Mr. PPA, some substantive questions, which you may have overlooked ?
 

Can you address the assertion that Barry G made about "legalized" online poker in the US in 6 months ?

what projection, if any, do you think is realistic ?

Was the interested Judiciary Committee you referred to the Senate or House Judiciary Committee ?

Was there a different level of interest in the different bills/proposals ?

Thanks for your insight.

If you are NOT authorized to answer on behalf of the PPA about matters of substance, please say so and I won't ask again.

Re: Mr. PPA, some substantive questions, which you may have overlooked
 

Hi I think I answered this post in the thread I was in before, I don't know how to do that cool "quote" thing you guys can all do, but I'm sure I will be getting the noob crash course soon.

It was the post in the "please allow me to introduce myself" thread at 10:36 AM on 10/30/07 right after the engineer posted. One edit to that is the House Judiciary Committee hearing has been bumped to 11/14/07.

Bryan Spadaro
Membership Relations, Manager
Poker Players Alliance

Mr. PPA, thanks, But .....
 

Okay, I had missed where you put it into the response to TE. My mistake, thanks:

"As to Barry's statement on 6 months, we [the PPA] are working hard here to realize this goal, and Mr Greenstein is most certainly an important part of that goal, and we will continue to fight until this situation is resolved in our favor, and the sooner it happens the better for us all.

Continuing questions, it has been taken up in the House Judiciary Committee, and there will be a hearing there next Tuesday, Nov 6th.[now the 14th]

As to differentiating the bills that are up in the house, I think the more promising aspect is the fact that general awareness of this industry, and the size and amount of growth it has in it, has come to the forefront. The Fly-In really showed that we are organized, we are intelligent, we are motivated and we will not be going away any time soon."

Thanks for the answers. It appears that while Barry G is talking about "6 months", your third paragraph leans toward a more realistic long-haul view, i.e. the particular bills this session are not really important, it is the establishment of a "poker" political presence that matters.

Although declaring victory in the "recognition" area seems a bit premature, you have made one start.

A lot of the posters may not appreciate the validity of the "transparency" and Board make-up issues which trouble Mason and others here. It would be a really good idea however to see significant movement on that front, if the PPA wants to mature as a political organization on behalf of players, not exist as just a front for interests temporarily in alignment with "players".

(The potential is there for an NRA-type dues paying active constituency, rather than an "Airline Passengers" type front organization.)

Re: Mr. PPA, some substantive questions, which you may have overlooked
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know how to do that cool "quote" thing you guys can all do, but I'm sure I will be getting the noob crash course soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

For short quotes as above use the reply option then scroll down and cut the bit you want from the post you are replying to (it is off the screen down there). Press the Quote hyperlink (bottom left box just below where your reply is typed and paste between the [ quote] [ /quote] bits that appear.

To quote the whole post use the quote not the reply option - it is next to the reply.

As for some substance can I say that I hope that you bring us info on events any new articles and news of the campaign - I don't expect you to get involved in public slanging matches or debates with posters. We can debate the issues without you being forced to make official replies all the time. News and action is what I want not rows.