUOTE ]
"WTF is wrong"? Leaving aside any philisophical point, like hosting a forum for posters to participate in discourse directly, Mason puts up a forum for people to come and post on. That builds traffic, which sells ads. Why would you want him to give up the traffic to be generated by a PPA direct appearance ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what you're getting at. Can you elaborate?

YoureToast

09-05-2007, 04:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
ughigh et al.,

Some of you really don't seem to have a grasp of the situation. It is precisely Mason and 2p2 that does not have a vested interest in any particular business model of poker, whether it be B&M or online. If anything, he is as unbiased as it comes regarding these things (and I do realize that 2p2 takes ads but that is a small part of their biz). However when he is asked to give an unequivocal backing of the PPA in order to help that organization, his reputation is on the line if he should vouch for them to the posters of 2p2 and that endorsement isn't 100% warranted. And since he has had and still does have strong reservations, as I do, about the structure and makeup of the PPA board as well as other issues, he has said he still can't give that endorsement, though he is willing to continue to engage the PPA in dialogue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who is demanding 2+2's endorsement? Perhaps my reading comprehension is awful, but that is not what OP was asking is it? I thought he wanted a LIST OF QUESTIONS (and Mason inexplictably told the rest of us not to provide such a list.). This is my only problem with Mason's statement, but the INTENT behind it is what is more ominous. I don't know exactly what that intent is, but I suspect its based on SELFISH MOTIVATIONS, because there can be NO OTHER justification for making such a ludicrous statement. If there is, please fill us all in.

[ QUOTE ]
The bottom line is that Mason and 2p2 generously provide this forum for 100% honest and open conversation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absolutely ridiculous. They are not doing this out of generosity; they are doing it to profit and because they love it. (Which by the way are COMPLETELY VALID REASONS; but I'm sick of hearing comments like this making them sound like Saints -- they're just really friggin smart people that have capitalized on a subject matter they love).

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
But if you or others expect an uncritical/unmerited endorsement of the PPA

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, never said this.

[ QUOTE ]
For all of you who seem to have some anger at Mason or other critics, I would suggest that you direct a healthy portion of that at the owners of CP magazine who have hijacked the PPA in order to look out primarily for their own interests and those of certain online sites whose advertising they depend on. Ask them why they need 4 out of 6 non-chairman positions on the board, with the other two filled by players who have contracts with online sites. Ask them whether they are willing to give up that control of the PPA and allow the board to have a wider range of members who represent the average joe players, and who have relevant expertise in the law and politics. Some of you wish to ignore these issues because they are difficult. But the very best grassroots political tactics in the world won't help an ill-conceived overall strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

All fair enough, but again, so what?????

Mason Malmuth

09-05-2007, 04:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Its quite obvious to me now that tpt ownership have their own agenda which is not completely aligned with the agenda of the poker playing community And while I cannot have any objections to it( who could fault Mason etal to look out for their personal interests), I do hope that more in the community are aware of the distinction and the power struggle, so we can make decisions that are in our best interests, rather than putting blind faith in places, it doesnt belong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think just the opposite is true. You obviously don't know the history here. Through our efforts, the PPA has improved as an organization, but in my opinion, they have a long way to go.

MM

MiltonFriedman

09-05-2007, 05:05 PM

The 2+2 business model is to attract traffic and sell ads. If Mason, theoretically, felt that a direct PPA poster would yield more traffic than would someone mucking about as a messenger, why would you think that is elitist or wrong ? You are getting lunch for free, you want to complain about the menu design ?

Now could you clarify something for me ? You think that PPA is "perhaps elistist, perhaps lazy, perhaps stupid....Who knows? But who cares? Thats not the point."

Dear Miss Manners, are you upset because Mason allegedly snubbed a supposedly grass-roots organization you now say is itself "perhaps elitist, perhaps lazy, perhaps stupid " ? Could you clarify your concern then ?

DeadMoneyDad

09-05-2007, 05:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Were people who asked D$D some very pointed questions to feel him out being eltitist ? No.
...

...
I do support discussion of poker, politics and the legislative and it will never be a tea party if it is truly open and frank.

[/ QUOTE ]

While the journey wasn't always plesant, and took some measure of self control, getting to a good destination seems, at least for me as an INDIVIDUAL /images/graemlins/wink.gif it was worth the effort. One thing you can guarentee from 2+2 is passion about poker.

Effective political action requires both passion and a tough skin. Well at least a lasting effort.....

I had a brief conversation with John today involving mainly the timing of our meeting tomorrow. One thing became clear to me for that brief dialouge, he seems very aware that he will have to devote a good amount of effort to over comming past actions and lost opportunities if he is to be sucessful in implementing his "new" vision.

As I stated in my first post I have hope for the "new" PPA. But my hopes aren't always fufilled. I'm told I helped elect our current President twice, and the GOP would have not had control of the Senate at one point without my efforts. Look at how that turned out!

I do want to thank all who have posted comments to my posts. I don't mean to be rude to those that posted positive comments, but I want to especially thank those who were most negative.

D$D

Mason Malmuth

09-05-2007, 05:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The 2+2 business model is to attract traffic and sell ads.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. We are mainly a book publishing company.

[ QUOTE ]
If Mason, theoretically, felt that a direct PPA poster would yield more traffic than would someone mucking about as a messenger, why would you think that is elitist or wrong ?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. Our position concerning the PPA is neutral. We do have some issues with them and want to make sure, because of these issues, that they deal with us directly.

Best wishes,
Mason

MiltonFriedman

09-05-2007, 06:16 PM

Hey, Mason, don't bother me with facts ... I am theorizing here.

(I've been wrong before, am wrong now, and will be wrong again in the future I am sure. That does not make you an elitist for pointing it out however.)

