Mason... Sir,

[Tuff_Fish]

I still don't fully understand what your problem is with the PPA. You don't like their board make up is as much as I can glean.

Fine.

However, the PPA has been doing yoeman's work for my right to play poker however I choose. What have you done for me and others like me?

2+2 Has not been proactive in our fight for poker rights. You had, and have, a near perfect vehicle to do what PPA is trying to do. So do better if you don't like them.

But.... If you choose to sit it out, if you choose to not be part of the solution, please don't become part of the problem.

I believe you could have avoided this whole fracas with a bit of forethought. But you seem somewhat obsessed with the fact that the PPA is funded by "industry special interests". Well, who the heck else is going to fund such an effort. The PPA spent some serious coin on the Washington DC flyin. How much have you spent helping us?

One last thought. If for some reason, you don't think this is your fight, you might want to reconsider.

If, due to your footdragging, hostility, and indifference, the PPA effort fails and our opponents win, you will rue the day. There is not going to be a subsidence to benign neglect so favored by a lot of 2+2ers, either we win or the opposition wins.

If the opposition wins, you will receive the following phone call from the DOJ.

Get those #@!#@$#@ poker site ads off your website YESTERDAY!

You don't want that, I don't want that, and the PPA is the ONLY group working to stop that.

Again, please don't become part of the problem. The legislative forum is one of the premier watering holes for folks seeking to secure our rights. Don't muddy the water.

Respectfully,

Tuff Fish

PPA member and online poker fish.

[BluffTHIS!]

Tuff,

Wikipedia sure is a great resource. You might want to check out some of these topics in your spare time. Probably wouldn't hurt your poker game either!

Fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_fallacy)

List of fallacies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies)

List of cognitive biases (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases)

[Jerry D]

The powers that be at 2+2 are more interested in fighting the PPA than they are in fighting the poker ban. All of their efforts are directed at doing away with the PPA, not with doing away with the poker ban. Then they should do like you said and remove all the ads from their site, which are in fact illegal under the UIGEA.

[BluffTHIS!]

Hey Tuff,

How come you weren't around last year to defend poor little nrog (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showprofile.php?Cat=0&User=76417&what=search&Searc hpage=1&topic=) ? I mean he claimed to be the saviour of online poker and some of us who doubted him got bashed to no end. Whatever happened to that guy?

(Note that I am not drawing a parallel in saying PPA is some kind of scam which I certainly don't believe. I am however drawing a parallel as to the proclivity of many posters here to ignore justified questions and criticisms of those with similar goals, instead of working to redress the problems that led to those criticisms.)

[joeker]

If the UIGEA is overturned, it will be in spite of most poker players and 2+2 specifically

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
If the UIGEA is overturned, it will be in spite of most poker players and 2+2 specifically

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for sharing the brilliant reasoning that led you to that deduction.

[Legislurker]

How is Mason fighting the PPA? He doesn't need the PPA. He doesn't need fame or money. Apparently they are here asking for help and a nod of approval. Lets be clear, the whole [censored] industry from the PPA to the rooms to the affiliates to the players, pros and fish all get an F when it came to politically representing poker. The PPA isn't even top 3 when it comes to getting remote gaming back where it was. Maybe theres some snippy ego BS going on but it doesn't mean the PPA doesn't have major problems.

I don't consider myself part of 2p2, except in regards to this effort. Whats been done here has been far and away more visible and impressive than anything the PPA has done. If there was a rally in DC and one one side of the street there were unpaid parts of the PPA and the other had 2p2 people, which side would have the bigger turnout? I know where I would bet.

[Uglyowl]

What bothers me is most companies at least pretend to care about their customers. Mason comes off as a very unpleasant guy.

[Lostit]

Bluff this, what are you after here? Disagree with Tuff, fine. Don't like the PPA? Fine. I don't know Tuff, and although I like some of the things I've seen LATELY out of the PPA, I could care less who does it, only that it gets done.

There's been a lot of bickering in this thread and other threads, by a lot of people, meant to accomplish what? Educate? Drive people away?

If I told you that FOF would take away one of our greatest resources (Engineer) and find a way for us to focus on fighting each other instead of fighting for our right to play poker, it would come accross as some dreamed up atomic bomb attack that would be totally unrealistic. Better than anything that they could ever hope to do. Well they didn't have to. We did it to ourselves, and those that are against us must be ecstatic.

Take a step back, and look at whats going on here. This is not good. Its not constructive.

If you, or Mason, or anyone else has all this energy and time lets focus it on what we really need. Either clean up the PPA, assist the PPA, or replace the PPA. I'd say 99% of the people on here could give a rats behind who is fighting on our side, just that we're doing the best job, with the largest force, that we can muster.

Personal attacks do nothing but take away from those goals, and increase the chances that 3-4 years from now, there will be no 2+2, no PPA, and no checks coming in the mail from poker sites that would have gone out of business due to lack of players. There are people who I don't like, viewpoints I don't respect, and people who spew total non-sense on this board, but they are still potential allies in our fight for poker, and right now, we need them all.

Think about what you're trying to accomplish in the long run.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
What bothers me is most companies at least pretend to care about their customers. Mason comes off as a very unpleasant guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually while he is a little stiff, he does have as do others some valid concerns.

Personally I'd like to lock "them" all in a room for a week and not let them out untill they have figured out their turf wars and just get on with the "movement."

All this talk of control and time outs makes me think there are too many only childs and yougests making all the demands while the rest of us have to clean up the messes.


D$D

[BluffTHIS!]

Losit,

Look at the other side of the issue. How difficult is it really for the Engineer to just copy and past a disclaimer, and/or be content with a subtitle noting his membership in the PPA board? Mason actually has taken a middle stand between not allowing a board member to post here when his own position on the organization is neutral, and the other end of not requiring any notice of affiliation which infrequent readers may not already be aware of. The Engineer is only being asked to jump over a very low hurdle.

[Lostit]

[ QUOTE ]

Actually while he is a little stiff, he does have as do others some valid concerns.

Personally I'd like to lock "them" all in a room for a week and not let them out untill they have figured out their turf wars and just get on with the "movement."

All this talk of control and time outs makes me think there are too many only childs and yougests making all the demands while the rest of us have to clean up the messes.


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree with this more. I think in the case of Mason and TE, this should have been handled in a phone call, and not in a message board game of tag.

I see this in business all the time. Ego's are what get people to the top, and what makes them inevitably fall. Sometimes you need to put your ego aside, put trivial issues to bed, and get back to your real goals.

I'm not comfortable with some of the things I hear about the PPA, and I don't like egotistical behavior I see here either, but lets not throw the baby out with the bath water in either case.

If there was any type of leverage that someone could think of to lock these parties in a room until they worked out there differences, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

We need all of the parties involved here, but working together instead of this childishness.

[Lostit]

[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

Look at the other side of the issue. How difficult is it really for the Engineer to just copy and past a disclaimer, and/or be content with a subtitle noting his membership in the PPA board? Mason actually has taken a middle stand between not allowing a board member to post here when his own position on the organization is neutral, and the other end of not requiring any notice of affiliation which infrequent readers may not already be aware of. The Engineer is only being asked to jump over a very low hurdle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff, as I stated before, I am not taking sides in this particular issue. I can understand both viewpoints. The issue to me is that this has gotten way out of hand, however we got here, and it needs to be put to bed.

If TE's info is on the PPA website, why can't Mason get him on the phone, and the two work it out. Would that hurt anyone?

If this were an average poster, I would fully support Mason telling him to go pound sand. In the case of TE however, work it out. I'm not saying cave in, I'm saying work it out.

[BluffTHIS!]

Losit,

Again, just how hard is it for TE to have a disclaimer and/or a subtitle? You are acting as if he is being to asked to do something very hard and that damages his integrity. If another board member, currently not a poster on 2p2, was asked to do this in advance, would/should that board member refuse when he/she thought that posting here could help the PPA? Again, the hurdle is very low even if it comes up at every turn.

[Lostit]

[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

Again, just how hard is it for TE to have a disclaimer and/or a subtitle? You are acting as if he is being to asked to do something very hard and that damages his integrity. If another board member, currently not a poster on 2p2, was asked to do this in advance, would/should that board member refuse when he/she thought that posting here could help the PPA? Again, the hurdle is very low even if it comes up at every turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

My honest answer? I don't understand why Mason or TE are being as obstinate as they are. Frankly it doesn't matter. The end result is that we are in the process of losing one of our most valuable resources. I think the point you are trying to make in a round about way is that this is trivial, so why can't he just agree? I agree it is trivial, but I'm not TE, so I don't fully understand. Nor do I care.

This whole thing is absurd at this point and needs to be fixed, however that happens. I don't really care how it happens, just that it does.

[BluffTHIS!]

Losit,

The bottom line is that this is Mason's joint. If he says to leave your shoes outside then you will if you really want to come in. If instead you let pride stand in your way, then it's on you and not Mason.

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't agree with this more. I think in the case of Mason and TE, this should have been handled in a phone call, and not in a message board game of tag.


[/ QUOTE ]

My original request for the identification was sent via PM to TE.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Lostit]

[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

The bottom line is that this is Mason's joint. If he says to leave your shoes outside then you will if you really want to come in. If instead you let pride stand in your way, then it's on you and not Mason.

[/ QUOTE ]

With all due respect bluff, I understand exactly what you're saying, but in this case I think its a little narrow minded. For 99.7% of the posters, you're absolutely correct. Leave your shoes at the door or hit the bricks, I got it. Individually, they mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. The grand scheme of things however is our continuing fight to be able to play poker. The PPA is a part of this. 2+2 is a part of this. Mason is a part of this. And thanks to his hard work, TE is a part of this.

