Mason... Sir,
 

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.

Fine.

However, the PPA has been doing yoeman's work for my right to play poker however I choose. What have you done for me and others like me?

2+2 Has not been proactive in our fight for poker rights. You had, and have, a near perfect vehicle to do what PPA is trying to do. So do better if you don't like them.

But.... If you choose to sit it out, if you choose to not be part of the solution, please don't become part of the problem.

I believe you could have avoided this whole fracas with a bit of forethought. But you seem somewhat obsessed with the fact that the PPA is funded by "industry special interests". Well, who the heck else is going to fund such an effort. The PPA spent some serious coin on the Washington DC flyin. How much have you spent helping us?

One last thought. If for some reason, you don't think this is your fight, you might want to reconsider.

If, due to your footdragging, hostility, and indifference, the PPA effort fails and our opponents win, you will rue the day. There is not going to be a subsidence to benign neglect so favored by a lot of 2+2ers, either we win or the opposition wins.

If the opposition wins, you will receive the following phone call from the DOJ.

Get those #@!#@$#@ poker site ads off your website YESTERDAY!

You don't want that, I don't want that, and the PPA is the ONLY group working to stop that.

Again, please don't become part of the problem. The legislative forum is one of the premier watering holes for folks seeking to secure our rights. Don't muddy the water.

Respectfully,

Tuff Fish

PPA member and online poker fish.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Tuff,

Wikipedia sure is a great resource. You might want to check out some of these topics in your spare time. Probably wouldn't hurt your poker game either!

Fallacy

List of fallacies

List of cognitive biases

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

The powers that be at 2+2 are more interested in fighting the PPA than they are in fighting the poker ban. All of their efforts are directed at doing away with the PPA, not with doing away with the poker ban. Then they should do like you said and remove all the ads from their site, which are in fact illegal under the UIGEA.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Hey Tuff,

How come you weren't around last year to defend poor little nrog ? I mean he claimed to be the saviour of online poker and some of us who doubted him got bashed to no end. Whatever happened to that guy?

(Note that I am not drawing a parallel in saying PPA is some kind of scam which I certainly don't believe. I am however drawing a parallel as to the proclivity of many posters here to ignore justified questions and criticisms of those with similar goals, instead of working to redress the problems that led to those criticisms.)

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

If the UIGEA is overturned, it will be in spite of most poker players and 2+2 specifically

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the UIGEA is overturned, it will be in spite of most poker players and 2+2 specifically

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for sharing the brilliant reasoning that led you to that deduction.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

How is Mason fighting the PPA? He doesn't need the PPA. He doesn't need fame or money. Apparently they are here asking for help and a nod of approval. Lets be clear, the whole [censored] industry from the PPA to the rooms to the affiliates to the players, pros and fish all get an F when it came to politically representing poker. The PPA isn't even top 3 when it comes to getting remote gaming back where it was. Maybe theres some snippy ego BS going on but it doesn't mean the PPA doesn't have major problems.

I don't consider myself part of 2p2, except in regards to this effort. Whats been done here has been far and away more visible and impressive than anything the PPA has done. If there was a rally in DC and one one side of the street there were unpaid parts of the PPA and the other had 2p2 people, which side would have the bigger turnout? I know where I would bet.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

What bothers me is most companies at least pretend to care about their customers. Mason comes off as a very unpleasant guy.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Bluff this, what are you after here? Disagree with Tuff, fine. Don't like the PPA? Fine. I don't know Tuff, and although I like some of the things I've seen LATELY out of the PPA, I could care less who does it, only that it gets done.

There's been a lot of bickering in this thread and other threads, by a lot of people, meant to accomplish what? Educate? Drive people away?

If I told you that FOF would take away one of our greatest resources (Engineer) and find a way for us to focus on fighting each other instead of fighting for our right to play poker, it would come accross as some dreamed up atomic bomb attack that would be totally unrealistic. Better than anything that they could ever hope to do. Well they didn't have to. We did it to ourselves, and those that are against us must be ecstatic.

Take a step back, and look at whats going on here. This is not good. Its not constructive.

If you, or Mason, or anyone else has all this energy and time lets focus it on what we really need. Either clean up the PPA, assist the PPA, or replace the PPA. I'd say 99% of the people on here could give a rats behind who is fighting on our side, just that we're doing the best job, with the largest force, that we can muster.

