2+2 Ask the PPA

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Just...wow. D$D had an appointment to speak with John Pappas and decided to prepare by asking us about our concerns so he could speak intelligently about the concerns of the poker community. He also was trying to help us out. If this isn't needed, what happened to "no, but thanks anyway"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't much like the idea of someone speaking on behalf of the poker community I belong to when I have no idea who they are or what their agenda is. This guy has been fishy from the day he joined the message board. I feel like I've hired the Unknown Lawyer to go advocate on my behalf.

When someone says "I won't tell you who I am, but trust me, I have your best interests at heart," aren't you at least a little suspicious? Here's a guy who showed up out of the blue with a post about how he just happens to know the PPA has its heart in the right place, and it's only gotten stranger from there. What's his game, do you reckon?

[LeapFrog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Just...wow. D$D had an appointment to speak with John Pappas and decided to prepare by asking us about our concerns so he could speak intelligently about the concerns of the poker community. He also was trying to help us out. If this isn't needed, what happened to "no, but thanks anyway"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't much like the idea of someone speaking on behalf of the poker community I belong to when I have no idea who they are or what their agenda is. This guy has been fishy from the day he joined the message board. I feel like I've hired the Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer to go advocate on my behalf.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it does seem a bit weird. However, what is the harm in him fielding some questions? Any communication with the PPA is most likely better then none.

In theory the PPA should be reading 2+2 but who knows what scrub they have assigned to that task. This at least is a chance (assuming D$D is legit but if not a minor 'waste' of time) to whisper in the ear of one of the players.

frommagio, I thought a 2+2er posted about becoming a state rep but I don't remember who it was.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Any communication with the PPA is most likely better then none.

[/ QUOTE ]


That's not necessarily true. A convo done through middlemen that mostly avoids substantive issues while focusing only on PR benefits none of us here. Especially when it allows the PPA to very easily avoid tough questions and be able to backtrack on commitments by saying the middleman screwed up their message. The internet basically allows people to be in the same room, and using a middleman is like asking someone to talk to someone else for you, when that someone else is standing right there and could speak for himself.

This doesn't mean it isn't productive to have someone like the Engineer work with the PPA on grassroots efforts though. In fact what is very needed is for Engineer's efforts to be communicated to the broader membership of the PPA who are mostly average joe & jane poker players and who don't frequent the 2p2 forums *or the PPA website*. Thus the PPA should be using the Engineer to draft action plans to contact legislators and businesses (in re to WTO stuff) and get the total membership involved in same via weekly email campaigns.

And if Mr. Pappas does decide to come here and talk to us, he is only going to talk about such political tactics and won't be able, as an employee of the board, to discuss issues like the makeup of that board or why it refuses to subscribe to the broader agenda for poker that most of us have (i.e. not tied only to certain business models).

If PPA really gives a rat's ass about engaging the largest poker community in the world here, they will not only send Mr. Pappas to discuss grassroots political tactics, but also a board member to discuss the other issues. As I mentioned earlier, Greg (Fossilman) Raymer, a long time 2p2'er sits on the PPA board. Why can't he come here and talk to us as well?

[LeapFrog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any communication with the PPA is most likely better then none.

[/ QUOTE ]


That's not necessarily true. A convo done through middlemen that mostly avoids substantive issues while focusing only on PR benefits none of us here. Especially when it allows the PPA to very easily avoid tough questions and be able to backtrack on commitments by saying the middleman screwed up their message. ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I was referring specifically to the situation with D$D. Unless your posts burn his eyes (heh) or D$D has an agenda (Engineer's comments on the subject are very reassuring as well as Milton's 2c) he hopefully will communicate some of your tough questions to Pappas. Yes, you very well may not get an answer or may receive a heavily spin laden one but at least some of what you are saying may get through. That was what I was driving at.