My arguement is that he's a special case, due to all his hard work and results. I also agree that no one can come into "Mason's Joint" and spit on the floor. Things start to not work so well when that happens.

My arguement is that Mason was the one initiating a request here, which he 100% entitled to do. TE had an unexpected response to that request. We are now at an impasse. Should TE be above the rules? No way. Should Mason boot him out or antagonize him with one day suspensions over something that really isn't that big of a deal (to your point), and do other collateral damage like losing momentum with some of the letter writing to politicians? Doesn't make much sense there either.

Don't we have private messages on here? Isn't TE's information available for Mason to contact him? (I'm assuming Mason's is not available, which is understandable) At work, I see spats like this between very well compensated people, or between myself and them, all time. What do we do? We pick up the phone, sometimes we yell and scream for a while, but we figure something out and we move on. Why is that so hard here?

[YoureToast]

For what its worth and because BluffThis has already hijacked this thread (I get Mason's biases, however illogical they may be, but I don't understand and never have understood BluffThis's motivations), I need to say that I agree with Tuff Fish 100% on this. His point was right on the money. Thankfully for all of our sake, The Engineer is much much too mature, experienced, intelligent and motivated to be disuaded.

[BluffTHIS!]

Losit,

Here's my last post in this exchange. It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA. Even though 2p2 benefits in the long run from the goals of the PPA, it should be clear to all that the PPA benefits more from the TE's efforts. So it should be the PPA, and TE, who should be more willing to give here.

Also, as you imply, 2p2 does have global rules for everyone. If Mason makes an exception here, even though seemingly justified, he will doubtless be asked to make other exceptions which clearly aren't justified. So just as with any organization, the best policy long term is simply to have rules that apply equally to all. That may not be absolutely fair in discrete instances, but it will be perceived as fair by the majority of members/users.

Either TE will choose to make note that he is speaking his own views in each of his posts, or he won't. It just depends on what is most important to him and how important he views 2p2 as being to the success of the PPA.

[VP$IP]

Perhaps it is time to amend the Terms and Conditions of the 2+2 forum. That might make this a little less personal.

[LesJ]

<<<It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA.>>>>

Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

Ah. . .the good ole days have returned. Every "last post" in every thread in this forum belongs to BluffThis again. . . and they all say basically the same thing.

Les

[Lostit]

Bluff,

Only recently did TE become involved with the PPA. I believe your point about all his hard work to be for the benefit of the PPA to be incorrect. Thats not the point of this thread.

We can agree to disagree on this also, but I simply believe in not cutting your nose off despite your face.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

[/ QUOTE ]


You mean he really has been working to up page views so Mason makes more from his advertisers? Wow, Mason sure is an ingrate!

[Berge20]

Les, I'm glad you pointed that out because I totally agree with you.

Whatever one may think of the PPA or such, lord knows Engineer has been working hard for poker players for a year--well before ever considering getting involved with the PPA. Bluff can make some good points, but he's way off on this one.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

Our compromise concerning TE is now in place and he is free to post again. The PPA representative who we occasionally deal with (and who will remain anonymous) agrees that "it's a good solution."

Best wishes,
Mason

[LesJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

[/ QUOTE ]


You mean he really has been working to up page views so Mason makes more from his advertisers? Wow, Mason sure is an ingrate!

[/ QUOTE ]

Nor did I ever make such an assertion, Bluff. You may have a bazillion posts and you may be witty in your belittling of Tuff Fish, but neither of these facts make your arguments any more valid.

Les

[oldbookguy]

I agree 100%, in-fact working on local issues a few years back when I headed the local Historic Economic Group, the same here, turf wars and all chiefs, no Indians.

I privatly invited each head to dinner, on me, all at the same time and place, telling no one.

Well, it was hairy at first, then, well, we all walked out together and on the same page.

obg


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What bothers me is most companies at least pretend to care about their customers. Mason comes off as a very unpleasant guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually while he is a little stiff, he does have as do others some valid concerns.

Personally I'd like to lock "them" all in a room for a week and not let them out untill they have figured out their turf wars and just get on with the "movement."

All this talk of control and time outs makes me think there are too many only childs and yougests making all the demands while the rest of us have to clean up the messes.


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

[kailua]

Following passage of the UIGEA and a brief delay attributed to a globe trotting attorney, I believe that Mason and David were quite explicit in expressing their stance (to the consternation of many) that internet gambling was not necessarily an activity they felt compelled to endorse.

Those of you who expect, or feel that you are somehow “owed” more than a neutral PPA position from 2+2 because of your patronage have romanticized this forum and its function.

Mason stands to reap financial gain from the success of the PPA’s agenda, yet due to ethical principles does not aid their cause by actively lending his support or name cachet to enhance the organization’s legitimacy.

Agree with him or not, his actions have been consistent and are deserving of respect.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's my last post in this exchange. It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA. Even though 2p2 benefits in the long run from the goals of the PPA, it should be clear to all that the PPA benefits more from the TE's efforts. So it should be the PPA, and TE, who should be more willing to give here.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMFAO. I don't do this for PPA or for 2+2. I'm not employed by either entity. I do it because we should fight for our rights as poker players. It's that simple. I'm glad you and Mason are having fun playing politics over this, but it's not doing [censored] for us. I hate to break this to you, but I look at the top 100 enemies of ours, Allyn Shulman isn't on the list. We have real enemies, you know. That's where our focus needs to be.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, as you imply, 2p2 does have global rules for everyone. If Mason makes an exception here, even though seemingly justified, he will doubtless be asked to make other exceptions which clearly aren't justified. So just as with any organization, the best policy long term is simply to have rules that apply equally to all. That may not be absolutely fair in discrete instances, but it will be perceived as fair by the majority of members/users.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree...there should be one set of rules. However, there is no rule mandating everyone who happens to be on the board of any organization must sign each post. It's some new, made-up [censored]. Jay Cohen, TruePoker CEO, and many others don't sign their names. Bryan and John Pappas do because they represent PPA. I don't. WTF is so difficult about that? Now, apparently, I don't have to sign each post with my name and title.

[ QUOTE ]
Either TE will choose to make note that he is speaking his own views in each of his posts, or he won't. It just depends on what is most important to him and how important he views 2p2 as being to the success of the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have to do [censored]. Again, my issue isn't the success of the PPA. It's the success of the movement. Forget it...I feel like I'm talking to a wall.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone:

Our compromise concerning TE is now in place and he is free to post again. The PPA representative who we occasionally deal with (and who will remain anonymous) agrees that "it's a good solution."

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

What was with the ban? I assumed you were considering my offer about posting my PPA title under my screen name. You think anyone here didn't know my position that day.

I guess you were showing me who's boss. Congrats.

[Lostit]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that Mason and David were quite explicit in expressing their stance (to the consternation of many) that internet gambling was not necessarily an activity they felt compelled to endorse.

Those of you who expect, or feel that you are somehow “owed” more than a neutral PPA position from 2+2 because of your patronage have romanticized this forum and its function.

Mason stands to reap financial gain from the success of the PPA’s agenda, yet due to ethical principles does not aid their cause by actively lending his support or name cachet to enhance the organization’s legitimacy.

Agree with him or not, his actions have been consistent and are deserving of respect.

[/ QUOTE ]

My understanding is that Mason's position is based upon issues within the makeup of the board, not ethical issues, and this is why the stance is neutral. It is also my understanding that if the board issues were resolved, that the position of 2+2 COULD become positive towards the PPA.

Mason's personal views and ethics are totally outside of this discussion, but I do believe the position 2+2 to be based upon the issues I mentioned and not personal ethics.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
<<<It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA.>>>>

Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

Ah. . .the good ole days have returned. Every "last post" in every thread in this forum belongs to BluffThis again. . . and they all say basically the same thing.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

Les, I thank you and everyone else who was with me. My only goal has been to get all poker legalized everywhere.

Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while. I really don't need this. Besides, we're progressed beyond where we were a few months ago. I'll be at the PPA forum sometimes, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewforum.php?f=2 .

Take care all,

TE

[Lostit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone:

Our compromise concerning TE is now in place and he is free to post again. The PPA representative who we occasionally deal with (and who will remain anonymous) agrees that "it's a good solution."

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

What was with the ban? I assumed you were considering my offer about posting my PPA title under my screen name. You think anyone here didn't know my position that day.

I guess you were showing me who's boss. Congrats.

[/ QUOTE ]


Engineer, glad to see you. Can we all get back to work now? There's more important things for us to worry about, like the bad beats I keep taking.

Oh, and all those nice things we may have said, don't believe a word. Lies, ALL LIES!!!!

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

Again, just how hard is it for TE to have a disclaimer and/or a subtitle? You are acting as if he is being to asked to do something very hard and that damages his integrity. If another board member, currently not a poster on 2p2, was asked to do this in advance, would/should that board member refuse when he/she thought that posting here could help the PPA? Again, the hurdle is very low even if it comes up at every turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

My honest answer? I don't understand why Mason or TE are being as obstinate as they are. Frankly it doesn't matter. The end result is that we are in the process of losing one of our most valuable resources. I think the point you are trying to make in a round about way is that this is trivial, so why can't he just agree? I agree it is trivial, but I'm not TE, so I don't fully understand. Nor do I care.

This whole thing is absurd at this point and needs to be fixed, however that happens. I don't really care how it happens, just that it does.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not being obstinate. I offered to have my PPA affiliation below my screen name. Mason rejected that and said I had to end each and every post with "Rich Muny, PPA Board Member", as if I could ever make an independent post here with that restriction. He then banned me to show me who's boss, then agreed to my original offer like it was a favor. Sorry, but I've worked too hard around here to help progress our cause for this [censored].

