Re: Non-substantive response ...i. e. why you will never have credibi
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'll be happy to report back my personal views of that conversation as an individual.

[/ QUOTE ]

And there are those of us who are quite interested in what you have to say. Please do not let the pessimistic views of some slow you down! I must thank you for coming to this forum and posting what you have, as I personally have been intrigued. Have fun at your meeting and I look forward to a report in the "Poker Legislation" forum when you are done!

ryDog

Good.
 

"I've been in D.C. too long to even suggest that someone said exactly something verbatum, only to find out I got left holding the end of a trial ballon."

Good. This statement probably does a lot to put your posts in context.

Do everyone a favor, don't report PPA/Pappas conversations as such unless they are on the record or not subject to "severe restraint". Let them speak for theselves, or better yet, act.

Yes, it was "faint praise", but posters come in all types. I wanted to be clear that your other stuff would lead me to expect a more substative contribution to the discourse here. That you evidently understand the nature of planting stories and items into circulation, hence the "trial balloon" comment; you mightunderstand better the sensitivity some folks have to approaches from the blue by someone saying "Gosh, good news coming".

PPA may have turned a corner toward effective action, but while time is passing legitimate issues raised by sincerely interested posters here get no substantive PPA response.

The answer to that problem IS simple, get the PPA itself to send a poster over here. People like to be asked for more than just money. TheEngineer seems to have beaten down the PPA door, that is positive. Let's hope you can do what you indicate.

I am sure of the sincerity of Mason's posts. I have never known him to be insincere.... politically shy and reticent perhaps, but always sincerely so. He acts to promote a marketplace of ideas, rather than his own political agenda.

2+2 has a poker legislation forum precisely to provide a place for the sort of dialogue and discourse needed to inform readers and shape possible action, on either side of an issue. It is a resource offered for FREE to the posters.

Re: Non-substantive response ...i. e. why you will never have credibi
 

[ QUOTE ]
And there are those of us who are quite interested in what you have to say. Please do not let the pessimistic views of some slow you down! I must thank you for coming to this forum and posting what you have, as I personally have been intrigued. Have fun at your meeting and I look forward to a report in the "Poker Legislation" forum when you are done!


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Good.
 

"I've been in D.C. too long to even suggest that someone said exactly something verbatum, only to find out I got left holding the end of a trial ballon."

Uh oh. Welcome to the club [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Good.
 

HEY!!!!

How come Berge gets to use smily faces in a legislative forum???

<grin> jk

not again!!
 

As a longtime lurker of the legislation forum this is the second time I'v seen an attempt at communication being aggresively bashed. The first was with The engineer, but of course regular opsters couldnt lay into him, cos he had the rep. DaD is just an easy trget.

Anyway my personal feeling is of disgust at this grandstanding. Basic idea , they should come here. We are important. No need to take our queries there.

And then I read somewhere about objections to the PPA board composition.

Why would you hope that noone sends any questions?
Why is this unnecessary?
Why does Papas need well crafted and professional replies from the moderators/owners?
Why is it far better if Papas came here and answered questions?


I'm quite disillusioned with these old ideas expresed by the so called " elite" of this forum.

This is a simple case of a poster asking members for questions that they wish answered, not suggestions as so readily flow from TPCEO and BluffThiss.

You guys can make your own thread for your "thinking out loud" moments, and not spam/hijack other threads and clutter their readability.( Surely moderators will notice and address this... or mebbe not)

The more I read about this, more this seems to be about politics and business of Twoplustwo, than of the interests of pokerplayers.

The least you can do is stay out of any grassroot level approch( this thread). BUt wait, what if PPA goes grassroot on the TpT membership. Shrinking leverage. Cant command/demand things with significant authority. Ouch that hurts the business of tpt. No Good.

So bash any grassroot effort towards communication. To hell with the interests of poker players.

So even in the extreme case of DaD being a PPA stooge, who is just trying to build goodwill amongst the tpt community, even somehow adding to the membership base, by accepting a bunch of questions and bringing us the PPA answers to them, there is absolutely no reason to look at this as anything but forward movement for the poker playing community here.

