View Single Post
  #62  
Old 11-11-2007, 09:25 PM
IndyFish IndyFish is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cold-calling pre-flop raises...
Posts: 192
Default Re: Does the PPA need 2+2?

[ QUOTE ]
Hi IFish:

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand: does 2p2 need the PPA? 2+2 LLC made it very clear around the time UIGEA was passed that it was simply a book publisher and not a lobbyist organization. If left to 2p2 alone there would never have been as strong a fight as the PPA is putting up (if there was a fight at all). I mean in no way to discredit 2p2, because as publishers of books on gambling they are simply the best, as is this forum.


[/ QUOTE ]

There's a misconception here that I want to correct. We hope that the PPA is successful, and we also hope that our concerns are not necessary.

On the other hand, we do believe that our concerns have the potential to become significant and therefore damage the cause as they are better understood by those entities which want to see online poker and Internet gambling in general severely restricted. So that's why we are only neutral towards this organization even though we do share the same goals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, I never meant to imply that you didn't want the PPA to succeed. As your books prove, you are inherently logical. Online poker pads your already successful business, both with book sales and affiliate advertizing on this board. Of course you want the PPA to succeed.

I honestly don't know what the problem is with the PPA board makeup. I assume you have valid reasons for your criticism. My only point--that I perhaps did not make clear--is that RIGHT NOW the PPA seems to be the best shot we have to get explicitly legal online poker here in the US. I really do hope you and the PPA can resolve your differences, by whatever means. I think the result would greatly help our cause.

IndyFish
Reply With Quote