I do thank everyone who spoke up for me. I do care only about our right to play.

[BluffTHIS!]

Engineer,

Welcome back. I got the point they were making that you are working for our cause, and not the PPA only in particular. You were indeed doing your thing here first before being asked to join the PPA. It's just that some here forget that this site is run by a commercial entity that has global concerns that trump particular ones.

Regarding enemies, I don't view Ms. Schulman or other board members whom I have issues with as being enemies either. It's just that they're not our total friends, as in not sharing the wider range of goals many of us have. If a couple of them care more about the success of the PPA than they do in protecting their own vested interests, then they will be willing to resign and be replaced. If not, for whatever reason, then they won't.

The success of the movement, as in the ability of we poker players to play anywhere, anytime in any venue of our choosing, is indeed what is of paramount importance. But we can't be blinded by the moment and allow issues to go unadressed when working on those issues takes time beyond the current legislative cycle.

And although I don't expect you to speak for other board members, I want to note as I have in the past, that the refusal of those other members to at least come here and discuss issues of board composition and transparency speaks volumes about them and the importance they assign to the *posters* of 2p2.

[LesJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<<<It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA.>>>>

Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

Ah. . .the good ole days have returned. Every "last post" in every thread in this forum belongs to BluffThis again. . . and they all say basically the same thing.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

Les, I thank you and everyone else who was with me. My only goal has been to get all poker legalized everywhere.

Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while. I really don't need this. Besides, we're progressed beyond where we were a few months ago. I'll be at the PPA forum sometimes, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewforum.php?f=2 .

Take care all,

TE

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice job showing everyone who the boss is, Mason. NH, WP, etc.

Les

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the UIGEA is overturned, it will be in spite of most poker players and 2+2 specifically

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for sharing the brilliant reasoning that led you to that deduction.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not provide reasoning, I just need to point to your posts

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while. I really don't need this. Besides, we're progressed beyond where we were a few months ago. I'll be at the PPA forum sometimes, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewforum.php?f=2 .

Take care all,

TE

[/ QUOTE ]


Engineer,

You posted the above as I was typing my previous post. You are wanted here and I hope you realize that. If your problem is that you feel like you have to add a disclaimer to your posts to make it clear when you are speaking your own views, which is most of the time, instead of as an official rep of the PPA, then I hope you view that as a small effort to make for the cause. Just program an AHK script for your standard disclaimer and tap one key and forget about it.

[JPFisher55]

Bluffthis, I just do not understand what interests or goals that Mrs. Shulman and other members of the board of directors have that will not benefit my interests as an online poker player or will harm my such interests. Please clarify your concerns with specific interests of such board members that you feel conflict with online poker players.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Bluffthis, I just do not understand what interests or goals that Mrs. Shulman and other members of the board of directors have that will not benefit my interests as an online poker player or will harm my such interests. Please clarify your concerns with specific interests of such board members that you feel conflict with online poker players.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2) (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=law&Number=9341295&page=1 0&fpart=1)

Should 2+2 endorse PPA? (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=law&Number=10442603&page= 13&fpart=1)

PPA Update. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=law&Number=11765871&page= 9&fpart=1)

Which Groups *DO NOT* Deserve a Seat on the PPA Board? (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=law&Number=12048404&page= 8&fpart=1)

[TheProdigy]

Thanks Mason!

I see this is quite helpful in our fight to legalize poker. Maybe we should split the fight up into High Stakes Players of 2+2, Medium, Low, and then PPA members. No one can be a part of both groups.

IMO, 2+2's stubbornness on this issue is not needed and this little contest is a great way to divide a good cause. Especially making it a public issue as well.

I hope eventually you(2+2) can handle this "situation" in an adult like manner.

[mntbikr15]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<<<It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA.>>>>

Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

Ah. . .the good ole days have returned. Every "last post" in every thread in this forum belongs to BluffThis again. . . and they all say basically the same thing.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

Les, I thank you and everyone else who was with me. My only goal has been to get all poker legalized everywhere.

Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while. I really don't need this. Besides, we're progressed beyond where we were a few months ago. I'll be at the PPA forum sometimes, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerplayersalliance/viewforum.php?f=2 .

Take care all,

TE

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice job showing everyone who the boss is, Mason. NH, WP, etc.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

2nd.....Way to run off the best thing this forum has ever seen!

[redbeard]

Engineer I certainly understand your frustration in this matter and in the end it looks to me like you won in that only a color change to your name and sig is all that will be different.

Your work is very, very much appreciated by so many of us on this site that it is hard to even express. Please don't let the views and actions of a few members (no matter how powerful) ruin it for the rest of us that rely on the knowledge and information you bring to us on a daily basis. Your knowledge of the inner workings of the impending regulations allowed me to more safely move and store my money online and therefore allowed me to sleep more easily at night.

I understand if you cut back the number of posts you make here and i'll certainly check out the discussion link you posted earlier in this thread, but it is nice to have so many reliable posters (Skallagram, Berge, Mr. K, etc.)ALL located here in the legislative section of 2p2.

If you can find a way to put all of this behind you and continue to post here, I'm sure I speak for a large number of other posters in saying it would be greatly appreciated.

It is nice to have someone trusted on this site that I've always felt like represents us -- the online community there at PPA to let us know "inside information" that is reliable.

[crashjr]

Wow. Just WOW. Tuff, I agree with you (faulty logic aside, the point is clear - thanks for the Logic 101 rehash though Bluff).

This is all pretty clearly a pissing match and Mason is in a position of absolute power here. I'm pretty disgusted by it. When we are collectively as divided and dissentious as we have proven ourselves in the last 24 hours, then the terrorists have already won.

Engineer: I can't blame you for being upset. I am too. I'd like to see your legislative action plans and other important action posts e-mailed to the PPA membership, with an invitation to use the forums there (but wow do those forums need to be cleaned up and made more user friendly). A great many lurk here and some even follow on you lead.

CJ: You know me as ED. Well spoken sir.

-crashjr
Attorney.
Sometimes known as ED.
Not a Democrat.
A gun nut not located in Montana.

EDIT: It is hard to keep who said what in all these threads straight. So I just responded in this one. Oh well. I have guns, remember.

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
He then banned me to show me who's boss,

[/ QUOTE ]

No. We gave you some time off because you continued to post and not identify yourself as we had asked.


[ QUOTE ]
then agreed to my original offer like it was a favor

[/ QUOTE ]

No. We had discussion within our organization and decided that by also changing the color of your posting name this would give enough visibility to accomplish what we were after which was to make sure that our posters and readers, particularly those new to the site, would understand that you spoke with more authority even if you were only speaking for yourself.

MM

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, 2+2's stubbornness on this issue is not needed and this little contest is a great way to divide a good cause. Especially making it a public issue as well.


[/ QUOTE ]

We didn't make it a public issue. My correspondence with TE was done via private message. I only responded publicly here after he posted his complaints on this forum.

MM

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while

[/ QUOTE ]

Can we move past this? A satisfactory solution going forward has been reached right?

We are adults here. What we are fighting for is bigger than any one person.

Hurt feelings aside we must move on.

Engineer: You are at this everyday for long hours it seems, why not take a day or two off and recharge the batteries. Thanks for all you have unselfishly done and you are a giant asset here. I hope to see you back here.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone:

Our compromise concerning TE is now in place and he is free to post again. The PPA representative who we occasionally deal with (and who will remain anonymous) agrees that "it's a good solution."

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you!!!



D$D

[daedalus]

Mason, Bluff,
Nice work today. Looks to me like you've spend about 5 hours pissing off one of legalized poker's biggest champions (via posting and coming up with TE's proper identifier). Aren't you embarrassed when you look at all the time TE has put into the cause. Your only efforts are commentary and obstruction.
Keep this up and I'm going to burn my copy of TOP.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep this up and I'm going to burn my copy of TOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh I'm sure that really hurts!

Get a grip, perhaps Vanna will sell you a clue.



D$D

[Cactus Jack]

If given a choice between TE and Bluffidiot, I'll guess I'll not be reading any more posts on the Legislation Forum. The 2+2 attack dog--Bluffidiot--has retaken the forum and made it his own. Disagree, and he'll hump your leg until you go away.

Too bad the powers-that-be chose such an unpleasant poster to be their representative.

I hope that someone will PM me when Bluffidiot has been banned again, so I may come back and read what might be important to me and others who really care about poker, and not a personal vendetta.

CJ--who's views represent the Democratic Party because he once voted for one of its candidates.

[Steve565]

As a separate but related story.

I posted on Yahoo message board for maybe 6 or 7 years for one particular stock. There was a large following of daily posters.

Yahoo made some crazy changes which everyone was unhappy about. One week later, the entire group (I mean everyone) was posting on Investor Village, never to return to Yahoo.

This is the internet, there's (supposed to be) a real freedom here. And there are excellent training sites and forums all around. If you're unhappy with a particalur site, for whatever reason, gravitate elsewhere. I will.

Read this quick, I'm sure the thread will be locked or my post will be removed.

[oldbookguy]

OK, please, this has been debated enough, time to get back to work.

This post encompasses several:
1. Yes, 2+2 needs PPA
2. PPA needs 2+2
3. 2+2, like PPA is moving in a proactive direction.

Now, the REAL important thread here, now, is Berg's on the hearing in a few days (see, 2+2 is getting involved!).

