Re: PPA Update.
 

I suggest that unless you can come on here with some specifics, you shjouldn't be making the type of posts that you are. It doesn't do anyone here any good to be told that the sky is going to be blue soon unless you can back this up with a few facts.

On the other hand, if you would have been a long time poster here who has built up credibility then a post like yours would be more acceptable. And again, I want to repeat that our position towards the PPA is neutral. For this to change, we need to see more changes in their board than they have currently made even though there has been movement here in the right direction.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: PPA Update.
 

I think you have clearly mis-represented what we did and our attitude towards the PPA. I believe, because of our initial work, the PPA did improve.

Also, Bolcerek was on here soliciting members/money and refused to tell us when asked how the money was being spent, who the lobbyist were, what their goals were, etc. You need to understand that we at Two Plus Two are a serious organization that is willing to spend our own money when necessary to do what's best for poker and to protect our members. We do this at no charge to you.

On a side note, even though our current position towards the PPA is neutral, I would like to see a representative of their organization come on here and answer questions in a serious and professional manner. This didn't happen before which is one of the reasons there was difficulty. But, as far as we are concerned, there is no reason it can't happen now.

Mason

Re: PPA Update.
 

Thanks for weighing in Mason. You have had a measured, cautious approach to the PPA that I hope will bear fruit from them one day. You attempted to do the homework and background on them, and they stonewalled you. I think a lot of us would have overlooked where exactly the money went if they had organized us and acted, but they wanted secrecy and inaction. I don't know if they can interact with a forum this large easily and fluidly, but they could have a reader
here with weekly updates, at the least. Twoplustwo is the
nexus of the poker universe, and they have eschewed it, to the detriment of themselves and poker, and deserve to have to work to get back in our good graces.
I think I speak for a lot of us here when I say that my reading/posting here is relayed via IM/forum/table talk to a factor of ten or more other poker players. I've been asking
the last couple of days what it would take for the PPA to get them to act in unison with them. Of the first four people I queried, three said to get the endorsement of twoplustwo that they did not get before. More rank and file recreational people will follow in those people's footsteps.
People are willing to give time and money if they can see how its working. I realize poker player's may have the highest ratio of [censored] to angel, but we aren't unreasonable. Its not too late for the PPA to step up, but they can't get anything done online without first stepping up here with facts, transparency, and engagement.

Re: PPA Update.
 

Hey all,

I haven't been active here in months for a variety of reasons, but got my hopes up, momentarily, when I saw the title of this thread.

Now, I'm disappointed, not just in the lack of information but in discovering that the PPA has not had more of a presence here in the past few months. Last I paid attention, a number of people here had been selected as State contacts for the PPA (a position I unsuccessfully applied for). I had assumed that those people who be effective liasons between PPA and the rest of us. Are we still suffering from a lack of communication?

And I certainly can't understand why anyone would actually withhold information about the PPA's activities.

Re: PPA Update.
 

[ QUOTE ]
On a side note, even though our current position towards the PPA is neutral, I would like to see a representative of their organization come on here and answer questions in a serious and professional manner.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this is that often the questions aren't going to come from serious, professional posters. Many of them are going to come from people like BluffThis who obviously have their own agenda.

Re: PPA Update.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I suggest that unless you can come on here with some specifics, you shjouldn't be making the type of posts that you are. It doesn't do anyone here any good to be told that the sky is going to be blue soon unless you can back this up with a few facts.

On the other hand, if you would have been a long time poster here who has built up credibility then a post like yours would be more acceptable. And again, I want to repeat that our position towards the PPA is neutral. For this to change, we need to see more changes in their board than they have currently made even though there has been movement here in the right direction.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone,

I spoke with John Pappas for over an hour last night about various aspects of the PPA. They do have a plan. DeadMoney referred to an upcoming announcement. The announcement will happen fairly soon.

As we all know, up until now PPA has generally functioned a lobbying organization, where they work behind the scenes to influence politicians to support various legislation, and they've had some successes in this area. However, as we also know, they've not been effective in using their membership as a grassroots force. I think they're starting to understand this weakness and are working to resolve it. My conversation didn't lead me to draw anywhere near the optimistic conclusions DeadMoney did, but that's probably because I asked very specific questions about what they would do with regards to each issue we have [i.e., What are you doing about the KY elections? How? When? How about the UIGEA regs? What about the NFL letter? What about member communication? How come my posts (just one guy with a $0 budget) generate more Google returns than all of PPA’s work combined? Etc.]. What it did lead me to believe is that they’ll take some positive steps toward engaging their membership and towards facilitating the building of a grassroots organization. Time will tell if this will be more successful than in the past. I hope we’ll continue to hold them accountable, but that we’ll also look at them with as open a mind as possible. And, I hope we’ll let them know when we don’t like what we see.

As for BluffTHIS’ “PPA Update”:

1) The issues with the board are still what they are.
2) BluffTHIS is correct, the PPA isn’t lobbying to neuter the regs. I expressed my thoughts that they should, but they won’t.
3) PPA states they’d like to engage the 2p2 community, but have not yet done anything in this area. In fairness, they do respond to me whenever I ask them a question, but I can’t relay every question we have via email. A PPA presence here would help.
4) I discussed the KY gubernatorial elections with John (if Beshear wins, Kentuckians will vote on a constitutional amendment allowing poker; if Fletcher wins, he promises he’ll stop any expansion of gambling in KY). They have an interest and will make a determination. If they do, we’ll see them in action and will be able to critique their performance. If they sit this out, that would make quite the statement as well.
5) We, the PPA members, control the organization. When we don’t like something, we need to write or post on their forums demanding action. I have been, as have a few others here. I’ve seen what a few hundred dedicated folks here can accomplish, and can only imagine what could be done with 660,000. I’m still constrained to imaging, but am hopeful.
6) I think they’re sincere in wishing to improve in terms of member outreach and in grassroots effort building. Of course, sincerity and results aren’t the same thing. Time will tell.

So, I’d say I’m guardedly optimistic. They’re not contemplating anything with the energy level of what we do here, but they are looking at how to enable their members to do stuff like that within PPA. Again, time will tell. I’ll post more after the announcement.

If or when Engineer posts in this thread again, I\'ll read it.
 

If or when Engineer posts in this thread again, I'll read it.

I also would be interested in what an official representative of the PPA might post here, provided it is substantive.

Re: If or when Engineer posts in this thread again, I\'ll read it.
 

Engineer,

Thanks for the update. I guess one thing that still baffles me is why a lobbying organization doesn't have anyone it can designate to read and post on poker Internet message boards like 2+2. Seems like such a no-brainer to garner new members, preach to the converted and rally the troops.

Re: PPA Update.
 

Thanks Engineer.

I have written (never called) them and all but the last time simply received a canned response.

I did receive a reply from Pappas this last time for once concerning the Thompson letter.

I replied with many concerns that mirror yours and others.

Are we perhaps getting through to the PPA? The PPA needs to be at the least partially as active as FoF and other groups.

We shall see, I hope good things come soon.

obg

Re: If or when Engineer posts in this thread again, I\'ll read it.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Engineer,

Thanks for the update. I guess one thing that still baffles me is why a lobbying organization doesn't have anyone it can designate to read and post on poker Internet message boards like 2+2. Seems like such a no-brainer to garner new members, preach to the converted and rally the troops.

[/ QUOTE ]