YoureToast

09-05-2007, 06:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]

The 2+2 business model is to attract traffic and sell ads. If Mason, theoretically, felt that a direct PPA poster would yield more traffic than would someone mucking about as a messenger, why would you think that is elitist or wrong ? You are getting lunch for free, you want to complain about the menu design ?

Now could you clarify something for me ? You think that PPA is "perhaps elistist, perhaps lazy, perhaps stupid....Who knows? But who cares? Thats not the point."

Dear Miss Manners, are you upset because Mason allegedly snubbed a supposedly grass-roots organization you now say is itself "perhaps elitist, perhaps lazy, perhaps stupid " ? Could you clarify your concern then ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not upset that he "allegedly anubbed" the PPA. I'm upset that he asked me to not ask a question! (And I don't trust his intentions)

sethypooh21

09-05-2007, 06:52 PM

I'm slightly disturbed by MM's first post as well. His objections and problems with PPA are well known (and, though I don't know enough of the underlying facts to evaluate, his major complaints re: conflicts of interest are at least plausible), and he quite rightly points out that PPA should have someone in this forum pretty regularly (of course, many online sites should have reps here more often then they do as well...)

But that said, as long as it's clear that D$D is not a rep of 2p2 (which is pretty blindingly obvious), what does it hurt us to submit questions to be answered by Pappas? He may give us self-serving, mealy-mouthed [censored], but so what? That tells us what we need to know just as would a substantive answer.

And Mason, as much as I appreciate your work both on the books and in providing us these forums, you aren't the boss of this community. You may own the site, and the rights to the individual posts, but I don't think it's appropriate to try and stifle a legitimate* and possibly useful line of communication between the members of this forum and the PPA.

* used advisedly

CybrPunk

09-05-2007, 07:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
No. Our position concerning the PPA is neutral. We do have some issues with them and want to make sure, because of these issues, that they deal with us directly.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to remind you that, just as D$D doesn't represent your organization, Two Plus Two doesn't represent the poker community as a whole. Attempting to corner PPA into these forums to address issues that you have with them is nonsensical. When I have problems with an organization the onus is on me to make an effort to contact them. Nobody is going to magically appear at my doorstep so that I can voice my concerns therefore I have to make that effort.

The PPA has forums of their own. By the same regard, they're free and you're more than welcome to sign up at their forums to express the concerns you have with their organization.

I personally see your request for people to not submit questions as a hindrance to the poker community as a whole. I have to wonder whether your original reply to D$D is fueled by selfish motives. From day one since UIGEA Two Plus Two hasn't expressed a desire to help the poker community with regard to the legislation. In fact, you came out directly and said that you're in the business of publishing books and not political lobbying. In my eyes, this is just another example of Two Plus Two hindering the progress needed here.

If you really want to help the poker community, take steps to try and open the communication channels. If that means signing up at their forums and making efforts to contact them, then so be it. I personally salute D$D, The Engineer, obg and various others who have put forth way more visible effort than any 'representative' of 2p2 has since the inception of PPA and UIGEA.

I see no harm in D$D bringing a list of questions from individuals, who happen to be members of these forums, and returning to these forums with answers for the individuals who want to ask them. I'm sure you can agree that, from an organizational standpoint, having one Q&A session that addresses a large number of issues is quite efficient. This could actually result in a great deal of useful information. Instead I fear that most of the posters here will see the red name suggesting not to send questions and, in the end, the poker community at large will be the ones who suffer.

whangarei

09-05-2007, 07:43 PM

D$D: Here's a question I would like answered by Pappas: Does he intend to "fight back" against the NFL in its attempts to take away our freedom to play online poker? A boycott is preferred, but even an email message to its almost 700,000 members (I bet less than 10,000 are aware of the NFL's actions) would go a long way.

Also, does he intend to organize a more aggressive legislative contact drive. I am thinking a model based on MoveOn would be effective, where they email you the numbers of your representatives along with the message to deliver to them, and provide a link for you to click saying that you contacted them and allowing you to describe their response if any.

DeadMoneyDad

09-05-2007, 08:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Also, does he intend to organize a more aggressive legislative contact drive. I am thinking a model based on MoveOn would be effective, where they email you the numbers of your representatives along with the message to deliver to them, and provide a link for you to click saying that you contacted them and allowing you to describe their response if any.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do have a process similar to this in action on their main page called "what you can do." If you follow the directions and complete the forms, they track your actions because they then sent me a thank you e-mail for being an "August Advocate."

In a previous campaign we used this information to gague activity, and often then followed up the inital personal e-mails with other information. In the 72 hour campaign a GOP grassroots effort this became the basis in part for selection of "72 hour Team Leaders" in some states.

I would hope that is they are using this activity response and tie it into TheEngineer's letters as well if they already don't they should. It is these types of automatic computer based that become really valuable.

D$D

Legislurker

09-05-2007, 08:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Also, does he intend to organize a more aggressive legislative contact drive. I am thinking a model based on MoveOn would be effective, where they email you the numbers of your representatives along with the message to deliver to them, and provide a link for you to click saying that you contacted them and allowing you to describe their response if any.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do have a process similar to this in action on their main page called "what you can do." If you follow the directions and complete the forms, they track your actions because they then sent me a thank you e-mail for being an "August Advocate."

In a previous campaign we used this information to gague activity, and often then followed up the inital personal e-mails with other information. In the 72 hour campaign a GOP grassroots effort this became the basis in part for selection of "72 hour Team Leaders" in some states.

I would hope that is they are using this activity response and tie it into TheEngineer's letters as well if they already don't they should. It is these types of automatic computer based that become really valuable.