Lets get busy there, there are letters to write and calls we need to be making in support of the bills that will be debated that day and countering the FoF types that will be speaking (Goodlatte, Va. for 1).

We have several supporters on that committee but they cannot carry our water alone.

obg




[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while

[/ QUOTE ]

Can we move past this? A satisfactory solution going forward has been reached right?

We are adults here. What we are fighting for is bigger than any one person.

Hurt feelings aside we must move on.

Engineer: You are at this everyday for long hours it seems, why not take a day or two off and recharge the batteries. Thanks for all you have unselfishly done and you are a giant asset here. I hope to see you back here.

[/ QUOTE ]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer: You are at this everyday for long hours it seems,

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not quite that sad /images/graemlins/wink.gif. I generally have a couple games going while doing this. /images/graemlins/grin.gif Been running prety well lately.

[ QUOTE ]
why not take a day or two off and recharge the batteries. Thanks for all you have unselfishly done and you are a giant asset here. I hope to see you back here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks again for your support. I appreciate it. /images/graemlins/grin.gif I'm not angry or anything. It's just a lot of [censored] when all I'm trying to do is advocate for online poker rights.

I think you have the right idea. I will take a few days off. I'll continue to post about things we need to do, like how we need to advocate for our rights prior to the House Judiciary Committee meeting, of course. Other posts can wait.

[DMoogle]

Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[Zele]

TE, please don't let this pettiness get you down. It boggles my mind, too, but when something like this happens I try to think of it like when some kid eggs my house: it's really frustrating, but there's no sense in trying to reason with or understand the kid; that's just what kids do for some reason.

Thank you again for everything you've done and continue to do for us in this fight.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks DMoogle, Zele, and everyone else. I'll definintely be around for pertinent advocacy issues. We still have a long way to go, after all.

[LeapFrog]

[ QUOTE ]
Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also welcome back BT

[frommagio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks DMoogle, Zele, and everyone else. I'll definintely be around for pertinent advocacy issues. We still have a long way to go, after all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very nice resolution, and good feelings all around! Congrats to Mason and TE for carving out an all around rational solution.

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
If given a choice between TE and Bluffidiot

[/ QUOTE ]

It's very important that the exchange on this board remains professional in manner. Just because you don't agree with Bluffthis's positions doesn't mean you are allowed to interject these kinds of comments into your posts.

MM

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't be so sure. Mason keeps pushing and pushing and pushing and won't let it go.

I paraphrase from the other thread:

"The poker world revolves around twoplustwo and everyone needs the most important entity since the makers of sliced bread. You see Engineer you couldn't stay away.. muhahahahahhaha"

Mason I ashamed of this place and your company at this moment. The Engineer is not here because of you or David or Mat or Ray Zee, he is here because we (the poker community) read and use your board. If I realized you were such nit I may have used pocketfives or somewhere else and I am sure others feel the same.

[jimmytrick]

Many birds possess a muscular pouch along the esophagus called a crop. The crop functions to both soften food and regulate its flow through the system by storing it temporarily. The size and shape of the crop is quite variable among the birds. Members of the order Columbiformes, such as pigeons, produce a nutritious crop milk which is fed to their young by regurgitation. Birds possess a ventriculus, or gizzard, composed of four muscular bands that rotate and crush food by shifting the food from one area to the next within the gizzard. The gizzard of some species contains small pieces of grit or stone swallowed by the bird to aid in the grinding process of digestion, serving the function of mammalian or reptilian teeth. The use of gizzard stones is a similarity between birds and dinosaurs, which left gizzard stones called gastroliths as trace fossils.

I think of Mason as a peculiar sort of bird that can't process the food of life like the rest of us but instead needs to swallow stones to satisfy his constipation. Now we don't have to like that or respect that but it is just the way he is, so prolly its best to shrug and walk around his trace fossils when they litter our path.

[Dustin D]

Mason you seem to have a great many strengths, but your social abilities could use some work. You come across as fairly unlikeable quite often.



Dustin Dirksen

[yahboohoo]

The Engineer has never struck me as one motivated by self-interests ever. He has spent a lot of time, thought and energy trying to help poker players.

Bluff_This is a petty troll who wastes everyone's time with trivial distractions from the big picture.

Mason could make more of an effort (in more ways than one).

2+2 threads like this are a complete turn off, and contribute ZERO to poker players' concerns. That this thread has over 60 posts and 1,500 views is an embarrassment. Think of all the wasted energy and attention this thread has consumed, then multiply it times every other worthless thread like it in the Legislative Forum (1 in 10? 1 in 20?).

Sad.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I still don't fully understand what your problem is with the PPA. You don't like their board make up is as much as I can glean.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand either. Mason claims to be concerned about how the composition of the board will be perceived by the opponents of gaming, but I've seen no evidence anywhere that our opponents care, and I read everything on this that I could find. They care who funds the pro-Internet poker lobbies and they've speculated on that, but there's no evidence anywhere that they care at all about affiliates being on the board.

I personally think our opponents feel we're all degenerates. In their minds, there are degenerate gamblers, degenerate authors, and degenerate site owners, all motivated by greed. What they pay attention to is infighting. Read the criticism section of the PPA Wikipedia article. There's nothing about the board. Rather, it's about Mason.

I invite Mason to make his case that the PPA board composition empowers our opponents in any way, because he hasn't yet. He's entitled to his opinion, of course. However, he states this as incontrovertible fact; he's very emphatic about it, but he has yet to prove it.

There is another issue concerning the board composition. Specifically, are we players adequately represented? There are many opinions on this, but Mason hasn't made a case that either the Pappas-era PPA (i.e., the time I've been on the board) isn't acting 100% in our interests or that's it's ineffective. He's not asked me to push for policy or direction changes within PPA. He's not asked me for anything (besides telling me how to sign my name and to complain about the board makeup). My only other PM from him was one to let me know my request for moderator privileges on this forum was denied because of my PPA work.

So, I'm at a loss. Pappas is working hard for your right to play. I'm working hard for your right to play. You all are working hard for your right to play. Mason, OTOH, hasn't even submitted the 2+2 LLC comments on the UIGEA regs yet. If 2+2 LLC had submitted their comments by now, perhaps it would have worked to encourage other businesses to submit theirs. Even the Chamber of Commerce has submitted comments that help us. I do know that if 2+2 LLC and its authors don't submit comments by Dec. 12th, it will be difficult for them to claim a right to an opinion on what the rest of us are doing.

I wonder what Mason does think we should all do about the current situation regarding online poker. He's not articulated an alternate vision by which we work without ulitizing PPA. I hope it at least involves commenting on the UIGEA regs before Dec. 12th.

Cheers,

Rich Muny
PPA Board Member

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I still don't fully understand what your problem is with the PPA. You don't like their board make up is as much as I can glean.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why you'd dig up a semi-dead thread.

[ QUOTE ]
I invite Mason to make his case that the PPA board composition empowers our opponents in any way, because he hasn't yet. He's entitled to his opinion, of course. However, he states this as incontrovertible fact; he's very emphatic about it, but he has yet to prove it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is NOT the only reason to question the make-up of the board, to suggest such is a straw man.

[ QUOTE ]
There is another issue concerning the board composition. Specifically, are we players adequately represented? There are many opinions on this, but Mason hasn't made a case that either the Pappas-era PPA (i.e., the time I've been on the board) isn't acting 100% in our interests or that's it's ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]

How often have you yourself posted that since you "spoke to John" about an issue and because you were satisfied the issue was dead?

Just using improved communications with members, one of John's "highest" priorities, as a yardstick, the approaching 6 month anniversary of John's "reign" has to be considered a failure.

From a grassroots perspective of making the most of resources volunteered that are demonstratively shown to have been and will be needed, the same reign should be considered an abject failure.

I hesitate to offer any of a number of solutions, as me doing so is sure to doom them to immediate rejection.

To suggest that PPA critic's only empower our opposition as you did in the resurrection of semi-dead thread is another example of you loosing your objectivity and claimed 2+2 forum bias representation to the PPA board.



D$D

[Uglyowl]

I too am disappointed by twoplustwo's, the Company, effort when it comes to fighting for online poker (maybe they are doing behind the scenes stuff, but I doubt it). My respect for the company has greatly diminished in the past year. Short of an incredible book going forward, I will look to other book publishers.

That being said I am surprised you tried to engage Mason again. Not what I would want to do. PPA and Mason don't mix, I would try going on without him.

FWIW, I agree with the opposition not caring about the make-up of the board (I view it as only a very small part of his argument), although he may have a point about it from our end (his main point)


D$D: Failure is inaccurate or way too harsh. They have done alot of good things, you sound like a scorned lover.

[JPFisher55]

TE, I just want to thank you for all your efforts. I agree with everything that you wrote. I hope that 2+2 can contribute to our efforts to fight the Bush administration's war against online gambling.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason claims to be concerned about how the composition of the board will be perceived by the opponents of gaming

[/ QUOTE ]


"claims"? If you are implying he has some other motive then just come out and say it.


[ QUOTE ]
What they pay attention to is infighting. Read the criticism section of the PPA Wikipedia article. There's nothing about the board. Rather, it's about Mason.

[/ QUOTE ]


Why the [censored] do you care what anonymous person put in a wiki article? Change it if you don't like it! I guess you do care a lot though and that is what has prompted you to bait Mason here.


[ QUOTE ]
I invite Mason to make his case that the PPA board composition empowers our opponents in any way, because he hasn't yet. He's entitled to his opinion, of course. However, he states this as incontrovertible fact; he's very emphatic about it, but he has yet to prove it.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have discussed this aspect of the board composition before which Mason has agreed with, so refer to that. But I'll lay it out here again:

1) A board dominated by affiliate farm interests allows our enemies to paint the PPA as not an organization 600K strong or whatever representing average Joe players, but rather as the mouthpiece of a certain segment of the online poker industry.

