2+2 Ask the PPA
 

"I know this is going to hurt, I just don't know whom yet.."

This is what I say to myself playing AK(s) in a multi-way pot pre-flop.

I mentioned in a previous post that I might be meeting with John Pappas. Well we have scheduled a day later this week.

I am a member of this forum with little standing. I think I understand some of the issues this forum has with the past actions of the PPA. I have my own issues with the past actions of the PPA. I do however have a lot more confidence in the new direction John Pappas has outlined to me.

No I am not sure I would want any job that required dealing with some of you on a regular basis, even a paid one, I don't think a non-profit could afford what anyone might demand to do this on a regular basis! [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

But as a member of this forum I will take whatever questions you all put together and promise that John at least gets them. Of course I can not promise what might happen after he gets them......

I will hope to sumarize them and post the list for the group aproval in a couple of days. I will attempt to update my profile here to add my poker e-mail address so any may feel free to send any questions they as members may want to ask and may not for whatever reason feel like asking openly.

I do not hold myself out as "the one and only true spokesman" for 2+2 (or even close to it!). I just think this is a good time for these past issues to be addressed. As I have posted in the past, I have my own issues with lost opportunities of the PPA. I also have some ideas of how it might operate better in the future.

The reason for the meeting is I have some experience in the area of grassroots politics and I have offered to volunteer some time to help in whatever manner the PPA deems nessecary.


D$D

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

Ask him what, if any role, the PPA intends to take in litigation over online poker, including the iMEGA case, the Carruthers/Kaplan case and the case in the State of Washington challenging its ban on online gambling. Does the PPA have any plans to iniate litigation against the UIGEA and its regulations if and when it is appropriate?
Will the PPA lobby Congress about complying with the WTO decision on online gambling?
These are more important issues than any current bill in Congress concerning online gambling.

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

Why are they not aggressively trying to minimize the pending regulations. This really pisses me off and makes me want to withdraw my membership.

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am a member of this forum with little standing. I think I understand some of the issues this forum has with the past actions of the PPA. I have my own issues with the past actions of the PPA. I do however have a lot more confidence in the new direction John Pappas has outlined to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a lot of problems with this. You're an individual, not a representative of Two Plus Two. If you meet with Papas or any other representative of the PPA you are speaking only on your own and not as any sort of representative of Two Plus Two.

The PPA knows how to contact me and I have had private conversations with a representative of theirs. If Papas wants to contact me he's welcome to do so. If he wants to come on this forum and hold a discussion, he's also welcome to do so. But you only speak for yourself.

[ QUOTE ]
But as a member of this forum I will take whatever questions you all put together and promise that John at least gets them. Of course I can not promise what might happen after he gets them......

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope that no one on this forum sends you a question. Again, if Papas wants to come on here and have a discussion, that's a different matter. I and Mat Sklansky, along with our moderators, will make sure that the response he gets will be professional in nature.

[ QUOTE ]
I will hope to sumarize them and post the list for the group aproval in a couple of days. I will attempt to update my profile here to add my poker e-mail address so any may feel free to send any questions they as members may want to ask and may not for whatever reason feel like asking openly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, you are not needed to do this. Plus it would be far better if Papas or some other official representative of the PPA came here and answered questions directly.

[ QUOTE ]
I do not hold myself out as "the one and only true spokesman" for 2+2 (or even close to it!).

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to make this very clear. You are not a representative of Two Plus Two Publishing LLC or www.twoplustwo.com, and do not represent us in any way. Only I or my designates have that authority, and you are not in that category.

Mason Malmuth

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hope that no one on this forum sends you a question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Feverishly trying to delete

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

I don't believe he's trying to represent 2p2 publishing. Just noting that he's going to be meeting with the PPA boss, and is happy to take a list of questions from legislation forum members here.

Am I wrong? I don't get the vibe that he's trying to carry the flag of "the business" or the owners of 2p2. Just simply giving people who post in this particular subforum a chance to get questions in since he has access this week to a live meeting w/ John P.

To the O.P. :

My question (really a request). Communicate with your members like Engineer does here. Some type of "weekly action" to get folks moving is a great idea.

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

[ QUOTE ]


Just to make this very clear. You are not a representative of Two Plus Two Publishing LLC or www.twoplustwo.com, and do not represent us in any way. Only I or my designates have that authority, and you are not in that category.