Personal attacks do nothing but take away from those goals, and increase the chances that 3-4 years from now, there will be no 2+2, no PPA, and no checks coming in the mail from poker sites that would have gone out of business due to lack of players. There are people who I don't like, viewpoints I don't respect, and people who spew total non-sense on this board, but they are still potential allies in our fight for poker, and right now, we need them all.

Think about what you're trying to accomplish in the long run.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
What bothers me is most companies at least pretend to care about their customers. Mason comes off as a very unpleasant guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually while he is a little stiff, he does have as do others some valid concerns.

Personally I'd like to lock "them" all in a room for a week and not let them out untill they have figured out their turf wars and just get on with the "movement."

All this talk of control and time outs makes me think there are too many only childs and yougests making all the demands while the rest of us have to clean up the messes.


D$D

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Losit,

Look at the other side of the issue. How difficult is it really for the Engineer to just copy and past a disclaimer, and/or be content with a subtitle noting his membership in the PPA board? Mason actually has taken a middle stand between not allowing a board member to post here when his own position on the organization is neutral, and the other end of not requiring any notice of affiliation which infrequent readers may not already be aware of. The Engineer is only being asked to jump over a very low hurdle.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]

Actually while he is a little stiff, he does have as do others some valid concerns.

Personally I'd like to lock "them" all in a room for a week and not let them out untill they have figured out their turf wars and just get on with the "movement."

All this talk of control and time outs makes me think there are too many only childs and yougests making all the demands while the rest of us have to clean up the messes.


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree with this more. I think in the case of Mason and TE, this should have been handled in a phone call, and not in a message board game of tag.

I see this in business all the time. Ego's are what get people to the top, and what makes them inevitably fall. Sometimes you need to put your ego aside, put trivial issues to bed, and get back to your real goals.

I'm not comfortable with some of the things I hear about the PPA, and I don't like egotistical behavior I see here either, but lets not throw the baby out with the bath water in either case.

If there was any type of leverage that someone could think of to lock these parties in a room until they worked out there differences, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

We need all of the parties involved here, but working together instead of this childishness.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

Look at the other side of the issue. How difficult is it really for the Engineer to just copy and past a disclaimer, and/or be content with a subtitle noting his membership in the PPA board? Mason actually has taken a middle stand between not allowing a board member to post here when his own position on the organization is neutral, and the other end of not requiring any notice of affiliation which infrequent readers may not already be aware of. The Engineer is only being asked to jump over a very low hurdle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff, as I stated before, I am not taking sides in this particular issue. I can understand both viewpoints. The issue to me is that this has gotten way out of hand, however we got here, and it needs to be put to bed.

If TE's info is on the PPA website, why can't Mason get him on the phone, and the two work it out. Would that hurt anyone?

If this were an average poster, I would fully support Mason telling him to go pound sand. In the case of TE however, work it out. I'm not saying cave in, I'm saying work it out.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Losit,

Again, just how hard is it for TE to have a disclaimer and/or a subtitle? You are acting as if he is being to asked to do something very hard and that damages his integrity. If another board member, currently not a poster on 2p2, was asked to do this in advance, would/should that board member refuse when he/she thought that posting here could help the PPA? Again, the hurdle is very low even if it comes up at every turn.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

Again, just how hard is it for TE to have a disclaimer and/or a subtitle? You are acting as if he is being to asked to do something very hard and that damages his integrity. If another board member, currently not a poster on 2p2, was asked to do this in advance, would/should that board member refuse when he/she thought that posting here could help the PPA? Again, the hurdle is very low even if it comes up at every turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

My honest answer? I don't understand why Mason or TE are being as obstinate as they are. Frankly it doesn't matter. The end result is that we are in the process of losing one of our most valuable resources. I think the point you are trying to make in a round about way is that this is trivial, so why can't he just agree? I agree it is trivial, but I'm not TE, so I don't fully understand. Nor do I care.

This whole thing is absurd at this point and needs to be fixed, however that happens. I don't really care how it happens, just that it does.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Losit,

The bottom line is that this is Mason's joint. If he says to leave your shoes outside then you will if you really want to come in. If instead you let pride stand in your way, then it's on you and not Mason.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't agree with this more. I think in the case of Mason and TE, this should have been handled in a phone call, and not in a message board game of tag.


[/ QUOTE ]

My original request for the identification was sent via PM to TE.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

The bottom line is that this is Mason's joint. If he says to leave your shoes outside then you will if you really want to come in. If instead you let pride stand in your way, then it's on you and not Mason.