2) Such affiliates are at the highest risk of prosecution under the IUGEA as they are facilitating the transfer of funds and deriving a profit that doesn't come from their own individual play. While others here have said in the past "great! let em try to prosecute!" so as to have a test case, the fact is that our enemies would then be able to point to the PPA as having individuals on its board under criminal indictment. Not something good for PR purposes IMO.

And I will say again that if it would in fact be such a great thing, then CP mag and Allyn Schulman and Linda Johnson should wage an "I dare you to prosecute us!" campaign and try to bring it about for the good of the goals of the PPA. And don't bring up CP's being willing to fight on the advertising from online cardrooms, because that is a separate issue.


[ QUOTE ]
There is another issue concerning the board composition. Specifically, are we players adequately represented?

[/ QUOTE ]

And I've laid out this case as well before in detail. Many if not most of you seem to disagree. But that is primarily because of the pending legislation and judicial initiatives. If those fail this year, giving the PPA a 2 year track record of no legislative gains, then I suspect more posters here will question not only the board's composition, but its overall goals as well, as online poker in the form we have it now, is not the only form of poker most of us care about. Most of us have a wider range of goals, and some of them take a much longer timeframe to work on, which is why if they aren't worked on now, even while placing a priority on the pending legislation, that it will take longer yet to achieve them.

And let's note something else as well, which is that Mason's concerns about the PPA have not only to do with the board, but also transparency. So what about that???


[ QUOTE ]
So, I'm at a loss. Pappas is working hard for your right to play. I'm working hard for your right to play. You all are working hard for your right to play. Mason, OTOH, hasn't even submitted the 2+2 LLC comments on the UIGEA regs yet. If 2+2 LLC had submitted their comments by now, perhaps it would have worked to encourage other businesses to submit theirs. Even the Chamber of Commerce has submitted comments that help us. I do know that if 2+2 LLC and its authors don't submit comments by Dec. 12th, it will be difficult for them to claim a right to an opinion on what the rest of us are doing.

I wonder what Mason does think we should all do about the current situation regarding online poker. He's not articulated an alternate vision by which we work without ulitizing PPA. I hope it at least involves commenting on the UIGEA regs before Dec. 12th.

[/ QUOTE ]



We all appreciate the efforts of Mr. Pappas and yourself. But now you aren't content with that and are demanding that 2+2 take certain specific steps. So it seems that despite the lack of substantive responses in the thread started by Berge to answer the question I put in a different thread, Does the PPA need 2+2? (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=12898457&page=1&fpart=1& vc=1), that the answer is "yes the PPA does need 2+2 and in fact demands its help in the way it wishes apart from their allowing the use of this forum to help the efforts of the PPA".


And now I am going to restate something I have said before in that thread:

"I just want to note again that either the PPA doesn't need 2p2, in which case all this arguing and discussion is pointless, or they do need 2p2, in which case *even if the criticisms and demands of Mason and posters like myself are totally unreasonable* you who disagree will seek to remove the source of those criticisms by working for board change and better transparency. Of course believing that the PPA does need 2p2 but refusing for reasons of pride/ego/whatever not to meet critics half-way is also an option. Just don't keep bitching at those of us who refuse to accept the PPA as it is, even while we note that the PPA has made visible improvements of late."

[BluffTHIS!]

Engineer,

I want to add something and a question for you and perhaps others here as well. Which is that the other side of the coin is the question, "does the PPA desperately need the affiliate farm/CP board members, and if so why?". If you can't make the case why those board members are so critical for the success of the PPA, then you can't argue that they shouldn't resign for the good of the PPA to remove this bone of contention.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
"does the PPA desperately need the affiliate farm/CP board members, and if so why?".

[/ QUOTE ]

I can only surmise that affiliate farm/CP board members were the ones that had the opportunity and the money to found the PPA. They would be loath to abandon their efforts because others didn't like them being on the board now.

You and Mason should found a separate organization to fight for our poker rights. If you could get even 10,000 active participants, you would be ahead of where are now. But I don't see any energy coming from either of you to do anything of this sort.

I am reasonably sure Mason is content with his place in the poker world and doesn't see any real reason to get in a big uproar. He will still sell books and have a forum. Sure, he would sell more if US based poker was available. But, and I am just surmising here, his attitude is, "if it happens, good, if it doesn't, ok too". Only the threat of an immediate and complete shutdown of 2+2 would he get concerned. Just my humble opinion. I don't know Mason at all.

Tuff

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I too am disappointed by twoplustwo's, the Company, effort when it comes to fighting for online poker (maybe they are doing behind the scenes stuff, but I doubt it). My respect for the company has greatly diminished in the past year. Short of an incredible book going forward, I will look to other book publishers.

That being said I am surprised you tried to engage Mason again. Not what I would want to do. PPA and Mason don't mix, I would try going on without him.

FWIW, I agree with the opposition not caring about the make-up of the board (I view it as only a very small part of his argument), although he may have a point about it from our end (his main point)


D$D: Failure is inaccurate or way too harsh. They have done alot of good things, you sound like a scorned lover.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I'm bringing it up again because we asked Mason for a 2+2 LLC comment for the UIGEA regs and he replied by telling PPA to change its board (and it was, IMO, impolite). I think he has a right to his opinion, but withholding commenting on the UIGEA regs hurts us, the players. I really hope to see 2+2 LLC's UIGEA regulation comment here soon.

PPA has done a lot of good on behalf of poker players. I'm committed to continuing this improvement, but it's time for PPA to lose the apologetic tone around here, IMO. When challenged, I think PPA needs to stand up for what it's doing for the poker community. PPA should admit what needs improvement, but should also stand up for what they're succeeding at.

Rich Muny
PPA Board Member

[crzylgs]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm bringing it up again because we asked Mason for a 2+2 LLC comment for the UIGEA regs and he replied by telling PPA to change its board (and it was, IMO, impolite). I think he has a right to his opinion, but withholding commenting on the UIGEA regs hurts us, the players. I really hope to see 2+2 LLC's UIGEA regulation comment here soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this went down the way you say it went down here, I agree with this 100%. Whatever issues 2+2 has with the PPA have absolutely nothing to do with potential comments on the regs. It's just bad business not to comment, and I hope Mason et al don't let this ideological feud blind them to doing what is best for poker.

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
It's just bad business not to comment, and I hope Mason et al don't let this ideological feud blind them to doing what is best for poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there a thread or link about official PPA comments submitted to the regulators? I hope I missed it or the reason for not commenting.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]


D$D: Failure is inaccurate or way too harsh. They have done alot of good things, you sound like a scorned lover.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please take all my posts in their sum total. Picking a single post or a single part in any attempt to make a cute little comment is simply counter productive.

I am way beyond caring.

I have nothing to gain.

I offered first to volunteer, then applied for an advertised job, and offer my criticism; only because I have some experience in the fields of politics and grassroots organization and activism. My self proclaimed opinions are not based on some imagined self worth, but based on multiple demonstrated successes and comments by nationally recognized figures in the field.

I was fairly silent in my criticism until I got out behind my keyboard, spoke to a lot of people, followed up on many activities both most basic and more complex, that any organization with the PPA's stated goal and mission statement would be expected to do.

I have also both publicly and privately been one of the first to congratulate every success achieved to date.

Unlike a scorned lover, I continue to offer any assistance on a volunteer basis, regardless of any hiring done by the PPA. Shortly after Bryan's hiring was announced, I called him to give him as much advice as I could to help him get as much done as quickly as possible, simply as one man's historical perspective.

I have participated in every suggested activity, letter writing, calls to Hill and State offices, attended the Fly-in events, and have offered suggestions on the comment process on the proposed UIGEA regulations.

I offered suggestions to Randy in the MA effort. I have continued to as I have in the past done the grunt work to develop ideas for improvement in existing efforts and fund raising ideas using personal contacts forward those results to PPA HQ in more than one form or contact method.

Perhaps your scorned lovers continue to try to help you after you tell them to go to hell repeatedly. Sorry my experience in that regard is limited from having been with the same woman over 1/2 my life.

So nice try, perhaps if TE simply tries to pile on to your cheap shot, and that doesn't work, maybe his better defend the PPA against criticism deserves one of his self written skewed polls he loves.

I have nothing to defend but my ideas and the validity of the criticisms offered. John already called me "two-faced", that showed me the growing "bunker" mentality seemingly growing from TE digging up an old thread to pick a new fight on the crappy board issue.

Yes John is a hard worker, doing a tough job, but in such a position as the PPA is today, ignoring free resources beyond my personal involvement, because of some chip on his shoulder is insane IMO.

TE posting he rationale for a more vigorous defense of the PPA for a fly-in that in real numbers was average at best, even though it got a somewhat friendly hearing, as the political payoff, and excelling at his area of expertise PR, is not hitting on all cylinders as it is portrayed. I don't care how many people write posts that puff up his ego.

I posted a while back about the need for a balanced political table. Pointing to 1/2 of one leg and a very stout solid leg, is in no way proof of a table capable of the success necessary for the actions that will be required for "legal" poker anytime soon, if at all.

I will continue to offer to volunteer, do all that is asked of the membership even beyond what is required. I challenge anyone else to show they have done more, let alone someone subject to the public and private crap I have been subject to in the process.

So back up your comments or remove them.