Mason Malmuth

[/ QUOTE ]

I fully understand, and I thought I made it clear that both as only a member of this forum and only a member of the PPA, but NOT an offical of either I was making the offer.

If it's a bad idea then it's a bad idea. I think 2+2 has a lot to offer the PPA and the PPA 2+2.

Personally I feel and will express my personal opinion that the PPA needs to have an offical desiginated to "offically" communicate to the major poker forums.

I'm pretty sure I do not want any part of that effort given that I can't even seem to express a simple offer of attempting to offer a way to UNOFFICALLY improve communications between the two......


D$D

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

PPA should have a representative on the forums to give regular updates, or better yet have a forum of their own for these questions. Ask them why they don't.

There should be regular dialogue and communication. The lack of this is the big problem with the PPA. There are alot of very smart and creative people in poker to draw ideas from, and not to do that is a shame.

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

[ QUOTE ]
PPA should have a representative on the forums to give regular updates, or better yet have a forum of their own for these questions. Ask them why they don't.

There should be regular dialogue and communication. The lack of this is the big problem with the PPA. There are alot of very smart and creative people in poker to draw ideas from, and not to do that is a shame.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of my top 3 <u>PERSONAL</u> questions!


D$D

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

D$D- If your intentions are good, don’t get deterred, we need more active people on board. (I guess I am more trusting than a lot of people.)

My personal, individual (as only a member of this forum) question would be:

How will you communicate with your members better about what is going on with your organization and poker legislation?

Why can\'t PPA simply send someone to post here and get feedback ?
 

This is unnecessary.

All PPA needs to do is post here directly, and answer questions. It is FREE, except for the effort made.

A number of poker sites recognize this opportunity and have posted here in the past to address issues.(I get my share of crap here, but it comes with the territory and is a worthwhile exercise.)

If the PPA does really value input from here, then send someone to read, post, and DISCUSS issues here.

It IS just that simple.

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

Amen.

Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
 

[ QUOTE ]
PPA should have a representative on the forums to give regular updates, or better yet have a forum of their own for these questions. Ask them why they don't.

There should be regular dialogue and communication. The lack of this is the big problem with the PPA. There are alot of very smart and creative people in poker to draw ideas from, and not to do that is a shame.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mentioned in a thread, sometime in the past few weeks, that I had stopped visiting this forum for months, but was very disappointed to learn that none of the people here who had been chosen to be State contacts by the PPA had been posting any updates.

I recall when the PPA made these choices that at least a couple of regular posters (or semi-regulars) indicated they had been chosen. But I guess even they have not been in a position to provide more information?

Re: Why can\'t PPA simply send someone to post here and get feedback ?
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is unnecessary.

All PPA needs to do is post here directly, and answer questions. It is FREE, except for the effort made.

A number of poker sites recognize this opportunity and have posted here in the past to address issues.(I get my share of crap here, but it comes with the territory and is a worthwhile exercise.)

If the PPA does really value input from here, then send someone to read, post, and DISCUSS issues here.

It IS just that simple.

[/ QUOTE ]


TP CEO,

Very nice post and 100% true. It really is that simple.

But let's note something important. Even if Mr. Pappas himself availed himself of this obvious opportunity, he is still just an employee of the board. That means he is not going to be in a position to answer any questions about the serious conflicts of interest and lack of expertise on the board, nor about why the PPA has a severely shortened list of goals that primarily cater to the business models of certain online poker sites, instead of the larger set of goals most members have. So all he is going to be able to speak to is grassroots tactics and PR (happy spin).

But it just so happens that there is a long time poster who is a member of the PPA board, Greg Fossilman Raymer. He could be the go between here and speak to the more important structural issues that have to do with the makeup of the board and the goals it subscribes to. But to my knowledge, never once has he posted about same in this forum. Though he doesn't post often in general, it is clear he reads the forums and keeps up with things, and has been gracious to talk about a lot of stuff in the past. And yet he doesn't about the PPA in this forum. Why is that? I would imagine it is because he realizes the truth of the criticisms that have been made here about the PPA board, and has too much integrity to lie to us by saying that isn't the case.

The bottom line is that the PPA has and has had, every opportunity to engage 2+2's posters and its site owners. But the reason they don't anymore is simply because they refuse to acknowledge the points that have been made in criticism of it, and have no intention of changing their focus on the sites and advertising media dependant on same being the PPA's de facto primary stakeholders, rather the broader membership.




