Harrah's and MGM's CEOs say Internet poker to explicitly legal soon

[BluffTHIS!]

TF,

I'm not going to revisit our previous arguments on the PPA board in detail. But just let me say that if you replaced the affiliate farm interest board members with reps of B&M casinos, I would say the same things, and that perhaps you would then see my point. And although I grant that the harm is more potential that not at this point, by the time any such potentiality became fact if would probably be too late. One thing is clear from all the various legislative battles on the state and federal levels, which is that usually in any decade we only get a limited opportunity to change anything to our liking, after which you have to go through the whole cumbersome process to tweak it.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]


But..., I believe the PPA is doing a good job for all of us and deserves our full support at this time. We can quibble over the spoils when there are spoils to be quibbled over.

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

Tuff this isn't directed only towards you but arrises from a phone conversation today.

Why is this an either or, black or white issue? You have to toe the party line 110% or you are an enemy?

I've been accused of being a PPA critic in this forum by TE and today somehow in with BluffThis as a leading detractor of the PPA. My call to offer my genuine "well done" was portrayed as a two faced sham. I was spoken to as if I was Catherine Hanaway and Tom McClusky's secret love child spawned specifically to ruin the good works of the PPA through my posting IMO thoughtful suggestions for improvement of the PPA's efforts.

Tuff you know me, we've met and spoken at length in person, what is going on?


D$D

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been accused of being a PPA critic in this forum by TE and today somehow in with BluffThis as a leading detractor of the PPA. My call to offer my genuine "well done" was portrayed as a two faced sham. I was spoken to as if I was Catherine Hanaway and Tom McClusky's secret love child spawned specifically to ruin the good works of the PPA through my posting IMO thoughtful suggestions for improvement of the PPA's efforts.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Critic" doesn't mean "one who hates something". I don't know anything about a phone call, but I don't think you hate PPA or are opposed to it, nor was I implying any such thing.

Critic means, "one who forms and expresses judgments of the merits, faults, value, or truth of a matter" (i.e., thoughtful suggestions for improvement). I'll bet if you search your posts here, you may find a word or two you wrote about PPA that meets that definition. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but I don't feel I misused the term. Since you take offense, I'll refrain from using it in the future.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Critic means, "one who forms and expresses judgments of the merits, faults, value, or truth of a matter" (i.e., thoughtful suggestions for improvement). I'll bet if you search your posts here, you may find a word or two you wrote about PPA that meets that definition. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but I don't feel I misused the term. Since you take offense, I'll refrain from using it in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no trouble with being labled much of anything. Critic as you defined it indeed fits. Sometimes I'm even over the top.

My only concern as expressed in the "rejected suggestions" thread is when even my volunteer suggestions and offers are rejected or attached with unintended motives (from my perspective). I'm a big boy most of the time [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img], I can handle being told no quite well. Heck I've been married to the same woman for over 20 years! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I've tried my best to understand all the various issues and pressures the organization has and IMO will face, even to the point of totally devaluing my opinion of my own ideas. But too often the value later has proven it self out over the course of time.

Perhaps I am not as mindful as I should that this is an open forum read by even non-member of 2+2 I think. John spoke some time ago of having a PPA members only forum for discussions such as these. Perhaps I should have been more patient.


D$D

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Critic means, "one who forms and expresses judgments of the merits, faults, value, or truth of a matter" (i.e., thoughtful suggestions for improvement). I'll bet if you search your posts here, you may find a word or two you wrote about PPA that meets that definition. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but I don't feel I misused the term. Since you take offense, I'll refrain from using it in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no trouble with being labled much of anything. Critic as you defined it indeed fits. Sometimes I'm even over the top.

My only concern as expressed in the "rejected suggestions" thread is when even my volunteer suggestions and offers are rejected or attached with unintended motives (from my perspective). I'm a big boy most of the time [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img], I can handle being told no quite well. Heck I've been married to the same woman for over 20 years! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I've tried my best to understand all the various issues and pressures the organization has and IMO will face, even to the point of totally devaluing my opinion of my own ideas. But too often the value later has proven it self out over the course of time.

Perhaps I am not as mindful as I should that this is an open forum read by even non-member of 2+2 I think. John spoke some time ago of having a PPA members only forum for discussions such as these. Perhaps I should have been more patient.