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Well let them know they need to hire professional help for the website. It blows. On so many levels. That is their public face, and its horrible. How can you claim to have 600k members and the top posts on the message board barely total 60 VIEWS.

oldbookguy

09-05-2007, 08:33 PM

D$D, I am not one to critize anyone working for our cause.

First, you state at one point, "In a previous campaign we used this information to gague activity, and often then", do you or do you not represent the PPA?

What he is asking you to ask, not answer for the PPA (are you fielding questions for them now too?, see above), would / will the PPA actively e-mail members action to be taken.

Yes, the info, as we all know, is on the PPA page, heck it is on my page, the Senate page, The House page......

Organizations such as Move on and others post and e-mail to motivate their base weekly and sometimes more often on issues.

That is the question / suggestion presented to you to present to the PPA, not answer for the PPA, unless.....

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Also, does he intend to organize a more aggressive legislative contact drive. I am thinking a model based on MoveOn would be effective, where they email you the numbers of your representatives along with the message to deliver to them, and provide a link for you to click saying that you contacted them and allowing you to describe their response if any.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do have a process similar to this in action on their main page called "what you can do." If you follow the directions and complete the forms, they track your actions because they then sent me a thank you e-mail for being an "August Advocate."

In a previous campaign we used this information to gague activity, and often then followed up the inital personal e-mails with other information. In the 72 hour campaign a GOP grassroots effort this became the basis in part for selection of "72 hour Team Leaders" in some states.

I would hope that is they are using this activity response and tie it into TheEngineer's letters as well if they already don't they should. It is these types of automatic computer based that become really valuable.

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

DeadMoneyDad

09-05-2007, 08:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Well let them know they need to hire professional help for the website. It blows. On so many levels. That is their public face, and its horrible. How can you claim to have 600k members and the top posts on the message board barely total 60 VIEWS.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I was sitting here a while ago thinking of how to summarize this thread, to include both the questions as well as to capture the mood and full taste of this fourm and issue.

I noticed as you pointed out, that my silly little posts here have generated more replies in 2 days and more views than many on the PPA's forum. I doubt that any effective grassroots effort would want to try and operate in anothers forum long-term, initially you have to use whatever method is working to get any message out.

Well I came up with an either brilliant or completely lazy way to capture it all. I sent John a link to this thread.

I'll still discuss various topics tomorrow, but I can say that I delivered all of the topics as well as the tone.....

D$D

frommagio

09-05-2007, 08:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No. Our position concerning the PPA is neutral. We do have some issues with them and want to make sure, because of these issues, that they deal with us directly.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to remind you that, just as D$D doesn't represent your organization, Two Plus Two doesn't represent the poker community as a whole. Attempting to corner PPA into these forums to address issues that you have with them is nonsensical. When I have problems with an organization the onus is on me to make an effort to contact them. Nobody is going to magically appear at my doorstep so that I can voice my concerns therefore I have to make that effort.

The PPA has forums of their own. By the same regard, they're free and you're more than welcome to sign up at their forums to express the concerns you have with their organization.

I personally see your request for people to not submit questions as a hindrance to the poker community as a whole. I have to wonder whether your original reply to D$D is fueled by selfish motives. From day one since UIGEA Two Plus Two hasn't expressed a desire to help the poker community with regard to the legislation. In fact, you came out directly and said that you're in the business of publishing books and not political lobbying. In my eyes, this is just another example of Two Plus Two hindering the progress needed here.

If you really want to help the poker community, take steps to try and open the communication channels. If that means signing up at their forums and making efforts to contact them, then so be it. I personally salute D$D, The Engineer, obg and various others who have put forth way more visible effort than any 'representative' of 2p2 has since the inception of PPA and UIGEA.

I see no harm in D$D bringing a list of questions from individuals, who happen to be members of these forums, and returning to these forums with answers for the individuals who want to ask them. I'm sure you can agree that, from an organizational standpoint, having one Q&A session that addresses a large number of issues is quite efficient. This could actually result in a great deal of useful information. Instead I fear that most of the posters here will see the red name suggesting not to send questions and, in the end, the poker community at large will be the ones who suffer.

[/ QUOTE ]

This all seems pretty insulting to me.

MM and 2+2 have done a lot for the poker community (for free), whereas PPA has done less than nothing. This organization has an appalling lack of disclosure, and we're still not even sure who or what they represent.

Why the very high standards for the very high achievers, and the extremely low standards for the non-achievers?

If the PPA had motives and agenda that aligned with our interests, they would have been here long ago building their support. There's no reason for them to expose themselves to the scrutiny they would receive here unless they're confident that they would obtain support. I think they're smart enough to avoid what would be a well-deserved negative reception.

As far as I'm concerned, I'll respect PPA once they earn it. I think Mason has earned the respect, and his request should be honored. He certainly doesn't deserve to be insulted.

DeadMoneyDad

09-05-2007, 09:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
D$D, I am not one to critize anyone working for our cause.

First, you state at one point, "In a previous campaign we used this information to gague activity, and often then", do you or do you not represent the PPA?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry if it wasn't clear. A better statement would have been in a previous policial campaign some years ago, we used action tracking for various purposes.

My knowledge of how the PPA currently uses some tracking efforts was based on the fact that I was sent an e-mail thanking me for following the actions suggested on their web site. My knowledge was based only on my actions as a non-dues paying member of the PPA. Again I have no offical affiliation with the PPA, 2+2, or any other organization.

Are my posts really that unclear?

D$D

IndyFish

09-05-2007, 09:15 PM

D$D, I commend you on your effort to have a personal meeting with Pappas and your offer to relay our questions to him. It's extremely unfortunate that the offer fell on (mostly) deaf ears. The attacks back and forth, from both the 2p2 supporters and the PPA supporters, only serves to prove just how disorganized we remain.