(cue D$D's reply with repitition of: 1) more happy spin &amp; 2) "we'll just have to see - time will tell")

Re: Why can\'t PPA simply send someone to post here and get feedback ?
 

[ QUOTE ]

(cue D$D's reply with repitition of: 1) more happy spin &amp; 2) "we'll just have to see - time will tell")

[/ QUOTE ]

"I just knew this was going to hurt." [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Nion-substantive response ...i. e. why you will never have credibility
 

OP,

I took the time to raise a real substantive point about why your suggestion was unnecessary and how simple it IS for PPA to have a welcome presence in 2+2 forums ... i.e just post and respond substantively with respect to issues.

You could have addressed the substance of what I related, instead of some hissy-fit posturing because BluffThis was mean to you.

Sorry, but something is really stomach-churning about cutesy posts with smiley icons in a political discussion forum.

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

Wow is everyone over-reacting to what D$D wrote, you would have thought he was going to Pappas calling himself "President of Twoplustwo".

You are right though that Pappas should be here, but wow is everyone over-reacting.

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

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.

Secondly, I do not think anyone was over-reacting .... aside from BluffThis' always cogent asides about the flaws he sees in the PPA/CardPlayer/Tri-lateral Commission troika.

Tell you what, go back to D$D's first post in the PPA update and every single post of his since then. I will comp you a dollar for each substantive post.

With all due respect, D$D is not a substantive poster on the PPA. (If he WERE a PPA source, then why not take off the wraps ?)

Otherwise, his PPA posts smack of:

"geewhizgreatthingsarecoming butIcan'ttellyouwhat" because despite my access and contacts, it is "not my place".

I am always in favor of raising the standard of political discusion here, to maintain the levels reached with knowledgable posters like Nate, Mr. K, Berge and the October group that foresaw AND actively fought against the UIGE Act, and The Engineer and OBG today.

Sorry, but extremism in the defense of literacy is no vice, or something someone said like that about 40 years ago.

(To be fair, D$D does make substantive posts, in some areas, such as the IRS ... He can be articulate if he wants to be.)

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

[ QUOTE ]
Wow is everyone over-reacting to what D$D wrote, you would have thought he was going to Pappas calling himself "President of Twoplustwo".

You are right though that Pappas should be here, but wow is everyone over-reacting.

[/ QUOTE ]

But he's not even a representative of the 2+2 community, let alone some kind of "official" representative. He's an anonymous guy with 36 posts who just showed up here a few weeks ago, and the whole thing is a little weird, quite frankly.

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 ]

I want to avoid that at all costs!

I agree that 2+2 is an important forum. There are many people here with much more knowledge about poker and the finer points of poker legislation than I may ever have.

My only desire was to include in my conversation with John Pappas, MY sense, of both a vast untapped resource but also an problem area. The PPA's communications efforts on the web, at least from my point of view, are a major concern as an individual who would like to see real changes for poker in this country.

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, I do not think anyone was over-reacting .... aside from BluffThis' always cogent asides about the flaws he sees in the PPA/CardPlayer/Tri-lateral Commission troika.

Tell you what, go back to D$D's first post in the PPA update and every single post of his since then. I will comp you a dollar for each substantive post.

With all due respect, D$D is not a substantive poster on the PPA. (If he WERE a PPA source, then why not take off the wraps ?)

Otherwise, his PPA posts smack of:

"geewhizgreatthingsarecoming butIcan'ttellyouwhat" because despite my access and contacts, it is "not my place".

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't speak for another. I am not an employee of the PPA. I think I've been pretty clear about my position as an individual as well as my intentions.

I don't think I can be any more transparent than I have been. I did not think it was in any way in the spirit of my original post to this thread to answer each and every post. I did reply to posts with comments or questions directed directly towards me.

Virtue or vice I don't know about being able to see both sides of an issue. I was told once it was because I am a middle child. Personally I blame it, as I do with all of my faults on the Jesuits! I'd put a smiley face there just to show humor incase it is lacking in the reading or writing, given the nature of internet communication, but that seems out of bounds in a political forum.......

[ QUOTE ]
I am always in favor of raising the standard of political discusion here, to maintain the levels reached with knowledgable posters like Nate, Mr. K, Berge and the October group that foresaw AND actively fought against the UIGE Act, and The Engineer and OBG today.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is my hope that I can communicate my experience in this sub-fourm with enough conviction to convince the PPA of my strong PERSONAL feelings that regular and open communication here is a nessecary vital part of any future plans.

