Does the PPA need 2+2?

[Cactus Jack]

This is absurd.

This is like what's left over from Ivory's 99 44/100% pure fighting about who's more important. The truth is neither are more important in the grand scheme of things.

The vast majority of the poker playing population--the 99 and 44/100%--do not know about either the PPA or 2+2. Do you understand that??? 2+2 is important to SOME online poker players--among the ones still playing--but totally unimportant to the ones who WOULD BE PLAYING if the PPA is successful. 2+2 is important to us, but the rest of the world could give a fat rat's derierre.

I'm a supporter of 2+2, but I'm in the same position here as I was before the invasion of Iraq. I can't criticise without being considered a Communist. Well, at the risk of offending some people I'd rather not, I'm going to anyway...

This is totally and utterly ridiculous and I'm appalled!

C'mon, Mason, gimme a break. While you may have good reasons in your own mind, in the minds of your customers you're out of your mind. Frankly, 2+2 did nothing before the passage of the UIGEA to prevent it, to educate poker players, and has since done nothing to repeal it. You've sold a bunch of books. You haven't done what the PPA is at least trying to do.

In my eyes, the PPA is the one who's gaining respect, while 2+2 is losing it. You are, simply, wrong. (and sadly unlikely to change your mind.)

So, in conclusion, I believe in this case, 2+2 needs the PPA much more than the PPA needs 2+2. If the PPA fails, there's nothing to take it's place, the market shrinks further, and you sell fewer books over time. Duh. The PPA has made it this far without 2+2 at all. The only thing to come out of 2+2 which has been of great help to the PPA is The Engineer, if that's a true statement at all.

Stop this nonsense before it hurts us further. And stop acting like Democrats. Sheesh.

CJ--a member of the Democratic Party and as such, his views should be taken as the policy of the Democratic Party.