Senate records show PPA given $720,000 so far......

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi cat:

He's a representative of Bluff Magazine who we have already barred several times under different names. But we hav decided to let him post for now to ensure that all points of view are heard.

Best wishes,
Mason

[sdfsdf]

720K down the drain
should've given it to me

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi cat:

He's a representative of Bluff Magazine who we have already barred several times under different names. But we hav decided to let him post for now to ensure that all points of view are heard.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that clears things up. I don't know why he had to be so mysterious.

[rokstedy]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi cat:

He's a representative of Bluff Magazine who we have already barred several times under different names. But we hav decided to let him post for now to ensure that all points of view are heard.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]


Why was he banned? BECAUSE he's a rep of Bluff? That's kind of gay.

[Uglyowl]

PPA: "You just have to trust us, Bill Frist will fail" "We can't give away our secrets though, just trust us"

Within two days, the UIGEA was passed.

To think poker players will support an organization without having the necessary assurances and trust is insane. Any organization that asks for money and/or support should answer questions of those it is asking.

Twoplustwo is one of the largest places poker players gather and to avoid it because PPA and Mason can't get along is pornographic!

Micheal B (PPA, President) seems like a good enough guy, but no one can be trusted just because....

I still think the PPA can succeed and are getting better. With limited information though, it is tough to really tell their effectiveness. I really really want them to succeed.

To date what is PPA biggest accomplishment? I don't mean this to be coy, but just saying there is alot of work to earn the trust of the poker playing public.

[Richas]

I'll ask again - what is the back story between 2+2 and some members of the PPA board that led to the investigation and the hatchet job statement pinned to the top of the board?

I genuinely want to know why the only 2+2 action on this is to slag the PPA, if there are better or even more personal but potentially significant character issues I'd like to know what they are because from a neutrals perspective it looks like the PPA are doing all they can and started to work on this long before many of us knew it was a threat.

[demon102]

I think there wasnt much of a problem between 2+2 members and the PPA as there was just a question of should 2+2 endorse the PPA. If Im right 2+2 leaders just wanted to know that the PPA is legit before they promote supporting and giving donations from 2+2 members.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll ask again - what is the back story between 2+2 and some members of the PPA board that led to the investigation and the hatchet job statement pinned to the top of the board?

I genuinely want to know why the only 2+2 action on this is to slag the PPA, if there are better or even more personal but potentially significant character issues I'd like to know what they are because from a neutrals perspective it looks like the PPA are doing all they can and started to work on this long before many of us knew it was a threat.

[/ QUOTE ]


Richas,

And I'll ask YOU again. Are you affiliated with either party poker or another online gaming site, or a site such as neteller that provides logistical support to same? Your extreme interest in the PPA as a UK citizen raises this question.

Also regarding "backstory" vis-a-vis 2+2 and the PPA, why do you think there must be some sinister motive on Mason's part when many of us posters have raised the same issues regarding the PPA? If anything, you should question the makeup of the PPA board which consists *solely* of CP mag affiliated writers, and players who have either an ownership or sponsorship affiliation with an online poker site, thus leading to a reasonable conclusion that the PPA represents primarily the interests of those online sites and the media dependant on same, rather than its player membership. And this is important because an agenda of online poker only as opposed to both B&M and online, and one furthermore tied to other forms of gambling likes sports and casino games is what some of those same sites like party are very interested in, regardless of whether it harms poker.

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'll ask again - what is the back story between 2+2 and some members of the PPA board that led to the investigation and the hatchet job statement pinned to the top of the board?

I genuinely want to know why the only 2+2 action on this is to slag the PPA, if there are better or even more personal but potentially significant character issues I'd like to know what they are because from a neutrals perspective it looks like the PPA are doing all they can and started to work on this long before many of us knew it was a threat.

[/ QUOTE ]


Richas,

And I'll ask YOU again. Are you affiliated with either party poker or another online gaming site, or a site such as neteller that provides logistical support to same? Your extreme interest in the PPA as a UK citizen raises this question.