At any rate it sounds like Pappas will be posting here in the future so you should have a chance to make yourself heard. Don't be afraid to speak up [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]

I apologise for any stupidity it attaches to me for my laziness in not cutting and pasting messages to a spell checker before posting.


[/ QUOTE ]

D$D, I recommend Firefox 2.x as it has a built in spellchecker. Very handy.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Just...wow. D$D had an appointment to speak with John Pappas and decided to prepare by asking us about our concerns so he could speak intelligently about the concerns of the poker community. He also was trying to help us out. If this isn't needed, what happened to "no, but thanks anyway"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't much like the idea of someone speaking on behalf of the poker community I belong to when I have no idea who they are or what their agenda is. This guy has been fishy from the day he joined the message board. I feel like I've hired the Unknown Lawyer to go advocate on my behalf.

When someone says "I won't tell you who I am, but trust me, I have your best interests at heart," aren't you at least a little suspicious? Here's a guy who showed up out of the blue with a post about how he just happens to know the PPA has its heart in the right place, and it's only gotten stranger from there. What's his game, do you reckon?

[/ QUOTE ]

When I spoke to John Pappas on Tue. afternoon, the subject of D$D actually came up. D$D is what he says....he's someone experienced at grassroots lobbying who has a meeting with John to discuss this. Exactly as he said.

I reread the OP and couldn't see where D$D was making himself the 2p2 spokesman. He merely offered to bring some questions to John Pappas, with whom he legitimately has a meeting scheduled to legitimately discuss how to move our agenda forward. I guess I don't see how having him show up empty handed helps us in any way.

As for John, he will be posting here soon. I'm personally glad he waited a few weeks to do so. I honestly didn't want to hear any more PPA happy spin about grand plans for the future. I want to hear what they are doing and when they're doing it. John has taken some time to lay out concrete actions, so his initial communications to us should be more substantive. I hope we'll all hear him out and decide from there.

Cheers.

[MiltonFriedman]

I have exchanged some messages with D$D and generally believe he is what his posts describe, a volunteer, with DC experience, who is interested in helping out poker ... and has contacted the PPA and this forum to do so.

If the end result of this sturm & drang thread is the PPA coming in and making substantive posts on 2+2 , great. This is progressing somewhat.

(I am not making light of BluffThis' complaint about Card Player interests co-opting the PPA, I have no doubt that is so to date. However, I feel politics does make for unsavory necessary alliances at times. To the extent that the PPA can put a favorable ball into play on behalf of poker players, we can benefit. However, just lending bodies/numbers and donating money will not result in a favorable direction.)

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I feel politics does make for unsavory necessary alliances at times. To the extent that the PPA can put a favorable ball into play on behalf of poker players, we can benefit. However, just lending bodies/numbers and donating money will not result in a favorable direction.)

[/ QUOTE ]


Although I have expounded at length about the PPA not representing its base membership and all the goals those players have, everyone, myself included, understands that limited resources, of both time and money, dictate short term priorities. But even putting aside structural issues with the PPA, and the wider goals of promoting legalization of poker in all venues with no artificial barriers to entry to favor certain parties, it seems clear that the following are the short term priorities *this year*:

1) Seeking to pass Frank/Weixler or a derivative of same this year via attachment to must pass legislation;

2) Neutering the regs if the above fails as likely;

3) Aiding in the judicial fight against online gambling restrictions, especially by helping to cure any issues of standing that current litigants friendly to us might have (and note again that this shouldn't cost the PPA a dime as the litigants should underwrite all the PPAs expenses on same since it is to their own benefit).