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

No, No, No. We do not need a private forum. That sends the wrong message and you know within 24hrs half 2p2 will know.
We aren't criminals and we are only seeking justice. That just adds fire to the accusation that the PPA is biased and
slanted to narrow interests. If that occurred I would hope Mason moved his position from neutral to hostile. This isn't a narrow, one-off matter to a lot of us. Transparency, openess, and integrity should be the PPA's concern and you guys will have a lifetime of TV appearances and fat-paying no-show jobs. Start going secret youre going to lose what little goodwill you've gleaned.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
No, No, No. We do not need a private forum. That sends the wrong message and you know within 24hrs half 2p2 will know.
We aren't criminals and we are only seeking justice. That just adds fire to the accusation that the PPA is biased and
slanted to narrow interests. If that occurred I would hope Mason moved his position from neutral to hostile. This isn't a narrow, one-off matter to a lot of us. Transparency, openess, and integrity should be the PPA's concern and you guys will have a lifetime of TV appearances and fat-paying no-show jobs. Start going secret youre going to lose what little goodwill you've gleaned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree.

There are no talks at PPA to have any private forums, and I'm not aware there ever were any. If the unlikely event it ever gets mentioned, I'll oppose it.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
No, No, No. We do not need a private forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


There's nothing wrong with the PPA having a private forum to discuss some strategy and tactics that they don't wish our opponents to see openly. And in fact if used properly, it could be a good way to get some advice from knowledgeable political and legal insiders who otherwise wouldn't feel comfortable saying certain things in the open. Of course the same can be accomplished by chain emails or a private maillist server. However I am not talking about a private forum where "just any PPA member" could read and post, but only invited ones (and I don't mean myself). Otherwise some shill for our opponents would just sign up for same. The PPA indeed needs some private advisory panels on various topics.

However for most stuff, this is still the forum where the most poker players can be reached, and they have questions to ask and also provide valuable commentary.

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, No, No. We do not need a private forum.

[/ QUOTE ]


There's nothing wrong with the PPA having a private forum to discuss some strategy and tactics that they don't wish our opponents to see openly. And in fact if used properly, it could be a good way to get some advice from knowledgeable political and legal insiders who otherwise wouldn't feel comfortable saying certain things in the open. Of course the same can be accomplished by chain emails or a private maillist server. However I am not talking about a private forum where "just any PPA member" could read and post, but only invited ones (and I don't mean myself). Otherwise some shill for our opponents would just sign up for same. The PPA indeed needs some private advisory panels on various topics.

However for most stuff, this is still the forum where the most poker players can be reached, and they have questions to ask and also provide valuable commentary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like any organization, PPA does have non-public communications of the sorts you mentioned. There is no private forum, though.

As for 2+2. I personally think we gain much more by allowing many interested poker players to read our open discussions here than we lose by allowing FoF access to it. If we try to keep things secret, I think we'll just keep things secret from ourselves.

For example, poker players can read this particular thread and learn a lot about the future of the online game. We'll probably have a few hundred folks read it. Foes of Fun may have one guy read this, but he won't learn a whole lot more than he would have from the initial story, which was in the Las Vegas Sun. And, if they do read us for details, they'll note that there really are a lot of Americans who want to play. As they (grudgingly) accept horse racing and lotteries, they may figure that, between poker and casino gaming, in their mind we're the lesser of two evils. Anyway, my point is that I hope we'll remain an open forum.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
We aren't criminals and we are only seeking justice. That just adds fire to the accusation that the PPA is biased and
slanted to narrow interests. If that occurred I would hope Mason moved his position from neutral to hostile. This isn't a narrow, one-off matter to a lot of us. Transparency, openess, and integrity should be the PPA's concern and you guys will have a lifetime of TV appearances and fat-paying no-show jobs. Start going secret youre going to lose what little goodwill you've gleaned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Take my word for it there are no fat-paying no-show jobs in the PPA but plenty in The Federal Government. One Appointee I knew of had to change hobbies because the glue and paint from the models was just too much.

My suport of any member only forum would be for communication of organizational grassroots efforts, a web-based confrence call type deal only. I was once asked but do not know the status of taking a more direct (named) volunteer position in VA.

I can see and feel there would be a benifit of a forum for State Reps. Of course I envision this more of a communication medium for an organization of 435+ as IMO when we can "we" should be organized to the CD level. I have no interest in joining nor being part of some secret society. Having only one rep in CA who has the same duties as a rep in MT just isn't workable IMO. VA IMO needs at least 3 to start.

But since this is the Harrah's and MGM "open tomorrow" and all our troubles are over thread, perhaps it is all a mental exercise.



D$D

[OMFGWTF]

[ QUOTE ]

As soon as UIGEA passed, they each bought several poker sites for pennies, literally in prep, this was (and somewhere I posted about it) a sign that all was not really as it seemed with the UIGEA, something was up.


[/ QUOTE ]


Which sites did they acquire?