D$D

[JPFisher55]

Bluffthis, I would like to point out that the DOJ has previously threatened CP with prosecution for accepting .com poker site ads. In fact, CP has in essence answered prosecute when ready. The DOJ has declined to prosecute. What would Mason do if the DOJ threatened to prosecute 2+2 and him for the affiliate ads that he has on this site? If litigation is needed to protect the interests of online poker players, then Ms. Shulman is the best director that we can get for the PPA. She is already assisting Mr. Lee Rousso with his litigation against the State of Washington concerning its law prohibiting individuals from making any bets on online gambling sites.
I'm sorry but I fail to see what interests the board of directors of the PPA has that 2+2 or us online poker players do not share.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I had made it clear in prior private message communication that I would not have a conversation with John Pappas until we saw improvements in the PPA board. We feel that it is very important for the PPA to improve in a number of areas or else they run the risk of damaging the cause that we all want to see successful. The reason we pick on the board so much is that I believe this area is highly visible and (relatively) easy to address. (I also don't want to get into the other issues any more since we believe that this forum is now read by many entities, not all of who are friendly to the PPA and our cause in general. So it's not in our best interest to post specifics that can be used against us.) Hence, when I heard from John Pappas the other day, a response from me along the lines of my previous communication was sent. Also, it's hard to see how it was impolite since my response was almost word for word the exact same message he sent to me except with appropriate subjects changed.

For those who want to know, we do have a line of communication with the PPA, but it does not go through John Pappas. It will also remain confidential as to how that line of communication works.

We have also made it clear to the PPA through our communication and through this forum that their officials are free to post here unencumbered so long as they are identified as PPA officials and they follow the rules of this board. This includes John Pappas who does post here on occasion even though I will not, at this point in time, directly communicate with him.

As for Two Plus Two Publishing LLC commenting on the UIGEA Regs, I don't think it is appropriate for us to do so simply because I and the the other officials of Two Plus Two are not experts on Internet gambling law. We rely on our attorneys who are experts in this area for advice when we need it, and are confident because of how they advise us that we are making the right decisions from a company point of view in this area. We also feel that there are many posters here who are far more knowledgeable in this area than we are and rely on them to post their comments and opinions.

As for The Engineer, he needs to understand that posting here is a privledge and not a right. He cannot and it will not be tolerated for him to participate here in an un-respecful and non-professional manner. So to this end he now has been given a three day vacation. I know that some of you will be upset by this, but www.twoplustwo.com (http://www.twoplustwo.com) is our site and we will run it by the rules that we post and in which everyone, including myself, must abide by.

Best wishes,
Mason

[tehpokarplayor]

Mason - Agreed, it is your site. To all others, I have been lurking here for a long time, and it has never ceased to amaze me the amount of energy that is spent on arguing and infighting. If only a small percentage of that energy could go to either unifying or being productive; this battle could be finished already, imo.

I remember last election, a large amount of money was raised and a senator was voted out...let's go back to that.

[JPFisher55]

I'll gamble. What rule did TE break? When has he been disrespectful or unprofessional?
Also, I would like to know specifics about 2+2's issues with the Board of Directors of the PPA.
The excuse that our opponents will benefit by public revelation of these specifics does not make sense to me. Our opponents in the Bush Administration are not that smart. If they were that smart, then they could have drafted a law better than the UIGEA and avoided the mess that has come out of the WTO case with Antiqua. Also, they lost the election of 2006 and alienated many former Republican voters like myself. What specifics can they use and how? These specifics will not matter in any future litigation about the UIGEA, its regulations and/or the Wire Act. I doubt that they can expose 2+2 to any civil or criminal liability.
When 2+2 originally raised questions about the PPA, it raised some valid lack of disclosure issues. At the time, the PPA was behind on its required filings with the government. However, these issues have been resolved because the PPA is current with its legally required filings which have been posted on the PPA site. I have some trouble with what I, and many posters, perceive as a negative, even somewhat adversial, view of the PPA by 2+2. I would appreciate an update of the issues with more specifics than the overall composition of the board of directors of the PPA.
I can understand 2+2 not commenting on the proposed regulations under the UIGEA. Given its obvious bias, any comment from 2+2 would likely be disregarded by the agencies anyway.

[kailua]

[ QUOTE ]


Thanks. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I'm bringing it up again because we asked Mason for a 2+2 LLC comment for the UIGEA regs and he replied by telling PPA to change its board (and it was, IMO, impolite). I think he has a right to his opinion, but withholding commenting on the UIGEA regs hurts us, the players. I really hope to see 2+2 LLC's UIGEA regulation comment here soon.

PPA has done a lot of good on behalf of poker players. I'm committed to continuing this improvement, but it's time for PPA to lose the apologetic tone around here, IMO. When challenged, I think PPA needs to stand up for what it's doing for the poker community. PPA should admit what needs improvement, but should also stand up for what they're succeeding at.

Rich Muny
PPA Board Member

[/ QUOTE ]

Rich…I appreciate your sincerity and commitment to the PPA and the advancement of poker player’s rights, but from your tone it now appears quite justifiable that Mason insisted that you identify your affiliation with each post.

[Uglyowl]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll gamble. What rule did TE break? When has he been disrespectful or unprofessional?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto, I am having trouble as well, unless it is in the student shall never question the school principal type of disrespectful.

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll gamble. What rule did TE break? When has he been disrespectful or unprofessional?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto, I am having trouble as well, unless it is in the student shall never question the school principal type of disrespectful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. Mason, of course this is your site and you may set whatever rules you wish. That said, your recent actions seem increasingly petty.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]


I don't understand why you'd dig up a semi-dead thread.



[/ QUOTE ]

Also, I agree with the above statement.

It is clear that Mason has a lot of grief with the PPA board makeup. It is clear that he is unlikely to change his mind.

But, he has allowed the PPA a reasonable opportunity to come on here and post. The previous hubbub seemed to be settled mostly to everyone's satisfaction.

The PPA is who they are, Mason is who he is. Neither is likely to change soon.

I personally don't see the PPA board as being much of an issue. Of course they have an interest in some aspect of legalized online poker. Who else is going to go to any great effort to help us out? Especially, who is going to put out any significant amount of money?

Mason doesn't agree with that idea. Fine, let's agree to disagree and move on.

Tuff

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I don't understand why you'd dig up a semi-dead thread.



[/ QUOTE ]

Also, I agree with the above statement.

It is clear that Mason has a lot of grief with the PPA board makeup. It is clear that he is unlikely to change his mind.

But, he has allowed the PPA a reasonable opportunity to come on here and post. The previous hubbub seemed to be settled mostly to everyone's satisfaction.

The PPA is who they are, Mason is who he is. Neither is likely to change soon.

I personally don't see the PPA board as being much of an issue. Of course they have an interest in some aspect of legalized online poker. Who else is going to go to any great effort to help us out? Especially, who is going to put out any significant amount of money?

Mason doesn't agree with that idea. Fine, let's agree to disagree and move on.

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

Well the PPA hasn't shown any desire to allow further participation in the decision making processes. Suggestions are make in this forum, the PPA's forum, and to PPA officials; perhaps once in ten or less the reasoning for the decision is given, and too often the culture of "an inferiority complex" so infuses the official answer that any communication is lost.

I still have great hope for John and the PPA. I will no matter what, first offer any assistance requested or reasonably foreseen. I will not prostate my self nor silence my opinions on areas of improvement as a "price of admission."

This is no way to run a grassroots organization.


D$D<-- now using Firefox.. F! M$.

[chrisptp]

these threads, and others like them, strike me as a sad waste of time by intelligent people whose energy could be better spent promoting (in whatever way they see fit) the greater goal of legalized, regulated online poker.

i'd also like to know what rule TE broke.

[Skallagrim]

Well, it would appear an alliance between 2+2 and the PPA is out of the question, lets hope at least that the "truce" continues.

I have only one additional comment, directed more at the readers than the owners of 2+2: that the PPA board is open to challenge for not being 100% representative is something I have agreed with in general, but I still say "so what." Does anyone think the NRA is compromised by the fact that owners of gun manufacturing companies sit on its board? Or is anyone bothered that publishers of porn give financial contributions to the ACLU?

I see at this point no divergence between what the PPA board is fighting for and what I want: explicitly legal online poker. UNTIL I see such a divergence, I just cant help feeling Mason and Bluff are doing more harm than good, although I know this is not their intention.

Skallagrim

[Legislurker]

Im just greedy Skall. The entire UIGEA fiasco has given rise to something Ive seen a need for since my first trip to the casino. A player advocacy union/NGO. The PPA as is is not, and is miles away from being that. Its clear they have no intention now of ever being it. As for fighting the UIGEA they are there, ok, but iMega and Antigua have done more. Even the Russo guy in WA has. The PPA hasnt filed one lawsuit. Even a spurious one or 100. Florida is a big, glaring failure to convince me they were backing general poker. So Im sitting it out until they either co-opt Mason or go out on a limb ot convince me its going ot be a player's organization. Good work, I appreciate it, but I don't trust it.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
As for The Engineer, he needs to understand that posting here is a privledge and not a right. He cannot and it will not be tolerated for him to participate here in an un-respecful and non-professional manner. So to this end he now has been given a three day vacation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please to see how he was unrespectful or unprofessional? Or what posting rule he broke. Seems to me he was respectfully stating an opinion. Then again TE seemed to be working hard over the Thanksgiving weekend so a short posting vacation is well deserved.

In response to some other comments, something should be pretty clear by now: 2+2 LLC doesn't give a damn about fighting for our rights to play online poker. Get over it.

[2easy]

It seems to me that even if Mason were to get some redress from the PPA as regards the board makeup, there is no way 2+2 would ever become any form of advocate for our interests as players.

