Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
If given a choice between TE and Bluffidiot

[/ QUOTE ]

It's very important that the exchange on this board remains professional in manner. Just because you don't agree with Bluffthis's positions doesn't mean you are allowed to interject these kinds of comments into your posts.

MM

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Glad to hear you're not going to just quit these forums. You mean a lot to the community, TE.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't be so sure. Mason keeps pushing and pushing and pushing and won't let it go.

I paraphrase from the other thread:

"The poker world revolves around twoplustwo and everyone needs the most important entity since the makers of sliced bread. You see Engineer you couldn't stay away.. muhahahahahhaha"

Mason I ashamed of this place and your company at this moment. The Engineer is not here because of you or David or Mat or Ray Zee, he is here because we (the poker community) read and use your board. If I realized you were such nit I may have used pocketfives or somewhere else and I am sure others feel the same.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Many birds possess a muscular pouch along the esophagus called a crop. The crop functions to both soften food and regulate its flow through the system by storing it temporarily. The size and shape of the crop is quite variable among the birds. Members of the order Columbiformes, such as pigeons, produce a nutritious crop milk which is fed to their young by regurgitation. Birds possess a ventriculus, or gizzard, composed of four muscular bands that rotate and crush food by shifting the food from one area to the next within the gizzard. The gizzard of some species contains small pieces of grit or stone swallowed by the bird to aid in the grinding process of digestion, serving the function of mammalian or reptilian teeth. The use of gizzard stones is a similarity between birds and dinosaurs, which left gizzard stones called gastroliths as trace fossils.

I think of Mason as a peculiar sort of bird that can't process the food of life like the rest of us but instead needs to swallow stones to satisfy his constipation. Now we don't have to like that or respect that but it is just the way he is, so prolly its best to shrug and walk around his trace fossils when they litter our path.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Mason you seem to have a great many strengths, but your social abilities could use some work. You come across as fairly unlikeable quite often.



Dustin Dirksen

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

The Engineer has never struck me as one motivated by self-interests ever. He has spent a lot of time, thought and energy trying to help poker players.

Bluff_This is a petty troll who wastes everyone's time with trivial distractions from the big picture.

Mason could make more of an effort (in more ways than one).

2+2 threads like this are a complete turn off, and contribute ZERO to poker players' concerns. That this thread has over 60 posts and 1,500 views is an embarrassment. Think of all the wasted energy and attention this thread has consumed, then multiply it times every other worthless thread like it in the Legislative Forum (1 in 10? 1 in 20?).

Sad.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
I still don't fully understand what your problem is with the PPA. You don't like their board make up is as much as I can glean.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand either. Mason claims to be concerned about how the composition of the board will be perceived by the opponents of gaming, but I've seen no evidence anywhere that our opponents care, and I read everything on this that I could find. They care who funds the pro-Internet poker lobbies and they've speculated on that, but there's no evidence anywhere that they care at all about affiliates being on the board.

I personally think our opponents feel we're all degenerates. In their minds, there are degenerate gamblers, degenerate authors, and degenerate site owners, all motivated by greed. What they pay attention to is infighting. Read the criticism section of the PPA Wikipedia article. There's nothing about the board. Rather, it's about Mason.

I invite Mason to make his case that the PPA board composition empowers our opponents in any way, because he hasn't yet. He's entitled to his opinion, of course. However, he states this as incontrovertible fact; he's very emphatic about it, but he has yet to prove it.

There is another issue concerning the board composition. Specifically, are we players adequately represented? There are many opinions on this, but Mason hasn't made a case that either the Pappas-era PPA (i.e., the time I've been on the board) isn't acting 100% in our interests or that's it's ineffective. He's not asked me to push for policy or direction changes within PPA. He's not asked me for anything (besides telling me how to sign my name and to complain about the board makeup). My only other PM from him was one to let me know my request for moderator privileges on this forum was denied because of my PPA work.

So, I'm at a loss. Pappas is working hard for your right to play. I'm working hard for your right to play. You all are working hard for your right to play. Mason, OTOH, hasn't even submitted the 2+2 LLC comments on the UIGEA regs yet. If 2+2 LLC had submitted their comments by now, perhaps it would have worked to encourage other businesses to submit theirs. Even the Chamber of Commerce has submitted comments that help us. I do know that if 2+2 LLC and its authors don't submit comments by Dec. 12th, it will be difficult for them to claim a right to an opinion on what the rest of us are doing.

I wonder what Mason does think we should all do about the current situation regarding online poker. He's not articulated an alternate vision by which we work without ulitizing PPA. I hope it at least involves commenting on the UIGEA regs before Dec. 12th.

Cheers,

Rich Muny
PPA Board Member

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I still don't fully understand what your problem is with the PPA. You don't like their board make up is as much as I can glean.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why you'd dig up a semi-dead thread.

[ QUOTE ]
I invite Mason to make his case that the PPA board composition empowers our opponents in any way, because he hasn't yet. He's entitled to his opinion, of course. However, he states this as incontrovertible fact; he's very emphatic about it, but he has yet to prove it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is NOT the only reason to question the make-up of the board, to suggest such is a straw man.

[ QUOTE ]
There is another issue concerning the board composition. Specifically, are we players adequately represented? There are many opinions on this, but Mason hasn't made a case that either the Pappas-era PPA (i.e., the time I've been on the board) isn't acting 100% in our interests or that's it's ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]

How often have you yourself posted that since you "spoke to John" about an issue and because you were satisfied the issue was dead?

Just using improved communications with members, one of John's "highest" priorities, as a yardstick, the approaching 6 month anniversary of John's "reign" has to be considered a failure.

From a grassroots perspective of making the most of resources volunteered that are demonstratively shown to have been and will be needed, the same reign should be considered an abject failure.

I hesitate to offer any of a number of solutions, as me doing so is sure to doom them to immediate rejection.

To suggest that PPA critic's only empower our opposition as you did in the resurrection of semi-dead thread is another example of you loosing your objectivity and claimed 2+2 forum bias representation to the PPA board.



D$D

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

I too am disappointed by twoplustwo's, the Company, effort when it comes to fighting for online poker (maybe they are doing behind the scenes stuff, but I doubt it). My respect for the company has greatly diminished in the past year. Short of an incredible book going forward, I will look to other book publishers.

That being said I am surprised you tried to engage Mason again. Not what I would want to do. PPA and Mason don't mix, I would try going on without him.

FWIW, I agree with the opposition not caring about the make-up of the board (I view it as only a very small part of his argument), although he may have a point about it from our end (his main point)


D$D: Failure is inaccurate or way too harsh. They have done alot of good things, you sound like a scorned lover.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

TE, I just want to thank you for all your efforts. I agree with everything that you wrote. I hope that 2+2 can contribute to our efforts to fight the Bush administration's war against online gambling.