I personally (and I in no way intend to represent ANYONE but myself) would ask the PPA to communicate better. To the best of my knowledge they don't appear on ANY forums, not just 2p2. They don't even respond to posts in their OWN forum as far as I could tell. (I'm not counting the stickies for recent stories. I mean dialog.)

Outside of this forum (mostly bitching) I haven't even seen any mention of the PPA in months. They need to get the message out. It would be nice to see a FTP or Stars commercial during a TV tournament that ended in "Would you like to play online for real money? Join the PPA."

Do they plan to address the NFL issue? Are they getting involved in any of the upcoming court battles? Talking up the WTO dispute to Congress? What is the PLAN??? Inquiring minds would like to know. (No smileys.)

/rant

CybrPunk

09-05-2007, 09:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No. Our position concerning the PPA is neutral. We do have some issues with them and want to make sure, because of these issues, that they deal with us directly.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to remind you that, just as D$D doesn't represent your organization, Two Plus Two doesn't represent the poker community as a whole. Attempting to corner PPA into these forums to address issues that you have with them is nonsensical. When I have problems with an organization the onus is on me to make an effort to contact them. Nobody is going to magically appear at my doorstep so that I can voice my concerns therefore I have to make that effort.

The PPA has forums of their own. By the same regard, they're free and you're more than welcome to sign up at their forums to express the concerns you have with their organization.

I personally see your request for people to not submit questions as a hindrance to the poker community as a whole. I have to wonder whether your original reply to D$D is fueled by selfish motives. From day one since UIGEA Two Plus Two hasn't expressed a desire to help the poker community with regard to the legislation. In fact, you came out directly and said that you're in the business of publishing books and not political lobbying. In my eyes, this is just another example of Two Plus Two hindering the progress needed here.

If you really want to help the poker community, take steps to try and open the communication channels. If that means signing up at their forums and making efforts to contact them, then so be it. I personally salute D$D, The Engineer, obg and various others who have put forth way more visible effort than any 'representative' of 2p2 has since the inception of PPA and UIGEA.

I see no harm in D$D bringing a list of questions from individuals, who happen to be members of these forums, and returning to these forums with answers for the individuals who want to ask them. I'm sure you can agree that, from an organizational standpoint, having one Q&A session that addresses a large number of issues is quite efficient. This could actually result in a great deal of useful information. Instead I fear that most of the posters here will see the red name suggesting not to send questions and, in the end, the poker community at large will be the ones who suffer.

[/ QUOTE ]

This all seems pretty insulting to me.

MM and 2+2 have done a lot for the poker community (for free), whereas PPA has done less than nothing. This organization has an appalling lack of disclosure, and we're still not even sure who or what they represent.

Why the very high standards for the very high achievers, and the extremely low standards for the non-achievers?

If the PPA had motives and agenda that aligned with our interests, they would have been here long ago building their support. There's no reason for them to expose themselves to the scrutiny they would receive here unless they're confident that they would obtain support. I think they're smart enough to avoid what would be a well-deserved negative reception.

As far as I'm concerned, I'll respect PPA once they earn it. I think Mason has earned the respect, and his request should be honored. He certainly doesn't deserve to be insulted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nowhere in my reply did I intend to insult Mason. I agree that Two Plus Two does a great service by hosting these forums and providing a platform for us to communicate, however the simple truth is that they've openly stated that they are a book publishing company, not political lobbyists. I can respect Mason and Two Plus Two as the great book publisher they are. If that's where they wish to draw the line, that's fine. It's their prerogative.

That being the case, demanding that the PPA come here to answer questions and be held accountable to a book publisher is insane. It doesn't matter that this is the largest poker community in the world. The PPA does't represent Two Plus Two. They represent their members. I'm sure that many of their members are not Two Plus Two members. Honestly, if I were the PPA, I'd avoid this forum like the plague due to the immature nature and abrasive content found in just about every thread. Having intelligent discussion is nearly impossible here. At least on their forums its something they can self-moderate and not be subjected to abuse. Criticism is fine, but let's face it - way too many posters on this forum are unnecessarily abusive.

The only real dispute Two Plus Two has with the PPA (that we've been made aware of) is the fact that CardPlayer has too much control over the PPA board and that's something that Mason (and others) doesn't agree with. Again, that's fine. It's his choice to make.

Suggesting that nobody submit questions for D$D to bring to John is a hindrance to our cause and does a great disservice to the poker community. It helps nobody and actually, in the end, I believe it hurts our cause. There's no upside to Mason's suggestion, only a downside.

The opposite is true of submitting questions for D$D to bring to the PPA. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

I stand by my statement that Two Plus Two and its representatives are hindering our cause by suggesting we not submit questions, especially when you consider that they are the owners and representatives of the largest poker community in the world. They should realize that, if they have issues with the PPA as an organization, it's up to Two Plus Two to bring those issues to them and not vice versa. I honestly feel the two entities should be working together, not against each other, yet the only thing I've seen from the representatives of Two Plus Two are statements indicating that they are remaining neutral and are merely book publishers...

So I'll give them respect as the great book publishers they are.... which is the only respect they have earned from me.

whangarei

09-05-2007, 10:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Also, does he intend to organize a more aggressive legislative contact drive. I am thinking a model based on MoveOn would be effective, where they email you the numbers of your representatives along with the message to deliver to them, and provide a link for you to click saying that you contacted them and allowing you to describe their response if any.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do have a process similar to this in action on their main page called "what you can do." If you follow the directions and complete the forms, they track your actions because they then sent me a thank you e-mail for being an "August Advocate."