[/ QUOTE ]

With all due respect bluff, I understand exactly what you're saying, but in this case I think its a little narrow minded. For 99.7% of the posters, you're absolutely correct. Leave your shoes at the door or hit the bricks, I got it. Individually, they mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. The grand scheme of things however is our continuing fight to be able to play poker. The PPA is a part of this. 2+2 is a part of this. Mason is a part of this. And thanks to his hard work, TE is a part of this.

My arguement is that he's a special case, due to all his hard work and results. I also agree that no one can come into "Mason's Joint" and spit on the floor. Things start to not work so well when that happens.

My arguement is that Mason was the one initiating a request here, which he 100% entitled to do. TE had an unexpected response to that request. We are now at an impasse. Should TE be above the rules? No way. Should Mason boot him out or antagonize him with one day suspensions over something that really isn't that big of a deal (to your point), and do other collateral damage like losing momentum with some of the letter writing to politicians? Doesn't make much sense there either.

Don't we have private messages on here? Isn't TE's information available for Mason to contact him? (I'm assuming Mason's is not available, which is understandable) At work, I see spats like this between very well compensated people, or between myself and them, all time. What do we do? We pick up the phone, sometimes we yell and scream for a while, but we figure something out and we move on. Why is that so hard here?

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

For what its worth and because BluffThis has already hijacked this thread (I get Mason's biases, however illogical they may be, but I don't understand and never have understood BluffThis's motivations), I need to say that I agree with Tuff Fish 100% on this. His point was right on the money. Thankfully for all of our sake, The Engineer is much much too mature, experienced, intelligent and motivated to be disuaded.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Losit,

Here's my last post in this exchange. It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA. Even though 2p2 benefits in the long run from the goals of the PPA, it should be clear to all that the PPA benefits more from the TE's efforts. So it should be the PPA, and TE, who should be more willing to give here.

Also, as you imply, 2p2 does have global rules for everyone. If Mason makes an exception here, even though seemingly justified, he will doubtless be asked to make other exceptions which clearly aren't justified. So just as with any organization, the best policy long term is simply to have rules that apply equally to all. That may not be absolutely fair in discrete instances, but it will be perceived as fair by the majority of members/users.

Either TE will choose to make note that he is speaking his own views in each of his posts, or he won't. It just depends on what is most important to him and how important he views 2p2 as being to the success of the PPA.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Perhaps it is time to amend the Terms and Conditions of the 2+2 forum. That might make this a little less personal.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

<<<It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA.>>>>

Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

Ah. . .the good ole days have returned. Every "last post" in every thread in this forum belongs to BluffThis again. . . and they all say basically the same thing.

Les

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Bluff,

Only recently did TE become involved with the PPA. I believe your point about all his hard work to be for the benefit of the PPA to be incorrect. Thats not the point of this thread.

We can agree to disagree on this also, but I simply believe in not cutting your nose off despite your face.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

[/ QUOTE ]


You mean he really has been working to up page views so Mason makes more from his advertisers? Wow, Mason sure is an ingrate!

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Les, I'm glad you pointed that out because I totally agree with you.

Whatever one may think of the PPA or such, lord knows Engineer has been working hard for poker players for a year--well before ever considering getting involved with the PPA. Bluff can make some good points, but he's way off on this one.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Hi Everyone:

Our compromise concerning TE is now in place and he is free to post again. The PPA representative who we occasionally deal with (and who will remain anonymous) agrees that "it's a good solution."

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

[/ QUOTE ]


You mean he really has been working to up page views so Mason makes more from his advertisers? Wow, Mason sure is an ingrate!

[/ QUOTE ]

Nor did I ever make such an assertion, Bluff. You may have a bazillion posts and you may be witty in your belittling of Tuff Fish, but neither of these facts make your arguments any more valid.

Les

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

I agree 100%, in-fact working on local issues a few years back when I headed the local Historic Economic Group, the same here, turf wars and all chiefs, no Indians.

I privatly invited each head to dinner, on me, all at the same time and place, telling no one.

Well, it was hairy at first, then, well, we all walked out together and on the same page.

obg


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What bothers me is most companies at least pretend to care about their customers. Mason comes off as a very unpleasant guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually while he is a little stiff, he does have as do others some valid concerns.

