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.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
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???

[/ QUOTE ]


And do YOU not understand that isn't what is important? The statistic that *is important*, is what percentage of active, letter writing and phone calling members of the PPA are also 2p2'ers. And where is the place most likely to induce more members to such active measures. This is the same as in politics where it's not just registered voters, but those most likely to in fact vote, who are the most sought after.

[Kraize]

[censored] 2+2.

I don't post here often but I do read the legislation board every day and do the things asked of us by TE in his weekly action threads.

This situation is complete BS and I won't be visiting this site or buying anymore 2+2 books.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[censored] 2+2.

I don't post here often but I do read the legislation board every day and do the things asked of us by TE in his weekly action threads.

This situation is complete BS and I won't be visiting this site or buying anymore 2+2 books.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm curious whether you are also mad at the CP mag and affiliate farm board members of the PPA who could resign but won't because of either their vested interests tied to only certain forms of online poker, or their animus against 2p2? Will you also be boycotting CP magazine and urging your friends not to sign with affiliates advertised on their website?

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
I'm curious whether you are also mad at the CP mag and affiliate farm board members of the PPA who could resign but won't because of either their vested interests tied to only certain forms of online poker, or their animus against 2p2? Will you also be boycotting CP magazine and urging your friends not to sign with affiliates advertised on their website?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff This,

Please go back into hibernation where ever you were.

PPA has done more for MY poker interests in a week than you have EVER.

Nobody but nobody cares a fig what you think.

Tuff

[BluffTHIS!]

Tuff,

Quick question. When you were at the D.C. flyin, were board members Allyn Schulman, Linda Johnson, Jan Fisher and Mary Magazine also there? And did you have any discussions with them relevant to the issues of concern here regarding the board composition and transparency?

Also please keep one thing in mind. You are after all a fish, i.e. losing poker player, albeit one who can afford to do so. So your opinions on anything can't really be given a lot of credence. Unless of course you're playing at my table and donating. In that case I'm willing to cave into some of your demands including a percentage back of your losses. After all, it's the fish like you we want and not all these weak-tighties!

[primetime32]

[ QUOTE ]
Tuff,
Also please keep one thing in mind. You are after all a fish, i.e. losing poker player, albeit one who can afford to do so. So your opinions on anything can't really be given a lot of credence.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are being serious, you are a bigger fool than i thought. Just because someone is bad at poker does not mean that they are not capable of making superior arguments to your own.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
Tuff,

Quick question. When you were at the D.C. flyin, were board members Allyn Schulman, Linda Johnson, Jan Fisher and Mary Magazine also there?

.
.
There was a lady at my table who said she was a board member and a lawyer. I didn't catch her name.
.
.
And did you have any discussions with them relevant to the issues of concern here regarding the board composition and transparency?
.
.
I did not because I don't care one whit about the board conposition. The PPA is working for me. That works for me. You and Mason are the only ones who seem to have heart burn about the board makeup.
.
.


Also please keep one thing in mind. You are after all a fish, i.e. losing poker player, albeit one who can afford to do so. So your opinions on anything can't really be given a lot of credence. Unless of course you're playing at my table and donating. In that case I'm willing to cave into some of your demands including a percentage back of your losses. After all, it's the fish like you we want
.
.
Then you sir are a complete freaking idiot, because fish like me aren't going to be playing online poker AT ALL unless the PPA has success. You would be better served to work your complaining ass off helping the PPA rather that whining and obstructing them.
.
.

and not all these weak-tighties!

.
.

There may come a day, not too distant, when you and all your selfish ilk, will pine for the right to play the weak tight grinders the permeate the online scene nowadays. .



[/ QUOTE ]

Tuff

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
Also please keep one thing in mind. You are after all a fish, i.e. losing poker player, albeit one who can afford to do so. So your opinions on anything can't really be given a lot of credence.

[/ QUOTE ]

What planet are you on? The PPA should represent just winning players? Only winning players shold have the right to play or the right to campaign and be listened to as part of the campaign? Oh shoot 90% of players excluded from having any meningfull opinion - I am (just) a winning player so does that make my (negative) opinion of you valid?

[Kraize]

"I'm curious whether you are also mad at the CP mag and affiliate farm board members of the PPA who could resign but won't because of either their vested interests tied to only certain forms of online poker, or their animus against 2p2? Will you also be boycotting CP magazine and urging your friends not to sign with affiliates advertised on their website?"


I don't read CP but that has nothing to do with this issue.

I'm not backing up the PPA. I am however backing up TE. He has done nothing but help our cause and Mason is being ridiculous in his demands.

Anyone that reads here knows TE is on the PPA board. He shouldn't have to sign every post like he is representing the PPA.

Anyway this issue has been discussed in enough threads. Most people are on TE's side and hopefully they will follow him off 2+2.