[/ QUOTE ]

As OBG said (though I do not share his at times irrational suspicion of your motivations and affiliations), an email to members is more effective than having a link on their home page. For lazy people like me we will not regularly check the PPA page, but if we get an email that says "Wexler bill due for vote, call your Congessman 202-555-5555!" we can pretty easily take useful action.

Legislurker

09-05-2007, 11:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Also, does he intend to organize a more aggressive legislative contact drive. I am thinking a model based on MoveOn would be effective, where they email you the numbers of your representatives along with the message to deliver to them, and provide a link for you to click saying that you contacted them and allowing you to describe their response if any.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do have a process similar to this in action on their main page called "what you can do." If you follow the directions and complete the forms, they track your actions because they then sent me a thank you e-mail for being an "August Advocate."

[/ QUOTE ]

As OBG said (though I do not share his at times irrational suspicion of your motivations and affiliations), an email to members is more effective than having a link on their home page. For lazy people like me we will not regularly check the PPA page, but if we get an email that says "Wexler bill due for vote, call your Congessman 202-555-5555!" we can pretty easily take useful action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its so staggering what we could do with resources and lists.
If there are 2k users logged into 2p2 when Mason put his number up, there are over 100k US players at poker tables(tourney, cash, and FREE). If we could get on the sites and send political alerts. If we had people's AIMs, MSN, and Yahoos getting the ongoing activities. We could have almost daily things and lobbying. Ask people to sign up for an hour or two a week, and have the PPA coordinate things. Four or five people at the handle-end of a group as big as we can assemble can accomplish a lot. Monday 2-4, call the NFL. Tuesday 11-1, the DNC. Tuesday 3-5 is the House Financial Services. THats all feasible with the money and info they have.

And they have a 5 view a day message board. Well, I guess if some people get their shirts...........

TheEngineer

09-05-2007, 11:59 PM

Everyone,

Wow. Just...wow. D$D had an appointment to speak with John Pappas and decided to prepare by asking us about our concerns so he could speak intelligently about the concerns of the poker community. He also was trying to help us out. If this isn't needed, what happened to "no, but thanks anyway"?

We’re all disappointed by the opportunities that have been missed by the PPA in the past, but the question is -- what should we do going forward? I think we have two choices. We can either work with the PPA to encourage them to make the changes we want OR we can work to establish a new lobbying organization.

I think the bottom line is that they have 700,000 members, and our cause could really benefit by bringing these folks into our grassroots movement. Now that they have a new, responsive leader, I personally think we all should give the “new” PPA a chance.

Positive changes have already taken place under John Pappas’ leadership. The move to Washington D.C. is very positive. I’ve spoken to John four times now, sometimes after 9 pm (while he’s still in the office, eating Chinese take-out). John will post here in the near future to introduce himself and to share his plans with us.

I won’t sugarcoat anything; there are many open questions. Let’s post our concerns on their forum, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewforum.php?f=2 , or email them at email@pokerplayersalliance.org . Seems that would be more constructive than ripping D$D for daring to mention PPA.

Tuff_Fish

09-06-2007, 12:20 AM

What he said..

coachkf

09-06-2007, 01:37 AM

"Some of you really don't seem to have a grasp of the situation. It is precisely Mason and 2p2 that does not have a vested interest in any particular business model of poker, whether it be B&M or online."

2p2 certainly does have an interest in the success of online poker. Check the banner ads displayed on this site and email them for rates. They are making a killing from online poker. They don't just sell strategy books. ;]

frommagio

09-06-2007, 02:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Are my posts really that unclear?
D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all! Generally, they are very well-written.

But since you ask, I'll make one constructive comment: You have a serious spelling problem. It really stands out, because your writing is quite solid otherwise.

fnurt

09-06-2007, 02:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Just...wow. D$D had an appointment to speak with John Pappas and decided to prepare by asking us about our concerns so he could speak intelligently about the concerns of the poker community. He also was trying to help us out. If this isn't needed, what happened to "no, but thanks anyway"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't much like the idea of someone speaking on behalf of the poker community I belong to when I have no idea who they are or what their agenda is. This guy has been fishy from the day he joined the message board. I feel like I've hired the Unknown Lawyer to go advocate on my behalf.

When someone says "I won't tell you who I am, but trust me, I have your best interests at heart," aren't you at least a little suspicious? Here's a guy who showed up out of the blue with a post about how he just happens to know the PPA has its heart in the right place, and it's only gotten stranger from there. What's his game, do you reckon?

frommagio

09-06-2007, 02:55 AM

Hey, does anybody remember when the PPA tapped a few folks from 2+2 to be state representatives or some such? Did they just fall into the PPA black hole, where no communications escape? I don't recall hearing another word after the initial eagerness.

LeapFrog

09-06-2007, 03:42 AM

BluffTHIS!

09-06-2007, 05:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Any communication with the PPA is most likely better then none.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not necessarily true. A convo done through middlemen that mostly avoids substantive issues while focusing only on PR benefits none of us here. Especially when it allows the PPA to very easily avoid tough questions and be able to backtrack on commitments by saying the middleman screwed up their message. The internet basically allows people to be in the same room, and using a middleman is like asking someone to talk to someone else for you, when that someone else is standing right there and could speak for himself.

This doesn't mean it isn't productive to have someone like the Engineer work with the PPA on grassroots efforts though. In fact what is very needed is for Engineer's efforts to be communicated to the broader membership of the PPA who are mostly average joe & jane poker players and who don't frequent the 2p2 forums *or the PPA website*. Thus the PPA should be using the Engineer to draft action plans to contact legislators and businesses (in re to WTO stuff) and get the total membership involved in same via weekly email campaigns.

And if Mr. Pappas does decide to come here and talk to us, he is only going to talk about such political tactics and won't be able, as an employee of the board, to discuss issues like the makeup of that board or why it refuses to subscribe to the broader agenda for poker that most of us have (i.e. not tied only to certain business models).

