CA Online Poker Initiative!!

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I only agreed with his theory on fish depopulating tools, which I arrived at independently (and it's not really a very original idea, it's a simple application of predator/prey model). I don't really care about CA legalization, since I think that the legal status of online poker is not nearly as important as the health of the fish stock in the long term. Lots of people will find ways to play poker online, but they won't care to if the odds are stacked against them from the beginning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? People flock to casinos and sit at the slots all day long, hoping for good luck. Sorry, but people are morons. Fish get a better deal at the poker table, as they have a chance to win. Also, they don't know they're fish; they think they're unlucky.

[ QUOTE ]
I think that the proper avenue for passing on these ideas is to online poker rooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

Definitely. CA should determine the rules that make them the most money. That's probably going to be one that has the most tables filled, rather than one that tries to legislate the odds for the fish.

Neither Tuff_Fish nor you have data indicating that this fish protection exercise will do any good. Industry trends indicate that it won't.

[ QUOTE ]
It really surprises me that people running these rooms who must be pretty smart have not yet realized that it's not in their interest to stack the deck in grinders' favor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker is a game of skill. Of course the game favors the skilled players. It's supposed to. Also, it is in their favor to allow the games to be played. The fish will come back for their gamble. After all, their odds won't improve under Fish's proposal at all.

Anyway, this is all idiocy. These details don't belong in an initiative. Let the CA regulatory body determine the rules. Let them offer multiple rooms with nultiple sets of rules if they want. Obviously this is Tuff_Fish being a bitch, trying to turn his pet peeves into felonies. I can't believe we're still talking about this crap, to be honest. It's going nowhere.

Tuff_Fish should be banned. He clearly stated he doesn't care if we here at 2+2 like his proposal or not. In fact, he's glad we don't. That's fine, but why post it here in that case. He should post at Las Vegas Advisor, then brag about how he's saving the fish from the better players. They'll all say they're the sharks! That's how it works.

Finally, I can't believe people are wasting time here that they could be using to fight for our right to play. If you've not yet done so, please go to Fight for Online Gaming!! -- Plan for weeks of 4/9 & 4/16. Thanks.

[jumbojacks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The HUDbots want legalized Party Poker and nothing else.

[/ QUOTE ]

God you are a tool.

We want online poker the way it has always been on every single poker site, nothing more or less. You want an online poker full of retards like yourself who don't realize they have a straight unless they can count with their hands.

Admit it, this is just an elaborate way to get back at all the college kids on Party Poker who were crushing you playing twelve tables while you struggled to play one. To try and start a site designed to not allow multitabling, not allow pokertracker or PAhud, it's obviously just a glorified pipe dream of yours, you aren't fooling anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of players who can play more than 6 tables and still have very solid reads on all the players. There are even more players who have these tools and are longterm losers or breakeven at best. I don't see how these tools or multi-tabling is even an issue. They aren't the equivalent of aimbot scripts.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
Tuff_Fish should be banned. He clearly stated he doesn't care if we here at 2+2 like his proposal or not. In fact, he's glad we don't.
.
.


[/ QUOTE ]

What is with all the ban stuff? I write something you don't like so I should be banned?

Besides, not everybody hates my idea, and a lot of people probably find it interesting even if they don't come on here and yell. And, horror of horrors, some folks actually like the idea. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Tuff
.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
horror of horrors, some folks actually like the idea

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, two people...including you

[Dima2000123]

Regardless of how many people like his idea, calling for a ban of someone who says things you don't agree with is just sad. Part of being a mature adult is being able to listen to opposing viewpoints without wanting to muzzle the other guy.

[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of how many people like his idea, calling for a ban of someone who says things you don't agree with is just sad. Part of being a mature adult is being able to listen to opposing viewpoints without wanting to muzzle the other guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Speaking of acting like a mature adult, surely this includes taking responsibility for your own actions. Exactly why TF's proposal is retarded.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of how many people like his idea, calling for a ban of someone who says things you don't agree with is just sad. Part of being a mature adult is being able to listen to opposing viewpoints without wanting to muzzle the other guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no desire to muzzle him in general. It's simply obvious the guy is here to flame the board. He has a right to speak, but we don't have an obligation to give him a platform.

As for his "cause", I consider it to be as anti-freedom and anti-poker as Goodlette's crusade is. Would you complain if Goodlette posted here and I stood up for our rights as poker players and as Americans?

[Case Closed]

Guys, this thread is out of control. Gambling is an addictive activity that people will ruin their lives for. It's a drug to a lot of people. The work is done for us. There is no threat of poker running out of fish.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of how many people like his idea, calling for a ban of someone who says things you don't agree with is just sad. Part of being a mature adult is being able to listen to opposing viewpoints without wanting to muzzle the other guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

To add to my earlier answer, I'd have no problem with Goodlette posting here. In fact, I'd welcome the opportunity for the dialogue. The problem with TuffFish is that he's a troll, pure and simple. His "proposal" was created simply to yank our chains.

You failed to answer my earlier questions, especially the one asking why we cannot trust CA to come up with its own criteria for the games.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
The problem with TuffFish is that he's a troll, pure and simple. His "proposal" was created simply to yank our chains.

You failed to answer my earlier questions, especially the one asking why we cannot trust CA to come up with its own criteria for the games.
.
.
we cannot trust CA to come up with any games
.
.


[/ QUOTE ]

This was way too much work just to yank your chains. This is a real proposal and I intend to take it as far as I can. Even so, I would be quite surprised to get all the way to the ballot in the first try. But, if this initiative catches the imagination of enough folks, who knows.

If I had really wanted to yank your chains, I would have written two initiatives, one saying exactly what you all would want to see, and the second what I really wanted to submit. I could have posted the first one on the Sec of State website making it look all official and such, knowing I could post the real one just before the 15 days were up.

Now that would have been a hoot, watching you all do giant 180's about how good it was based on criteria 99% of voting Californians know nothing about.

I actually have resubmitted the initiative, but I didn't change anything you would be concerned about.

The website will be up soon. You will be able to download a petition and sign it. You just have to sign all the forms a circulator would have to sign. But you can do your part to help. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Tuff (the troll)
.