You all each in your own way have helped me better define my PERSONAL sense of how to suscintently communicate my individual feelings on this matter.

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but extremism in the defense of literacy is no vice, or something someone said like that about 40 years ago.

(To be fair, D$D does make substantive posts, in some areas, such as the IRS ... He can be articulate if he wants to be.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's called "faint praise". I really wish I had more of substance to offer. Unless I am severly restrained by any rules Mr. Pappas may put on our conversation, I'll be happy to report back my personal views of that conversation as an individual. 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. Best case senario I convince Mr. Pappas of the need for some sort of offical regular participation, hopefully directly with officals of this group. I sure that the offers of an open and professional dialouge are genuine.

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???

&lt;grin&gt; 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.

Re: not again!!
 

I think Mason is 100% correct in that the PPA needs to be on these boards. That being said, the following comment by Mason really struck a nerve yesterday with me and I gave it a day to reflect and am still a bit put off by it:

[ QUOTE ]
Just to make this very clear. You are not a representative of Two Plus Two Publishing LLC or www.twoplustwo.com, and do not represent us in any way. Only I or my designates have that authority, and you are not in that category.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason’s thoughts could have been more constructive, instead of jumping down D$D’s throat. At worst, D$D stated he was a member of the forum?

Who knows if D$D is a PPA “fan-boy” or could become a valuable ally in this fight, but if never give him a chance to establish himself here we will never know.

And yes the word “elite” does seem to fit a lot here.

Re: not again!!
 

Uglyowl,

D$D is welcome to post here as long as he follows the forum rules (and I think he has done that so far). I am reserving judgement until I have a better idea of exactly what he brings to the table. Others would do well to take this approach.

I can't blame Mason for protecting his business. You can disagree with his delivery method, but his point was valid and I'd probably do something similar if I were in his place. I know I wouldn't want an anonymous Internet poster potentially being construed as a representative of my business.

Offtopic --- Your avatar brings back fond memories. If only Virgil could get some screen time.

Grassroots does not mean Pollyanna, it is hard and cynical at times
 

Were people who asked D$D some very pointed questions to feel him out being eltitist ? No.

I think D$D has acquited himself well and seems well-versed in the action aspect of politics, especially DC. He should be a valued contributor to both 2+2 discussions and everyone's efforts to "right" the current political/legal climate around poker.

What would it mean to "right" the current legal framework ?Opinions are universal and posting them is what 2+2 is for.

What D$D was discussing went beyond posting and into action. That runs into a different standard. Sorry, if I did not accept his messenger offer at face value, but, through discourse here I think it has been refined and improved. Instead of D$D likely getting bogged down as a go-between between posters here and the PPA, it seems likely (?) tha PPA will directly put in a presence here.

Look, you may have some bone to pick with Mason's political style, or lack thereof, but he has done a great service by providing a forum for ideas to surface. Within that forum, posts and ideas are critiqued and generally constructively reviewed. That is not elitist, it is political discourse.

I spent years both in DC and working for labor unions and other populist-based political organizations. Grassroots does not mean sheep-like donations of money, but real democratically shaped policies and agendas. Pollyanna populism cannot survive or be effective. Democratically based efforts are difficult and rough to form and maintain.

The PPA came from Michael B's sincere beliefs, it definitely strayed thereafter and was co-opted along the way. Dedicated workers like TheEngineer and, mabe D$D, can help shape it back to serving the interests of poker players, not their advisors, suppliers or vendors.

(I clearly have an interest in how or whether there is "poker reform" legislation. As an offshore operator, I likely would have ZERO to gain from the Frank Bill. I would have a lot to gain from the Wexler Bill. We all, meaning operators, players and vendors, would stand to gain most rom a watering down of possible adverse regulatory language to secure a poker exclusion by definition.

I happen to think a regulatory effort is in the interests of "poker players". Is my personal/company interest necessarily that of "poker players", not really ... if players would prefer a US-based brick and mortar running the online poker market.)

I do support discussion of poker, politics and the legislative and it will never be a tea party if it is truly open and frank.

Re: not again!!
 

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody would NOT want the PPA to have a representative on here. No one is arguing that. For whatever reason, no one from the PPA has joined. Someone apparently has access to the head of the PPA and can ask some questions. WTF is wrong with that person soliciting questions here? Who cares whether its NOT IDEAL? This is simply some sort of power struggle I'm unaware of and quite frankly don't care about, but Mason's attitude is just another example of his elitism, I would suspect. This is not new.