If PPA really gives a rat's ass about engaging the largest poker community in the world here, they will not only send Mr. Pappas to discuss grassroots political tactics, but also a board member to discuss the other issues. As I mentioned earlier, Greg (Fossilman) Raymer, a long time 2p2'er sits on the PPA board. Why can't he come here and talk to us as well?

Mason Malmuth

09-06-2007, 05:04 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Its so staggering what we could do with resources and lists.
If there are 2k users logged into 2p2 when Mason put his number up, there are over 100k US players at poker tables(tourney, cash, and FREE). If we could get on the sites and send political alerts. If we had people's AIMs, MSN, and Yahoos getting the ongoing activities. We could have almost daily things and lobbying. Ask people to sign up for an hour or two a week, and have the PPA coordinate things. Four or five people at the handle-end of a group as big as we can assemble can accomplish a lot. Monday 2-4, call the NFL. Tuesday 11-1, the DNC. Tuesday 3-5 is the House Financial Services. THats all feasible with the money and info they have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi L_Lurker:

Again our position towards the PPA is neutral. If it ever moves to positive, then perhaps we could be of help in some of these areas. But there are those transparence issues, board make-up issues, and a bunch of other issues that need to be resolved, at least to some degree, before we can move to positive.

And as long as I have everyone's attention, as long as these issues are outstanding, I don't believe a PPA representative will come on here because he'll be quizzed to no end in this regard. It's also the reason I'm against someone representing www.twoplustwo.com (http://www.twoplustwo.com) with questions for the PPA. Once we move to positive territory, this might be an option.

Finally, I do want to note that Two Plus Two, like the PPA, wants to see Internet poker available for everyone. In fact our recent article, "Poker is Good for You" (http://twoplustwo.com/magazine/current/sklansyschoonmaker0907.html), which appears in the current issue of our Internet Magazine, is now also on the PPA site.

Best wishes,
Mason

TheEngineer

09-06-2007, 08:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Just...wow. D$D had an appointment to speak with John Pappas and decided to prepare by asking us about our concerns so he could speak intelligently about the concerns of the poker community. He also was trying to help us out. If this isn't needed, what happened to "no, but thanks anyway"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't much like the idea of someone speaking on behalf of the poker community I belong to when I have no idea who they are or what their agenda is. This guy has been fishy from the day he joined the message board. I feel like I've hired the Unknown Lawyer to go advocate on my behalf.

When someone says "I won't tell you who I am, but trust me, I have your best interests at heart," aren't you at least a little suspicious? Here's a guy who showed up out of the blue with a post about how he just happens to know the PPA has its heart in the right place, and it's only gotten stranger from there. What's his game, do you reckon?

[/ QUOTE ]

When I spoke to John Pappas on Tue. afternoon, the subject of D$D actually came up. D$D is what he says....he's someone experienced at grassroots lobbying who has a meeting with John to discuss this. Exactly as he said.

I reread the OP and couldn't see where D$D was making himself the 2p2 spokesman. He merely offered to bring some questions to John Pappas, with whom he legitimately has a meeting scheduled to legitimately discuss how to move our agenda forward. I guess I don't see how having him show up empty handed helps us in any way.

As for John, he will be posting here soon. I'm personally glad he waited a few weeks to do so. I honestly didn't want to hear any more PPA happy spin about grand plans for the future. I want to hear what they are doing and when they're doing it. John has taken some time to lay out concrete actions, so his initial communications to us should be more substantive. I hope we'll all hear him out and decide from there.

Cheers.

MiltonFriedman

09-06-2007, 11:21 AM

I have exchanged some messages with D$D and generally believe he is what his posts describe, a volunteer, with DC experience, who is interested in helping out poker ... and has contacted the PPA and this forum to do so.

If the end result of this sturm & drang thread is the PPA coming in and making substantive posts on 2+2 , great. This is progressing somewhat.

(I am not making light of BluffThis' complaint about Card Player interests co-opting the PPA, I have no doubt that is so to date. However, I feel politics does make for unsavory necessary alliances at times. To the extent that the PPA can put a favorable ball into play on behalf of poker players, we can benefit. However, just lending bodies/numbers and donating money will not result in a favorable direction.)

BluffTHIS!

09-06-2007, 11:51 AM

[ QUOTE ]
However, I feel politics does make for unsavory necessary alliances at times. To the extent that the PPA can put a favorable ball into play on behalf of poker players, we can benefit. However, just lending bodies/numbers and donating money will not result in a favorable direction.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Although I have expounded at length about the PPA not representing its base membership and all the goals those players have, everyone, myself included, understands that limited resources, of both time and money, dictate short term priorities. But even putting aside structural issues with the PPA, and the wider goals of promoting legalization of poker in all venues with no artificial barriers to entry to favor certain parties, it seems clear that the following are the short term priorities *this year*:

1) Seeking to pass Frank/Weixler or a derivative of same this year via attachment to must pass legislation;

2) Neutering the regs if the above fails as likely;

3) Aiding in the judicial fight against online gambling restrictions, especially by helping to cure any issues of standing that current litigants friendly to us might have (and note again that this shouldn't cost the PPA a dime as the litigants should underwrite all the PPAs expenses on same since it is to their own benefit).

Since #1 is a longshot in any short term time frame, then it is critical to achieve some success on #s 2 or 3. But if the PPA fails on those as well, especially due to a refusal to even adopt those last two as goals this year, then given the other deeper shortcomings in the PPA, there will simply be no reason to support it for the long term. The performance of the PPA on those 3 short term priorities should be the basis for judgement of their worthiness and credibility for the long term.