Also regarding "backstory" vis-a-vis 2+2 and the PPA, why do you think there must be some sinister motive on Mason's part when many of us posters have raised the same issues regarding the PPA? If anything, you should question the makeup of the PPA board which consists *solely* of CP mag affiliated writers, and players who have either an ownership or sponsorship affiliation with an online poker site, thus leading to a reasonable conclusion that the PPA represents primarily the interests of those online sites and the media dependant on same, rather than its player membership. And this is important because an agenda of online poker only as opposed to both B&M and online, and one furthermore tied to other forms of gambling likes sports and casino games is what some of those same sites like party are very interested in, regardless of whether it harms poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I have no connection with online sites apart from using them. I don't work for them or any organisation connected to them. I gues you suspect me for similar reasons I am concerned about 2+2's attack on the PPA.

The reason I think that there is likely to be some "back story" is the way that this was done by 2+2. If 2+2 want to do an investigation and then make a decision to endorse or not then fine. If the investigation raises concerns then the way to handle it (without personal animosity) is to make a statement saying something like as 2+2 has concerns about financial acountability, board membership and player representaton we cannot endorse the PPA at this time. Job done. Instead we have a whole load of muck pinned to this forum written by a lawyer not 2+2 that essentially attacks the PPA for being a new, small organisation trying to present itself as larger and more significant than it is (this is after all the job of any lobby group!!!). This statement has been and continues to be damaging to the PPA and to the poker lobby. Why choose to damage the PPA to the maximum of your ability? is my question. As for 2+2 doing nothing else on the issue what else can you point to? Why isn't the statement pinned to the top of this forum a statement in support of online poker and explaining why 2+2 opposes UIGEA instead of an attack on the PPA?

My "extreme interest in the PPA" is really an extreme interest in the future of Poker. I'm also interested in the differences between the politics/legislature in the US/UK and how new political issues arise and are dealt with, including new campaigns on issues I care about(including international trade).

I'm also concerned that the UK has all too often followed the US. In the past week we have had three TV programmes and numerous op-ed pieces attacking the UK government for regulating casinos and poker instead of "banning" them like the US. Most in the UK are not scared by what the US government is doing - I am.

[BluffTHIS!]

Richas,

As I have said before, I do understand how a citizen of another country can be interested in what happens over here and its possible global effects. However I still don't see why that legitimate interest translates into the specific organization that americans might or might not use to fight for their interests. Nor indeed why you would spend more time in these forums focusing on the PPA instead of trying to rally your fellow countrymen into taking some actions in your own country to stem the apparently rising anti-online gambling tide.

Regarding your criticisms of the way 2+2 conducted and posted the results of an investigation, I think despite being a regular here you don't understand some some things fully. Posters here hounded Mason for not backing the PPA or through some other means fighting the legislation in its runup to passage. However he made it clear he certainly didn't support the legislation, but as a publishing entity lacked the expertise or direct interest (they sold books to B&M players long before online) so as to take a more direct political role. And as to supporting the PPA, he had some prima facie concerns and wanted to see if those were valid.

So he had his attorneys do an investigation. But as to giving either a very short response regarding same as you suggest, posters here just wouldn't have accepted that. They would want to know the reasons and judge for themselves whether they would reach the same conclusion from the facts uncovered.

Of course you might still fairly not agree with the above. But note as well that Mason has allowed not just the PPA, but you or any interested party to have his say on these matters in this forum, even when all parties aren't being forthright as to their vested interests in the issues, and obviously some very interested parties have their HQ in London, which is why I asked you a question regarding yourself.

And note one final thing, which is that the PPA prez has thus far not come here and discussed not just the issues raised by Mason's attorneys, but also by many of us player-posters. He's the one who let a sore fester and get infected, and so far he is just trying to put a band-aid on it and hope it gets better by itself.