For commercial and political interests here at TPT, it might be different story, and hence the attempt to weed out any such attempts.

Of Course if PPA and its entire board , and their staff, and ... came here in person, and said to the great wise man himself," We submit to your superior authority". Show us the light!! It might just become a different story.

Re: Non-substantive response ...i. e. why you will never have credibi
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ugly ....

First, his post was counterproductive. Basically what D$D WAS doing was something that would gum up the works in the event that the PPA was really interested in someone posting something substantive here.


[/ QUOTE ]

What a spin?

I could equally well contend that it would hasten the process.

Re: not again!!
 

[ QUOTE ]
As a longtime lurker of the legislation forum this is the second time I'v seen an attempt at communication being aggresively bashed. The first was with The engineer, but of course regular opsters couldnt lay into him, cos he had the rep. DaD is just an easy trget.

Anyway my personal feeling is of disgust at this grandstanding. Basic idea , they should come here. We are important. No need to take our queries there.

And then I read somewhere about objections to the PPA board composition.

Why would you hope that noone sends any questions?
Why is this unnecessary?
Why does Papas need well crafted and professional replies from the moderators/owners?
Why is it far better if Papas came here and answered questions?


I'm quite disillusioned with these old ideas expresed by the so called " elite" of this forum.

This is a simple case of a poster asking members for questions that they wish answered, not suggestions as so readily flow from TPCEO and BluffThiss.

You guys can make your own thread for your "thinking out loud" moments, and not spam/hijack other threads and clutter their readability.( Surely moderators will notice and address this... or mebbe not)

The more I read about this, more this seems to be about politics and business of Twoplustwo, than of the interests of pokerplayers.

The least you can do is stay out of any grassroot level approch( this thread). BUt wait, what if PPA goes grassroot on the TpT membership. Shrinking leverage. Cant command/demand things with significant authority. Ouch that hurts the business of tpt. No Good.

So bash any grassroot effort towards communication. To hell with the interests of poker players.

So even in the extreme case of DaD being a PPA stooge, who is just trying to build goodwill amongst the tpt community, even somehow adding to the membership base, by accepting a bunch of questions and bringing us the PPA answers to them, there is absolutely no reason to look at this as anything but forward movement for the poker playing community here.

For commercial and political interests here at TPT, it might be different story, and hence the attempt to weed out any such attempts.

Of Course if PPA and its entire board , and their staff, and ... came here in person, and said to the great wise man himself," We submit to your superior authority". Show us the light!! It might just become a different story.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. I am particularly disturbed by Mason's pronouncement that he hopes no one gives OP questions. Mason doesn't like the PPA because, presumably among other things, there are people (a person) on the board that he doesn't like for whatever reason. Quite frankly, I don't get what the agenda is on 2+2s part here. The comment above about elitism certainly seems appropriate.

Re: not again!!
 

Pappas has quite the hurdle to overcome if he's to be successful. Bolcerek didn't exactly build more bridges than he seemed to burn.

Re: not again!!
 

uphigh, toast,

I think you guys are missing Mason's basic point: This forum is free and the PPA is welcome to have a representative post here. Berge and the other Legs mods will make sure that they are treated like any other member and not flamed, bashed or ridiculed. This is not a hard concept to understand and it's not a huge burden on the PPA to do this.

Do you guys really think that we would be better served having an ambassador to go to the PPA with our questions? That's really silly while this board exists. I'm glad D$D is meeting with Pappas and it appears that he has some of the same concerns as many posters here, but as he has stated (and Mason reiterated), he is merely speaking for himself. If the PPA is really concerned or interested in what this community thinks, then the PPA should come here, not expect each individual poster to come to them.

Just to be clear. I am not employed by 2p2 or associated with them in any manner except that I mod a few forums without remuneration. The views expressed above are my personal views and may not agree with those of 2p2 management or anyone else.