DeadMoneyDad

09-06-2007, 11:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]

As for John, he will be posting here soon. I'm personally glad he waited a few weeks to do so. I honestly didn't want to hear any more PPA happy spin about grand plans for the future. I want to hear what they are doing and when they're doing it. John has taken some time to lay out concrete actions, so his initial communications to us should be more substantive. I hope we'll all hear him out and decide from there.

Cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's fantastic! I will not have to waste any time trying to communicate my PERSONAL opion that John should not only come here himself but have some sort of regular contributor with PPA backing.

Sorry about the spelling, I normally use a spell checker and because of that I have gotten lazy, my common errors are so automatically fixed I don't even notice anymore. I've also been told I have a real problem with run on and compound sentences. When I was learning to read and write I was living overseas and as anyone who has learned English as a second language knows the rules don't make any sense or follow any logic.

I apologise for any stupidity it attaches to me for my laziness in not cutting and pasting messages to a spell checker before posting.

D$D

LeapFrog

09-06-2007, 12:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any communication with the PPA is most likely better then none.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not necessarily true. A convo done through middlemen that mostly avoids substantive issues while focusing only on PR benefits none of us here. Especially when it allows the PPA to very easily avoid tough questions and be able to backtrack on commitments by saying the middleman screwed up their message. ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I was referring specifically to the situation with D$D. Unless your posts burn his eyes (heh) or D$D has an agenda (Engineer's comments on the subject are very reassuring as well as Milton's 2c) he hopefully will communicate some of your tough questions to Pappas. Yes, you very well may not get an answer or may receive a heavily spin laden one but at least some of what you are saying may get through. That was what I was driving at.

At any rate it sounds like Pappas will be posting here in the future so you should have a chance to make yourself heard. Don't be afraid to speak up /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]

I apologise for any stupidity it attaches to me for my laziness in not cutting and pasting messages to a spell checker before posting.

[/ QUOTE ]

D$D, I recommend Firefox 2.x as it has a built in spellchecker. Very handy.

DeadMoneyDad

09-06-2007, 12:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
But even putting aside structural issues with the PPA, and the wider goals of promoting legalization of poker in all venues with no artificial barriers to entry to favor certain parties, it seems clear that the following are the short term priorities *this year*:

1) Seeking to pass Frank/Weixler or a derivative of same this year via attachment to must pass legislation;

2) Neutering the regs if the above fails as likely;

3) Aiding in the judicial fight against online gambling restrictions, especially by helping to cure any issues of standing that current litigants friendly to us might have (and note again that this shouldn't cost the PPA a dime as the litigants should underwrite all the PPAs expenses on same since it is to their own benefit).

Since #1 is a longshot in any short term time frame, then it is critical to achieve some success on #s 2 or 3. But if the PPA fails on those as well, especially due to a refusal to even adopt those last two as goals this year, then given the other deeper shortcomings in the PPA, there will simply be no reason to support it for the long term. The performance of the PPA on those 3 short term priorities should be the basis for judgement of their worthiness and credibility for the long term.

[/ QUOTE ]

From a political aspect my feelings are the PPA has on the legislative front been too quick to put the cart before the horse. People on the Hill are like everyone else, they want to protect their jobs. They aren't going to listen to the PPA, especially on the GOP side until the PPA can show it is a real political player. The only way to do that is to create a real grassroots organization, and prove it can be effective. On the Hill you don't have to be right, just be able to move enough votes. This message may be unpopular with some because it will require a good deal of volunteer grunt work to counter-balance the organized free manpower currently arrayed against us.

The KY race is the key in my opinion. As I’ve posted along with others, the PPA needs to establish a track record. It needs a tune up game for ’08. It needs to build its membership. It needs to be highly visible. It needs to get some idea of how many of its arm chair generals are willing to get in the trenches and do the work of privates!!!! It needs to try out all of the various ideas we all have for promoting the PPA and develop more. How many of you with in 4 to a 5 hour drive of KY have seriously planned on going there if there is a worthwhile activity that requires YOUR help to succeed??? I'm 6 hours from the border of the state and already making plans and boning up on the districts. Are you willing to make the same commitment?

We all want an effective grassroots organization, but really how many people are actually willing to show up? That will be the true test of the PPA’s viability.

I can tell from my conversations from John that the PPA is committed to devoting the resources to building the grassroots efforts necessary. BUT the PPA can only provide the structure. John is well aware of the hole that he is in. I'm sure there are many holes dug we all don't even know about. John has returned calls and sent e-mails at all hours of the day and night and on weekends. This isn't a 9-5 job for him. I’ve been involved in a number of organizations both political and non-political in my life; I think I can recognize real passion and determination when I see it. Look at John’s interview on CardPlayer TV, for all of you who aren’t boycotting that site, one of his first issues is improving communications!

Sure it is debatable if the PPA board, given whatever hidden agenda they might or may not have, will support his efforts. But I assume he would not have taken the job without the necessary assurances he'll be given the tools to succeed.

Like I said in my first post only time will really prove out if my PERSONAL opinions are correct. They are based on my past in dealing with political operators and sales people of all stripes. Sure I’ve bought into a few boondoggles in the past. Who hasn’t? But over time like in my poker “career” I’ve gotten a lot better at spotting fakes and conmen learning from each and every mistake.

D$D

Yes I did spell check this one…… Any better?

fnurt

09-06-2007, 02:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
When I spoke to John Pappas on Tue. afternoon, the subject of D$D actually came up. D$D is what he says....he's someone experienced at grassroots lobbying who has a meeting with John to discuss this. Exactly as he said.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, based on this post and the one by Milton, I'll stop grinding the axe. I do think this sort of due diligence is important, though.