Personally I'd like to lock "them" all in a room for a week and not let them out untill they have figured out their turf wars and just get on with the "movement."

All this talk of control and time outs makes me think there are too many only childs and yougests making all the demands while the rest of us have to clean up the messes.


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Following passage of the UIGEA and a brief delay attributed to a globe trotting attorney, I believe that Mason and David were quite explicit in expressing their stance (to the consternation of many) that internet gambling was not necessarily an activity they felt compelled to endorse.

Those of you who expect, or feel that you are somehow “owed” more than a neutral PPA position from 2+2 because of your patronage have romanticized this forum and its function.

Mason stands to reap financial gain from the success of the PPA’s agenda, yet due to ethical principles does not aid their cause by actively lending his support or name cachet to enhance the organization’s legitimacy.

Agree with him or not, his actions have been consistent and are deserving of respect.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here's my last post in this exchange. It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA. Even though 2p2 benefits in the long run from the goals of the PPA, it should be clear to all that the PPA benefits more from the TE's efforts. So it should be the PPA, and TE, who should be more willing to give here.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMFAO. I don't do this for PPA or for 2+2. I'm not employed by either entity. I do it because we should fight for our rights as poker players. It's that simple. I'm glad you and Mason are having fun playing politics over this, but it's not doing [censored] for us. I hate to break this to you, but I look at the top 100 enemies of ours, Allyn Shulman isn't on the list. We have real enemies, you know. That's where our focus needs to be.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, as you imply, 2p2 does have global rules for everyone. If Mason makes an exception here, even though seemingly justified, he will doubtless be asked to make other exceptions which clearly aren't justified. So just as with any organization, the best policy long term is simply to have rules that apply equally to all. That may not be absolutely fair in discrete instances, but it will be perceived as fair by the majority of members/users.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree...there should be one set of rules. However, there is no rule mandating everyone who happens to be on the board of any organization must sign each post. It's some new, made-up [censored]. Jay Cohen, TruePoker CEO, and many others don't sign their names. Bryan and John Pappas do because they represent PPA. I don't. WTF is so difficult about that? Now, apparently, I don't have to sign each post with my name and title.

[ QUOTE ]
Either TE will choose to make note that he is speaking his own views in each of his posts, or he won't. It just depends on what is most important to him and how important he views 2p2 as being to the success of the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have to do [censored]. Again, my issue isn't the success of the PPA. It's the success of the movement. Forget it...I feel like I'm talking to a wall.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone:

Our compromise concerning TE is now in place and he is free to post again. The PPA representative who we occasionally deal with (and who will remain anonymous) agrees that "it's a good solution."

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

What was with the ban? I assumed you were considering my offer about posting my PPA title under my screen name. You think anyone here didn't know my position that day.

I guess you were showing me who's boss. Congrats.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that Mason and David were quite explicit in expressing their stance (to the consternation of many) that internet gambling was not necessarily an activity they felt compelled to endorse.

Those of you who expect, or feel that you are somehow “owed” more than a neutral PPA position from 2+2 because of your patronage have romanticized this forum and its function.

Mason stands to reap financial gain from the success of the PPA’s agenda, yet due to ethical principles does not aid their cause by actively lending his support or name cachet to enhance the organization’s legitimacy.

Agree with him or not, his actions have been consistent and are deserving of respect.

[/ QUOTE ]

My understanding is that Mason's position is based upon issues within the makeup of the board, not ethical issues, and this is why the stance is neutral. It is also my understanding that if the board issues were resolved, that the position of 2+2 COULD become positive towards the PPA.

Mason's personal views and ethics are totally outside of this discussion, but I do believe the position 2+2 to be based upon the issues I mentioned and not personal ethics.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
<<<It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA.>>>>

Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

Ah. . .the good ole days have returned. Every "last post" in every thread in this forum belongs to BluffThis again. . . and they all say basically the same thing.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

Les, I thank you and everyone else who was with me. My only goal has been to get all poker legalized everywhere.

Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while. I really don't need this. Besides, we're progressed beyond where we were a few months ago. I'll be at the PPA forum sometimes, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerpla...wforum.php?f=2 .

Take care all,

TE

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone:

Our compromise concerning TE is now in place and he is free to post again. The PPA representative who we occasionally deal with (and who will remain anonymous) agrees that "it's a good solution."

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

What was with the ban? I assumed you were considering my offer about posting my PPA title under my screen name. You think anyone here didn't know my position that day.