The fact that they have never done anything proactive, (aside from making this forum available, if that could be called proactive,) even well before the board makeup, or the PPA itself, for that matter, was an issue, seems to bear this out quite clearly.

[oldbookguy]

It seems this really is a non-starter. Does 2+2 need the PPA or PPA need 2+2?

No, neither needs the other.

The real question is does the fight for poker need either. Yes, both are needed. Our fight needs everyone; all affiliate sites, forums, groups and most of all our fight needs ALL of us.

I care not at all if any one group, or all groups have distaste for the others, having been through this scenario in local politics with organizations, it simply needs to be put on a back burner, keeping the big picture in mind.

Someplace in this or another thread concerning this it was stated by someone (too lazy too look it up) that 2+2 started seeing business pick-up before the Moneymaker boom. This I can see as correct, the advent of the hole card cam in the year or so before made watching TV poker much more interesting and at that time players (Helmuth mainly) was running around with his .COM hats and jerseys and remember, all the .COM sites we advertising big then too, all before Moneymaker, but the internet WAS driving the boom. In this respect, yes, 2+2’s success was predicated on the Internet, Moneymaker just made it more popular. Recall, the year he won attendance was up what, over 100% from the year before.

In closing, we are all in this together. Each will shoulder a load they can carry, no more, no less.

So, perhaps we can end this and move on to more important matters like expending all this energy and time on fighting for poker; we have letters to write and comments to make (ABOUT the proposed regs, no about each other!

obg

[Legislurker]

But fight thru what vehicle obg? Why give your time, energy, and money to an organization that at the end of the day you don't know if you can trust? How hard would it be to rejig the board? Open it up to participatory member action? Poker players more than most people, but its true of human nature, hate a harness. We work for ourselves first and foremost, and asking us to work and support a pig in a poke is nigh insane. Im 100% glad Mason drew a line in the sand because so few people are willing to question a group that purports to serve the interests of poker at large while remaining secretive and narrowly controlled.

[oldbookguy]

That is the point, you are missing legis!

Join the PPA, don't join, it is moot what group, if any you affiliate yourself with.

The big picture, we are, all groups (am I am a member of several) are all fighting for the same thing, some more than others.

Some I agree with, some I don't; that does not mean I discount the effort simply because I dislike them. It means I will try and perhaps work to change what I don't like, while still supporting the end goal (not all are poker related).

Liking or disliking the PPA's board, does that mean you disagree with fighting to win this fight? Of course not.

Fight with a group you agree with, heck.

I read often the NRA model mentioned here. Take note sometime of them, they endorse candidates from BOTH parties, it is not the party they are fighting for, it is the end game.

Do you think ALL NRA members support this or prefer they support only one party? Does that stop the fight, no. It simply means they hold together even during times of disagreement.

obg

[Legislurker]

the NRA is different in that it OWNS districts. And that it relies on the goodwill/money of members to keep up the fight.
If the PPA is a flybynight affiliate farm outfit it just wants a one-off exemption and [censored] B&M and home poker. I want a PLAYER organziation for the long haul. Im not saying tear down the PPA and defame it in the street, just that I won't endorse it to anyone or even recommend it. Same as Safe and Secure. Fine, fight by us, but don't claim to be the voice of poker players. Its not agree/disagree with them, just a wish to not be lumped in with them. Say who you are and be who you are, and it would be easy for the PPA to be different, but it doesn't want that. No one is saying ban poker because the PPA is conflicted and suspect. The point is fight beside, not with. Id rescind my membership in it if it wasnt pointless to belong in the first place. Who is saying stop fighting for poker? No one said that.

[JPFisher55]

Ok maybe the PPA should be the OPPA, Online Poker Players Alliance.

[djrion]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand either. Mason claims to be concerned about how the composition of the board will be perceived by the opponents of gaming, but I've seen no evidence anywhere that our opponents care, and I read everything on this that I could find. They care who funds the pro-Internet poker lobbies and they've speculated on that, but there's no evidence anywhere that they care at all about affiliates being on the board.

I personally think our opponents feel we're all degenerates. In their minds, there are degenerate gamblers, degenerate authors, and degenerate site owners, all motivated by greed. What they pay attention to is infighting. Read the criticism section of the PPA Wikipedia article. There's nothing about the board. Rather, it's about Mason.

I invite Mason to make his case that the PPA board composition empowers our opponents in any way, because he hasn't yet. He's entitled to his opinion, of course. However, he states this as incontrovertible fact; he's very emphatic about it, but he has yet to prove it.

There is another issue concerning the board composition. Specifically, are we players adequately represented? There are many opinions on this, but Mason hasn't made a case that either the Pappas-era PPA (i.e., the time I've been on the board) isn't acting 100% in our interests or that's it's ineffective. He's not asked me to push for policy or direction changes within PPA. He's not asked me for anything (besides telling me how to sign my name and to complain about the board makeup). My only other PM from him was one to let me know my request for moderator privileges on this forum was denied because of my PPA work.

So, I'm at a loss. Pappas is working hard for your right to play. I'm working hard for your right to play. You all are working hard for your right to play. Mason, OTOH, hasn't even submitted the 2+2 LLC comments on the UIGEA regs yet. If 2+2 LLC had submitted their comments by now, perhaps it would have worked to encourage other businesses to submit theirs. Even the Chamber of Commerce has submitted comments that help us. I do know that if 2+2 LLC and its authors don't submit comments by Dec. 12th, it will be difficult for them to claim a right to an opinion on what the rest of us are doing.

I wonder what Mason does think we should all do about the current situation regarding online poker. He's not articulated an alternate vision by which we work without ulitizing PPA. I hope it at least involves commenting on the UIGEA regs before Dec. 12th.

Cheers,

Rich Muny
PPA Board Member


[/ QUOTE ]

Mason,

Do you have a response to any of these concerns? Have I missed your response in another post on this board? Would you please enlighten us plebs?

I was thinking of purchasing some new books in the next few months/year(2008). The expanded edition of Tournament for Adv. Players; Harrington Cash I and II. I am seriously going to reconsider because of your perceived behaviour/attitude.

If you do have a reason and do not feel like sharing it, why don't you feel compelled to respond publicly? You are very adamant about thwarting any effort the PPA seems to have in your "virtual" world. May I ask what you or 2+2 are doing to actually fight for our rights to play? Finally, why play this game that it appears you are playing? Do you want the PPA on this board or not? It seems like you dont, so why give yourself this administrative nightmare? Why dont you ban any and all talk from the PPA organization until you approve of them? If I owned a store and I said "no shoes, no service" I would NOT let in patron with only ONE SHOE ON. Stop playing games.

ryAn

[yahboohoo]

I'm outta here. gl/gg

[frommagio]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm outta here. gl/gg

[/ QUOTE ]

Yabbadabbadoo! Don't let the door hit you on the way out!

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
these threads, and others like them, strike me as a sad waste of time by intelligent people whose energy could be better spent promoting (in whatever way they see fit) the greater goal of legalized, regulated online poker.



[/ QUOTE ]


This is an important issue. Management of any organization is important to shareholders and stakeholders alike.

My active posting career here started with a post proclaiming that the PPA had turned the corner and my opinion that John Pappas, from my personal conversations, was a fantastic change for the prospects of success for all poker players.

"We" as poker player are indeed better off than "we" were before the Board decided to make the recent changes.

What is unanswered is what are the PPA's goals?

I am a critic because almost 6 months ago, John told me and made many public published statements that have not even been begun in the planning stages.

The PPA seems unwilling to do much more than push for a fairly limited set of legislative goals. Most of these goals do benefit your average poker player, but accomplishing them can be problematic if the broader interests of the average poker player are given short shrift to industry interests over represented on the board.

For example look at Party Poker's position vs Full Tilt and Poker Stars. FT & PS stayed in the US market. PP took the position that to do so was a F U to the US government.

So the question remains what would the PPA do or has done if a legislative compromise was offered by Congress that gave "us" (the average player) fully legal and regulated US poker, but the cost was an understanding that FT or PS would face some or complete difficulties in ever getting a US license?

I would suggest on principal that all sites should get a fair shot at any US market. But should "we" fight a longer battle as directed by the PPA to preserve their board interests, or does the majority of US poker players and members of the PPA not care who operates the games?

The PPA has also shown very little desire to organize its grassroots members. There are very little requirements for appointment to State Rep positions. Even worse there is very little requested of and required of these positions.

Some grassroots advocacy groups are lead by to some degree members elected to advisory groups. Suggesting running elections for State Reps just now is insane. But I think it is a fair suggestion to make that the Board has shown no interest in training, supporting, and developing these positions. Other than Randy having to almost demand help from PPA HQ, but actually finally getting but almost in spite of the PPA management and board. I can point to at least a dozen state actions I am personally aware of where this lack of organization, training, and support has hurt the overall cause.

If the PPA is to become an effective grassroots force in '08 time is running VERY short. Political grassroots work is a passion of mine. I do not consider myself in the top 1/2 of professionals, but even I have been approached by National efforts for State and Regional positions. I do not state this to some how promote myself to the forum or the PPA, it is clear that ship has sailed, but to simply show that almost all major players committed to trying to make an impact in '08 are well advanced in their efforts.

I have seen too many political efforts loose or discourage too many outstanding volunteers because they were not organized nor committed to developing their grassroots abilities until it was way too late.

Personally I offered to volunteer my time to do any job needed by John or the PPA from about June until now. Even if my talents are even less than 10% of those seeming recognized by others why would any group refuse almost any offers of free help?