Legislurker

09-06-2007, 03:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But even putting aside structural issues with the PPA, and the wider goals of promoting legalization of poker in all venues with no artificial barriers to entry to favor certain parties, it seems clear that the following are the short term priorities *this year*:

1) Seeking to pass Frank/Weixler or a derivative of same this year via attachment to must pass legislation;

2) Neutering the regs if the above fails as likely;

3) Aiding in the judicial fight against online gambling restrictions, especially by helping to cure any issues of standing that current litigants friendly to us might have (and note again that this shouldn't cost the PPA a dime as the litigants should underwrite all the PPAs expenses on same since it is to their own benefit).

Since #1 is a longshot in any short term time frame, then it is critical to achieve some success on #s 2 or 3. But if the PPA fails on those as well, especially due to a refusal to even adopt those last two as goals this year, then given the other deeper shortcomings in the PPA, there will simply be no reason to support it for the long term. The performance of the PPA on those 3 short term priorities should be the basis for judgement of their worthiness and credibility for the long term.

[/ QUOTE ]

From a political aspect my feelings are the PPA has on the legislative front been too quick to put the cart before the horse. People on the Hill are like everyone else, they want to protect their jobs. They aren't going to listen to the PPA, especially on the GOP side until the PPA can show it is a real political player. The only way to do that is to create a real grassroots organization, and prove it can be effective. On the Hill you don't have to be right, just be able to move enough votes. This message may be unpopular with some because it will require a good deal of volunteer grunt work to counter-balance the organized free manpower currently arrayed against us.

The KY race is the key in my opinion. As I’ve posted along with others, the PPA needs to establish a track record. It needs a tune up game for ’08. It needs to build its membership. It needs to be highly visible. It needs to get some idea of how many of its arm chair generals are willing to get in the trenches and do the work of privates!!!! It needs to try out all of the various ideas we all have for promoting the PPA and develop more. How many of you with in 4 to a 5 hour drive of KY have seriously planned on going there if there is a worthwhile activity that requires YOUR help to succeed??? I'm 6 hours from the border of the state and already making plans and boning up on the districts. Are you willing to make the same commitment?

We all want an effective grassroots organization, but really how many people are actually willing to show up? That will be the true test of the PPA’s viability.

I can tell from my conversations from John that the PPA is committed to devoting the resources to building the grassroots efforts necessary. BUT the PPA can only provide the structure. John is well aware of the hole that he is in. I'm sure there are many holes dug we all don't even know about. John has returned calls and sent e-mails at all hours of the day and night and on weekends. This isn't a 9-5 job for him. I’ve been involved in a number of organizations both political and non-political in my life; I think I can recognize real passion and determination when I see it. Look at John’s interview on CardPlayer TV, for all of you who aren’t boycotting that site, one of his first issues is improving communications!

Sure it is debatable if the PPA board, given whatever hidden agenda they might or may not have, will support his efforts. But I assume he would not have taken the job without the necessary assurances he'll be given the tools to succeed.

Like I said in my first post only time will really prove out if my PERSONAL opinions are correct. They are based on my past in dealing with political operators and sales people of all stripes. Sure I’ve bought into a few boondoggles in the past. Who hasn’t? But over time like in my poker “career” I’ve gotten a lot better at spotting fakes and conmen learning from each and every mistake.

D$D

Yes I did spell check this one…… Any better?

[/ QUOTE ]

How many people will show up? I don't know, but we should test the waters. One key factor for '08 will, IMHO, have to be a rally. In DC. We have to show up, get on the mainstream news, and generate some buzz. The PPA board will have to go for the most part. We need broad representation on the board. Not just players, but everyone. Players, B&M, online, affiliates, DEALERS, pros, and celebrities. The PPA can be huge or it can be a joke. The time for that decision is PAST due. And, the only path I see to broader acceptance is via 2p2. Humble yourself, make nice, and lets play together.

DeadMoneyDad

09-06-2007, 04:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
One key factor for '08 will, IMHO, have to be a rally. In DC. We have to show up, get on the mainstream news, and generate some buzz. The PPA board will have to go for the most part. We need broad representation on the board. Not just players, but everyone. Players, B&M, online, affiliates, DEALERS, pros, and celebrities. The PPA can be huge or it can be a joke. The time for that decision is PAST due. And, the only path I see to broader acceptance is via 2p2. Humble yourself, make nice, and lets play together.

[/ QUOTE ]

PERSONALLY I am about full up on humble pie.

I'll make you a personal deal. We do a good job in KY I'll make sure you get your victory rally with celebs in D.C..

D$D

Legislurker

09-06-2007, 04:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One key factor for '08 will, IMHO, have to be a rally. In DC. We have to show up, get on the mainstream news, and generate some buzz. The PPA board will have to go for the most part. We need broad representation on the board. Not just players, but everyone. Players, B&M, online, affiliates, DEALERS, pros, and celebrities. The PPA can be huge or it can be a joke. The time for that decision is PAST due. And, the only path I see to broader acceptance is via 2p2. Humble yourself, make nice, and lets play together.

[/ QUOTE ]

PERSONALLY I am about full up on humble pie.

I'll make you a personal deal. We do a good job in KY I'll make sure you get your victory rally with celebs in D.C..

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

All I want is the freedom to make a [censored] living. Ive invested years into poker. Maybe not the smartest thing considering my education, but its pretty much all I have barring my exceptional good looks and acting ability. I don't want to stand in front of crowds, I don't want to sully myself in politics, and I don't want have to do this.
But, I am willing to do my part. Somehow we have to make national media. And we have to put the fear of only being a lobbyist into Congresspeeps. And somehow, all of poker has to get along. Maybe the PPA can be that place where we all get along and put some fear into politicians. I hope so.