Since #1 is a longshot in any short term time frame, then it is critical to achieve some success on #s 2 or 3. But if the PPA fails on those as well, especially due to a refusal to even adopt those last two as goals this year, then given the other deeper shortcomings in the PPA, there will simply be no reason to support it for the long term. The performance of the PPA on those 3 short term priorities should be the basis for judgement of their worthiness and credibility for the long term.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
But even putting aside structural issues with the PPA, and the wider goals of promoting legalization of poker in all venues with no artificial barriers to entry to favor certain parties, it seems clear that the following are the short term priorities *this year*:

1) Seeking to pass Frank/Weixler or a derivative of same this year via attachment to must pass legislation;

2) Neutering the regs if the above fails as likely;

3) Aiding in the judicial fight against online gambling restrictions, especially by helping to cure any issues of standing that current litigants friendly to us might have (and note again that this shouldn't cost the PPA a dime as the litigants should underwrite all the PPAs expenses on same since it is to their own benefit).


Since #1 is a longshot in any short term time frame, then it is critical to achieve some success on #s 2 or 3. But if the PPA fails on those as well, especially due to a refusal to even adopt those last two as goals this year, then given the other deeper shortcomings in the PPA, there will simply be no reason to support it for the long term. The performance of the PPA on those 3 short term priorities should be the basis for judgement of their worthiness and credibility for the long term.

[/ QUOTE ]

From a political aspect my feelings are the PPA has on the legislative front been too quick to put the cart before the horse. People on the Hill are like everyone else, they want to protect their jobs. They aren't going to listen to the PPA, especially on the GOP side until the PPA can show it is a real political player. The only way to do that is to create a real grassroots organization, and prove it can be effective. On the Hill you don't have to be right, just be able to move enough votes. This message may be unpopular with some because it will require a good deal of volunteer grunt work to counter-balance the organized free manpower currently arrayed against us.

The KY race is the key in my opinion. As I’ve posted along with others, the PPA needs to establish a track record. It needs a tune up game for ’08. It needs to build its membership. It needs to be highly visible. It needs to get some idea of how many of its arm chair generals are willing to get in the trenches and do the work of privates!!!! It needs to try out all of the various ideas we all have for promoting the PPA and develop more. How many of you with in 4 to a 5 hour drive of KY have seriously planned on going there if there is a worthwhile activity that requires YOUR help to succeed??? I'm 6 hours from the border of the state and already making plans and boning up on the districts. Are you willing to make the same commitment?

We all want an effective grassroots organization, but really how many people are actually willing to show up? That will be the true test of the PPA’s viability.

I can tell from my conversations from John that the PPA is committed to devoting the resources to building the grassroots efforts necessary. BUT the PPA can only provide the structure. John is well aware of the hole that he is in. I'm sure there are many holes dug we all don't even know about. John has returned calls and sent e-mails at all hours of the day and night and on weekends. This isn't a 9-5 job for him. I’ve been involved in a number of organizations both political and non-political in my life; I think I can recognize real passion and determination when I see it. Look at John’s interview on CardPlayer TV, for all of you who aren’t boycotting that site, one of his first issues is improving communications!

Sure it is debatable if the PPA board, given whatever hidden agenda they might or may not have, will support his efforts. But I assume he would not have taken the job without the necessary assurances he'll be given the tools to succeed.

Like I said in my first post only time will really prove out if my PERSONAL opinions are correct. They are based on my past in dealing with political operators and sales people of all stripes. Sure I’ve bought into a few boondoggles in the past. Who hasn’t? But over time like in my poker “career” I’ve gotten a lot better at spotting fakes and conmen learning from each and every mistake.


D$D

Yes I did spell check this one…… Any better?

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But even putting aside structural issues with the PPA, and the wider goals of promoting legalization of poker in all venues with no artificial barriers to entry to favor certain parties, it seems clear that the following are the short term priorities *this year*:

1) Seeking to pass Frank/Weixler or a derivative of same this year via attachment to must pass legislation;

2) Neutering the regs if the above fails as likely;

3) Aiding in the judicial fight against online gambling restrictions, especially by helping to cure any issues of standing that current litigants friendly to us might have (and note again that this shouldn't cost the PPA a dime as the litigants should underwrite all the PPAs expenses on same since it is to their own benefit).