I still do not completely buy into the PPA's board is working at somewhat cross purposes to the larger interests of the average US poker player. But any fair observer would have more questions today than ever, in fact even recent sucesses point to more problems or "evidence" to support rather than reject these concerns.



D$D

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok maybe the PPA should be the OPPA, Online Poker Players Alliance.

[/ QUOTE ]


A rose by any other name....

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally I offered to volunteer my time to do any job needed by John or the PPA from about June until now. Even if my talents are even less than 10% of those seeming recognized by others why would any group refuse almost any offers of free help?

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

You either take us for fools or creatures without memory. And poker players generally have good memory.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally I offered to volunteer my time to do any job needed by John or the PPA from about June until now. Even if my talents are even less than 10% of those seeming recognized by others why would any group refuse almost any offers of free help?

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

You either take us for fools or creatures without memory. And poker players generally have good memory.

[/ QUOTE ]


D$D to PPA: "I offer my time to you."

a) PPA accepts: "Wait you misunderstood! Of course I meant I would work for you for pay!"

b) PPA declines: "Wait you misunderstood! I was offering *free* services!"

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally I offered to volunteer my time to do any job needed by John or the PPA from about June until now. Even if my talents are even less than 10% of those seeming recognized by others why would any group refuse almost any offers of free help?

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

You either take us for fools or creatures without memory. And poker players generally have good memory.

[/ QUOTE ]


D$D to PPA: "I offer my time to you."

a) PPA accepts: "Wait you misunderstood! Of course I meant I would work for you for pay!"

b) PPA declines: "Wait you misunderstood! I was offering *free* services!"

[/ QUOTE ]

That maybe the "generally accepted wisdom" and even a fair perception of my "true intent" given the nature of this town.

Even taking 100% of the blame for all of the mis-communication involved in on one hand applying for an openly advertised job, while at the same time continuing to participate in and offer further volunteer services I don't feel it is a fair perception.

Generally actions speak louder than words.

But then this is DC, politics, and the internet; often perception and good bullpoop trump truth.

However perhaps the root of the truth lies in the fact that my offers of free services in support of the "cause" is not an isolated incident and too frequent to excuse as minor problems encountered by an young organization or frequently overworked people.


D$D

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally I offered to volunteer my time to do any job needed by John or the PPA from about June until now. Even if my talents are even less than 10% of those seeming recognized by others why would any group refuse almost any offers of free help?

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

You either take us for fools or creatures without memory. And poker players generally have good memory.

[/ QUOTE ]


D$D to PPA: "I offer my time to you."

a) PPA accepts: "Wait you misunderstood! Of course I meant I would work for you for pay!"

b) PPA declines: "Wait you misunderstood! I was offering *free* services!"

[/ QUOTE ]

D$D's idea of volunteering (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=12143932&page=0&vc=1 )

[Legislurker]

I agree wholeheartedly the PPA doesn't want to be a grassroots organization. Lobbying Congress with questionable money and a veil of secrecy was a short term fix that was ill-conceived and duplicated better efforts. Its still not too late to turn to membership, but it means sacrificing names and power. Whether or not D$D wanted to volunteer his problem was one that is pervasive and general.
There is not organization for poker players to work thru and recieve help to change outdated evil laws. Calls, emails, ideas, all fell on deaf ears. Maybe its time to pull the plug on lobbying only and turn around and start going to bars and card rooms and signing peopel up one by one. Hire some bloggers/posters(no i don't want to do it). Start a community. Open up control to of the organization to memberhip. What the hell can it hurt? Oh wait, you want to preserve the HORRIBLE business model of the affiliate farms.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree wholeheartedly the PPA doesn't want to be a grassroots organization. Lobbying Congress with questionable money and a veil of secrecy was a short term fix that was ill-conceived and duplicated better efforts. Its still not too late to turn to membership, but it means sacrificing names and power. Whether or not D$D wanted to volunteer his problem was one that is pervasive and general.
There is not organization for poker players to work thru and recieve help to change outdated evil laws. Calls, emails, ideas, all fell on deaf ears. Maybe its time to pull the plug on lobbying only and turn around and start going to bars and card rooms and signing peopel up one by one. Hire some bloggers/posters(no i don't want to do it). Start a community. Open up control to of the organization to memberhip. What the hell can it hurt? Oh wait, you want to preserve the HORRIBLE business model of the affiliate farms.

[/ QUOTE ]

I derive very little income from on-line poker, percentage wise I spend more on Starbucks a month than I've won. Considering I started from zero, I am really proud of my few hundred bucks winnings, not that I ever expect to be able to spend money from my "off-shore unregulated numbered account".

But signing up people who play in bar leagues is one suggestion that has fantastic potential. I've even gone out and done it. At least two people at the fly-in were their only because I contacted them through bar leagues. No they were not all from the local area. Tuff met one who flew in from the Mid-west at his own expense with NO help or even consideration in hospitality let alone much PR contact to capitalize on his "story".

Think of me what ever you will, I'm old enough and secure enough to careless. I do care about my freedoms, and rights. I have a passion for the game of poker that far exceeds my skills at poker and apparently communications on-line and in person with the PPA abilities.

If I ran into the same problems in any other portion of my life I would follow the "conventional wisdom", and squarely place the blame as suggested.

However, grassroots politics is one area where I have excelled recently in the past decade of my life. To what extent is indeed debatable (perceptions -- depends on whom you talk to and when). But even discounting all of that, one area I am considered "head and shoulders" above many is getting the most out of volunteers and scooping up for free needed resources.

So I am willing to accept all the personal failure in my personal attempts. But I am unwilling to stay silent or suggest the PPA is anywhere near where it should be in the "care and feeding" of volunteers.

I could list another half dozen specific examples where the PPA has paid for or "blown" amazing opportunities to raise money and visibly shown a positive ROI to the broader poker world.

But why bother?



D$D

[Legislurker]

Yeah why bother. There just isn't the money to put together a poker organization. The PPA was the chance and they are [censored] blowing it by being secretive and standoffish. Im willing to bet if they had a loan to pay for the investment in organizing in 6 months it would pay off. You may have to endure some threats of violence from Harrahs thugs for organizing players, but one day the need for a union will be clear. Sooner or later rakes will go up. Perks down. Laws unfavorable to the consumer. Live dealers cut out. Im not saying mark my words, but we are all [censored] this pooch.

[NY60]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll gamble. What rule did TE break? When has he been disrespectful or unprofessional?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto, I am having trouble as well, unless it is in the student shall never question the school principal type of disrespectful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. Mason, of course this is your site and you may set whatever rules you wish. That said, your recent actions seem increasingly petty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I cannot admit that I know all the ins and outs of the arguments presented in this thread, but I do know one thing for sure...THE JOURNALIST HAS JUST BECOME THE CENSURER and that can never be a good thing!

[NY60]

As an attorney, when someone who is not an attorney says they do not want to comment on legal issues beacuse they do not have the expertise...I respect that.

When someone points out that a not-for-profit has transparency issues with their finances and that something needs to be done...I respect that.

When someone takes issue with the make up of a board of directors of a not-for-profit based on ethical principles...I respect that.

When someone questions the veracity of the opinions expressed by another who claims to be affiliated with an influential medium yet opts to remain anonymous....well I respect that and I too question those same opinions.

When someone creates a medium for the free flow of ideas and interjects in the forum when the decorum falls below a certain level NOT THE CONTENT...well I very much respect and appreciate that.

If the internet has proved nothng else, it has proven that in the aggregate, the rest of us outsiders are not collectively stupid...we don't need the hand of big brother to spoon feed us information.

Let's not jeopardize the respect we have earned by turning off the the broadcasting medium when the heat in the kitchen gets too hot.

That I do not respect.

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's not jeopardize the respect we have earned by turning off the the broadcasting medium when the heat in the kitchen gets too hot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of just turning down the thermostat, the owner has closed the kitchen.

No more food. /images/graemlins/mad.gif /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
As an attorney, when someone who is not an attorney says they do not want to comment on legal issues beacuse they do not have the expertise...I respect that.

When someone points out that a not-for-profit has transparency issues with their finances and that something needs to be done...I respect that.

When someone takes issue with the make up of a board of directors of a not-for-profit based on ethical principles...I respect that.

When someone questions the veracity of the opinions expressed by another who claims to be affiliated with an influential medium yet opts to remain anonymous....well I respect that and I too question those same opinions.

When someone creates a medium for the free flow of ideas and interjects in the forum when the decorum falls below a certain level NOT THE CONTENT...well I very much respect and appreciate that.

If the internet has proved nothng else, it has proven that in the aggregate, the rest of us outsiders are not collectively stupid...we don't need the hand of big brother to spoon feed us information.

Let's not jeopardize the respect we have earned by turning off the the broadcasting medium when the heat in the kitchen gets too hot.

That I do not respect.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sure your not a politician or lawyer?

I find myself in total agreement, but fairly unsure of what it is I am really agreeing to in total!



D$D

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah why bother. There just isn't the money to put together a poker organization. The PPA was the chance and they are [censored] blowing it by being secretive and standoffish. Im willing to bet if they had a loan to pay for the investment in organizing in 6 months it would pay off. You may have to endure some threats of violence from Harrahs thugs for organizing players, but one day the need for a union will be clear. Sooner or later rakes will go up. Perks down. Laws unfavorable to the consumer. Live dealers cut out. Im not saying mark my words, but we are all [censored] this pooch.

[/ QUOTE ]

A PPA PAC with some sort of membership direction on spending might solve a few of the current issues.

At least anyone trying to "buy" a seat or control would at least be out front and on record.


D$D