|
|
|
|
#1
09-04-2007, 12:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
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 
|
|
#2
09-04-2007, 12:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#3
09-04-2007, 02:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#4
09-04-2007, 11:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
Amen.
|
|
#5
09-04-2007, 02:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|
#6
09-04-2007, 02:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 Ask the PPA
[ QUOTE ]
I hope that no one on this forum sends you a question. [/ QUOTE ] Feverishly trying to delete
|
|
#7
09-04-2007, 02:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#8
09-04-2007, 02:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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
|
|
#9
09-04-2007, 11:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#10
09-04-2007, 02:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 & 2) "we'll just have to see - time will tell")
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