I guess you were showing me who's boss. Congrats.

[/ QUOTE ]


Engineer, glad to see you. Can we all get back to work now? There's more important things for us to worry about, like the bad beats I keep taking.

Oh, and all those nice things we may have said, don't believe a word. Lies, ALL LIES!!!!

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Losit,

Again, just how hard is it for TE to have a disclaimer and/or a subtitle? You are acting as if he is being to asked to do something very hard and that damages his integrity. If another board member, currently not a poster on 2p2, was asked to do this in advance, would/should that board member refuse when he/she thought that posting here could help the PPA? Again, the hurdle is very low even if it comes up at every turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

My honest answer? I don't understand why Mason or TE are being as obstinate as they are. Frankly it doesn't matter. The end result is that we are in the process of losing one of our most valuable resources. I think the point you are trying to make in a round about way is that this is trivial, so why can't he just agree? I agree it is trivial, but I'm not TE, so I don't fully understand. Nor do I care.

This whole thing is absurd at this point and needs to be fixed, however that happens. I don't really care how it happens, just that it does.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not being obstinate. I offered to have my PPA affiliation below my screen name. Mason rejected that and said I had to end each and every post with "Rich Muny, PPA Board Member", as if I could ever make an independent post here with that restriction. He then banned me to show me who's boss, then agreed to my original offer like it was a favor. Sorry, but I've worked too hard around here to help progress our cause for this [censored].

I do thank everyone who spoke up for me. I do care only about our right to play.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Engineer,

Welcome back. I got the point they were making that you are working for our cause, and not the PPA only in particular. You were indeed doing your thing here first before being asked to join the PPA. It's just that some here forget that this site is run by a commercial entity that has global concerns that trump particular ones.

Regarding enemies, I don't view Ms. Schulman or other board members whom I have issues with as being enemies either. It's just that they're not our total friends, as in not sharing the wider range of goals many of us have. If a couple of them care more about the success of the PPA than they do in protecting their own vested interests, then they will be willing to resign and be replaced. If not, for whatever reason, then they won't.

The success of the movement, as in the ability of we poker players to play anywhere, anytime in any venue of our choosing, is indeed what is of paramount importance. But we can't be blinded by the moment and allow issues to go unadressed when working on those issues takes time beyond the current legislative cycle.

And although I don't expect you to speak for other board members, I want to note as I have in the past, that the refusal of those other members to at least come here and discuss issues of board composition and transparency speaks volumes about them and the importance they assign to the *posters* of 2p2.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<<<It should be evident that TE, who has indeed worked very hard, has done that hard work not for the direct benefit of 2p2 as a commercial entity, but for the benefit of the PPA.>>>>

Do you really believe this? You sincerely believe that The Engineer has done all the work he has done over the last year simply for the benefit of the PPA as an organization?

Ah. . .the good ole days have returned. Every "last post" in every thread in this forum belongs to BluffThis again. . . and they all say basically the same thing.

Les

[/ QUOTE ]

Les, I thank you and everyone else who was with me. My only goal has been to get all poker legalized everywhere.

Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while. I really don't need this. Besides, we're progressed beyond where we were a few months ago. I'll be at the PPA forum sometimes, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerpla...wforum.php?f=2 .

Take care all,

TE

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice job showing everyone who the boss is, Mason. NH, WP, etc.

Les

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the UIGEA is overturned, it will be in spite of most poker players and 2+2 specifically

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for sharing the brilliant reasoning that led you to that deduction.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not provide reasoning, I just need to point to your posts

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone: This will be my last post on this forum for a while. I really don't need this. Besides, we're progressed beyond where we were a few months ago. I'll be at the PPA forum sometimes, at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerpla...wforum.php?f=2 .

Take care all,

TE

[/ QUOTE ]


Engineer,

You posted the above as I was typing my previous post. You are wanted here and I hope you realize that. If your problem is that you feel like you have to add a disclaimer to your posts to make it clear when you are speaking your own views, which is most of the time, instead of as an official rep of the PPA, then I hope you view that as a small effort to make for the cause. Just program an AHK script for your standard disclaimer and tap one key and forget about it.

Re: Mason... Sir,
 

Bluffthis, I just do not understand what interests or goals that Mrs. Shulman and other members of the board of directors have that will not benefit my interests as an online poker player or will harm my such interests. Please clarify your concerns with specific interests of such board members that you feel conflict with online poker players.