Since #1 is a longshot in any short term time frame, then it is critical to achieve some success on #s 2 or 3. But if the PPA fails on those as well, especially due to a refusal to even adopt those last two as goals this year, then given the other deeper shortcomings in the PPA, there will simply be no reason to support it for the long term. The performance of the PPA on those 3 short term priorities should be the basis for judgement of their worthiness and credibility for the long term.

[/ QUOTE ]

From a political aspect my feelings are the PPA has on the legislative front been too quick to put the cart before the horse. People on the Hill are like everyone else, they want to protect their jobs. They aren't going to listen to the PPA, especially on the GOP side until the PPA can show it is a real political player. The only way to do that is to create a real grassroots organization, and prove it can be effective. On the Hill you don't have to be right, just be able to move enough votes. This message may be unpopular with some because it will require a good deal of volunteer grunt work to counter-balance the organized free manpower currently arrayed against us.

The KY race is the key in my opinion. As I’ve posted along with others, the PPA needs to establish a track record. It needs a tune up game for ’08. It needs to build its membership. It needs to be highly visible. It needs to get some idea of how many of its arm chair generals are willing to get in the trenches and do the work of privates!!!! It needs to try out all of the various ideas we all have for promoting the PPA and develop more. How many of you with in 4 to a 5 hour drive of KY have seriously planned on going there if there is a worthwhile activity that requires YOUR help to succeed??? I'm 6 hours from the border of the state and already making plans and boning up on the districts. Are you willing to make the same commitment?

We all want an effective grassroots organization, but really how many people are actually willing to show up? That will be the true test of the PPA’s viability.

I can tell from my conversations from John that the PPA is committed to devoting the resources to building the grassroots efforts necessary. BUT the PPA can only provide the structure. John is well aware of the hole that he is in. I'm sure there are many holes dug we all don't even know about. John has returned calls and sent e-mails at all hours of the day and night and on weekends. This isn't a 9-5 job for him. I’ve been involved in a number of organizations both political and non-political in my life; I think I can recognize real passion and determination when I see it. Look at John’s interview on CardPlayer TV, for all of you who aren’t boycotting that site, one of his first issues is improving communications!

Sure it is debatable if the PPA board, given whatever hidden agenda they might or may not have, will support his efforts. But I assume he would not have taken the job without the necessary assurances he'll be given the tools to succeed.

Like I said in my first post only time will really prove out if my PERSONAL opinions are correct. They are based on my past in dealing with political operators and sales people of all stripes. Sure I’ve bought into a few boondoggles in the past. Who hasn’t? But over time like in my poker “career” I’ve gotten a lot better at spotting fakes and conmen learning from each and every mistake.


D$D

Yes I did spell check this one…… Any better?

[/ QUOTE ]

How many people will show up? I don't know, but we should test the waters. One key factor for '08 will, IMHO, have to be a rally. In DC. We have to show up, get on the mainstream news, and generate some buzz. The PPA board will have to go for the most part. We need broad representation on the board. Not just players, but everyone. Players, B&M, online, affiliates, DEALERS, pros, and celebrities. The PPA can be huge or it can be a joke. The time for that decision is PAST due. And, the only path I see to broader acceptance is via 2p2. Humble yourself, make nice, and lets play together.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
One key factor for '08 will, IMHO, have to be a rally. In DC. We have to show up, get on the mainstream news, and generate some buzz. The PPA board will have to go for the most part. We need broad representation on the board. Not just players, but everyone. Players, B&M, online, affiliates, DEALERS, pros, and celebrities. The PPA can be huge or it can be a joke. The time for that decision is PAST due. And, the only path I see to broader acceptance is via 2p2. Humble yourself, make nice, and lets play together.

[/ QUOTE ]

PERSONALLY I am about full up on humble pie.

I'll make you a personal deal. We do a good job in KY I'll make sure you get your victory rally with celebs in D.C..


D$D