The 2+2 sponsor is \"elitist\", PPA\'s refusal to post is NOT elitist ?
 

"For whatever reason, no one from the PPA has joined. ...

I am curious, how "elitist" might it be of PPA to avoid 2+2 posters' direct questions for "whatever reason" ?

"WTF is wrong"? Leaving aside any philisophical point, like hosting a forum for posters to participate in discourse directly, Mason puts up a forum for people to come and post on. That builds traffic, which sells ads. Why would you want him to give up the traffic to be generated by a PPA direct appearance ?

Re: The 2+2 sponsor is \"elitist\", PPA\'s refusal to post is NOT elitist ?
 

The inertia that is the PPA is not acceptable. I want action. I want grass roots organizing. I want our agenda advanced every day. If the PPA is not going to do that, with the zeal that is necessary, something else needs to take the flag.

On the other hand, I can't figure out why Mason is so opposed to the PPA if he is unwilling to take the flag. This board provides him with the tools to organize and take control of the opposition to the gambling moralists.

Inaction is a losing strategy.

Now, unless this violates some sort of law, here is what 2+2 should do:

1. Set up forums for every state or major metro area for the purpose of grass roots organization. Set up forums for organization methods. There are willing and able leaders amongst our ranks.
2. Advance the issues through local, grass roots means. Organize members to act through both parties.
3. National structures will follow, whether it is 2+2 taking control of the PPA or being stronger and more effective than the PPA.

Re: not again!!
 

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no issue with the 'demand' for PPA to have a rep communicate here. But I do have a problem with anyone who insists on an "all or nothing" approach, and while they do nothing constructive to achieve the end-result, they pounce on every half-measure.

A start is better than nothing. Usually thats how things get done.

Bashing the PPA and posters soft to PPA just seems like the favourite pastime of some armchair generals here, and thats what was the last straw for me today.

Its quite obvious to me now that tpt ownership have their own agenda which is not completely aligned with the agenda of the poker playing community And while I cannot have any objections to it( who could fault Mason etal to look out for their personal interests), I do hope that more in the community are aware of the distinction and the power struggle, so we can make decisions that are in our best interests, rather than putting blind faith in places, it doesnt belong.

This is clearly obvious when you see that Mason hopes no questions get sent to PPA thru DaD. The player community needs to see that Mason is watching out for his interest, and we should watch out for our own. And there might be overlap in some areas, but they surely are different sets of interests. I dont think that distinction has been made out in the past, and I hope to cause some more debate on it.

What I have more of a problem is with some posters who are part of the community, and yet act out in a way that benefits ownership and hurts the player community.

The community wants dialogue, and if it can be initiated one way or the other without the whole shebang, then there is no need to jump posters for making such suggestions. It sounds like intellectual, elitist, rhetoric without application in the real world.

Either these posters do not care about 'our' ( player) interests, or they just like the sound on their own voice.

And for that reason I suggested that they make their own threads for their ramblings, instead of hijacking others' threads that are action based.

Re: not again!!
 

ughigh et al.,

Some of you really don't seem to have a grasp of the situation. It is precisely Mason and 2p2 that does not have a vested interest in any particular business model of poker, whether it be B&amp;M or online. If anything, he is as unbiased as it comes regarding these things (and I do realize that 2p2 takes ads but that is a small part of their biz). However when he is asked to give an unequivocal backing of the PPA in order to help that organization, his reputation is on the line if he should vouch for them to the posters of 2p2 and that endorsement isn't 100% warranted. And since he has had and still does have strong reservations, as I do, about the structure and makeup of the PPA board as well as other issues, he has said he still can't give that endorsement, though he is willing to continue to engage the PPA in dialogue. If you and others had followed everything here the past year you would know all this.

Also I want to make a critical point. The critics of the PPA like myself are not badgering them just because of ineffectiveness, or a "half start" as you call it, but rather because the PPA does not support all of the goals that many of us believe it should have. So then what you have is not only a political ineptness in the past year, but a strategy that doens't even attempt to achieve the goals most of us have.

Instead, the PPA, whose board is dominated by CP magazine and online sites, seeks only to advance the narrowest of agendas, and not even competently at that.

The reason so many of you dislike this criticism is because you are so damn desparate that you can't see the forest for the trees. There are many competing business interests in the gaming industry. But we poker players have an interest in having the widest possible choice of legal options to play, be it online or in our own states at B&amp;M venues. And by promoting such a broad agenda, the individual elements could lend each other a synergistic strength that any one individual goal would have a hard time gaining.

The bottom line is that Mason and 2p2 generously provide this forum for 100% honest and open conversation. But if you or others expect an uncritical/unmerited endorsement of the PPA, then you are the ones being unrealistic. And it is unrealistic as well, as pointed out by others in this thread, to expect anything productive even for grassroots action to come of using middlemen, when the PPA is welcome, as it always has been, to have an official rep or reps here to talk to us. But they have to be willing to discuss 100% of the issues openly and honestly.

For all of you who seem to have some anger at Mason or other critics, I would suggest that you direct a healthy portion of that at the owners of CP magazine who have hijacked the PPA in order to look out primarily for their own interests and those of certain online sites whose advertising they depend on. Ask them why they need 4 out of 6 non-chairman positions on the board, with the other two filled by players who have contracts with online sites. Ask them whether they are willing to give up that control of the PPA and allow the board to have a wider range of members who represent the average joe players, and who have relevant expertise in the law and politics. Some of you wish to ignore these issues because they are difficult. But the very best grassroots political tactics in the world won't help an ill-conceived overall strategy.

Re: The 2+2 sponsor is \"elitist\", PPA\'s refusal to post is NOT elitist
 

[ QUOTE ]
"For whatever reason, no one from the PPA has joined. ...

I am curious, how "elitist" might it be of PPA to avoid 2+2 posters' direct questions for "whatever reason" ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps elistist, perhaps lazy, perhaps stupid....Who knows? But who cares? Thats not the point.

[ QUOTE ]
"WTF is wrong"? Leaving aside any philisophical point, like hosting a forum for posters to participate in discourse directly, Mason puts up a forum for people to come and post on. That builds traffic, which sells ads. Why would you want him to give up the traffic to be generated by a PPA direct appearance ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what you're getting at. Can you elaborate?

Re: not again!!
 

[ QUOTE ]
ughigh et al.,

Some of you really don't seem to have a grasp of the situation. It is precisely Mason and 2p2 that does not have a vested interest in any particular business model of poker, whether it be B&amp;M or online. If anything, he is as unbiased as it comes regarding these things (and I do realize that 2p2 takes ads but that is a small part of their biz). However when he is asked to give an unequivocal backing of the PPA in order to help that organization, his reputation is on the line if he should vouch for them to the posters of 2p2 and that endorsement isn't 100% warranted. And since he has had and still does have strong reservations, as I do, about the structure and makeup of the PPA board as well as other issues, he has said he still can't give that endorsement, though he is willing to continue to engage the PPA in dialogue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who is demanding 2+2's endorsement? Perhaps my reading comprehension is awful, but that is not what OP was asking is it? I thought he wanted a LIST OF QUESTIONS (and Mason inexplictably told the rest of us not to provide such a list.). This is my only problem with Mason's statement, but the INTENT behind it is what is more ominous. I don't know exactly what that intent is, but I suspect its based on SELFISH MOTIVATIONS, because there can be NO OTHER justification for making such a ludicrous statement. If there is, please fill us all in.

[ QUOTE ]
The bottom line is that Mason and 2p2 generously provide this forum for 100% honest and open conversation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absolutely ridiculous. They are not doing this out of generosity; they are doing it to profit and because they love it. (Which by the way are COMPLETELY VALID REASONS; but I'm sick of hearing comments like this making them sound like Saints -- they're just really friggin smart people that have capitalized on a subject matter they love).

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
But if you or others expect an uncritical/unmerited endorsement of the PPA

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, never said this.

[ QUOTE ]
For all of you who seem to have some anger at Mason or other critics, I would suggest that you direct a healthy portion of that at the owners of CP magazine who have hijacked the PPA in order to look out primarily for their own interests and those of certain online sites whose advertising they depend on. Ask them why they need 4 out of 6 non-chairman positions on the board, with the other two filled by players who have contracts with online sites. Ask them whether they are willing to give up that control of the PPA and allow the board to have a wider range of members who represent the average joe players, and who have relevant expertise in the law and politics. Some of you wish to ignore these issues because they are difficult. But the very best grassroots political tactics in the world won't help an ill-conceived overall strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

All fair enough, but again, so what?????