PPA Update.

[TheRedRocket]

[ QUOTE ]
PPA UPDATE:

1) The board is still packed with cronyist conflicting interests dominated by CP magazine reps and the interests of certain market players including Party Poker which tries to undermine the other market players still in the US Market

2) PPA hasn't shown much interest in neutering the forthcoming regs which should be an important mid-term fallback plan to protect the ability of its members to continue playing online while the longer term fight is waged

3) PPA still refuses to engage the posters of this forum by designating a spokesman to regularly interact with us here on 2+2 which is the largest poker community on the net/earth

4) PPA (thus far) has focused only repeal of the UIGEA without much/any focus on B&M poker at the state level which would have a synergistic effect to help online poker *especially* if they targeted a few big states like NY and TX

5) After, as likely and despite all our hopes, the pending bills in Congress fail, the PPA will say they tried and that we all need to ignore the organization's conflicted interests and shortcomings and work for the future instead of first demanding structural changes like in the board makeup

6) Summary bottom line is that the PPA still views its primary stakeholders as not its wider membership, but the existing online sites and media dependant on same for advertising

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't know about any of the above but as a member of the ppa it is disheartening to see how much the engineer comes up with each week towards getting online poker legalized or reducing the amount of restrictions and to only rarely be called to action by the PPA.

It seems like the weekly actions for example would not take much effort or resources and could have strong effects if pushed out to all of the PPA members.

honestly I really don't have a clue as to what the PPA actually does

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know about any of the above but as a member of the ppa it is disheartening to see how much the engineer comes up with each week towards getting online poker legalized or reducing the amount of restrictions and to only rarely be called to action by the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's like you're reading my thoughts.

[coachkf]

[ QUOTE ]

3) PPA still refuses to engage the posters of this forum by designating a spokesman to regularly interact with us here on 2+2 which is the largest poker community on the net/earth


[/ QUOTE ]

When PPA was in it's infancy before UIGEA was passed, Michael Bolcerek was active in this forum. He got repeatedly slammed by members who complained that he was a crappy spokesman, etc., and Mason M. of 2p2 even got in on the act by letting everyone know that they did not trust or support the PPA.

No wonder they don't bother coming to this forum anymore.

I'm disgruntled with the PPA like most everyone else I suppose, but I do see why they quit coming to this forum.

[DeliciousBass]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason M. of 2p2 even got in on the act by letting everyone know that they did not trust or support the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

On a side note: Mason is expected to have a statement about the UIGEA pretty soon.

[Mason Malmuth]

I think you have clearly mis-represented what we did and our attitude towards the PPA. I believe, because of our initial work, the PPA did improve.

Also, Bolcerek was on here soliciting members/money and refused to tell us when asked how the money was being spent, who the lobbyist were, what their goals were, etc. You need to understand that we at Two Plus Two are a serious organization that is willing to spend our own money when necessary to do what's best for poker and to protect our members. We do this at no charge to you.

On a side note, even though our current position towards the PPA is neutral, I would like to see a representative of their organization come on here and answer questions in a serious and professional manner. This didn't happen before which is one of the reasons there was difficulty. But, as far as we are concerned, there is no reason it can't happen now.

Mason

[Legislurker]

Thanks for weighing in Mason. You have had a measured, cautious approach to the PPA that I hope will bear fruit from them one day. You attempted to do the homework and background on them, and they stonewalled you. I think a lot of us would have overlooked where exactly the money went if they had organized us and acted, but they wanted secrecy and inaction. I don't know if they can interact with a forum this large easily and fluidly, but they could have a reader
here with weekly updates, at the least. Twoplustwo is the
nexus of the poker universe, and they have eschewed it, to the detriment of themselves and poker, and deserve to have to work to get back in our good graces.
I think I speak for a lot of us here when I say that my reading/posting here is relayed via IM/forum/table talk to a factor of ten or more other poker players. I've been asking
the last couple of days what it would take for the PPA to get them to act in unison with them. Of the first four people I queried, three said to get the endorsement of twoplustwo that they did not get before. More rank and file recreational people will follow in those people's footsteps.
People are willing to give time and money if they can see how its working. I realize poker player's may have the highest ratio of [censored] to angel, but we aren't unreasonable. Its not too late for the PPA to step up, but they can't get anything done online without first stepping up here with facts, transparency, and engagement.

[Wynton]

Hey all,

I haven't been active here in months for a variety of reasons, but got my hopes up, momentarily, when I saw the title of this thread.

Now, I'm disappointed, not just in the lack of information but in discovering that the PPA has not had more of a presence here in the past few months. Last I paid attention, a number of people here had been selected as State contacts for the PPA (a position I unsuccessfully applied for). I had assumed that those people who be effective liasons between PPA and the rest of us. Are we still suffering from a lack of communication?

And I certainly can't understand why anyone would actually withhold information about the PPA's activities.

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
Of the first four people I queried, three said to get the endorsement of twoplustwo that they did not get before.

[/ QUOTE ]

They have to clean up their board. Hopefully the new president is a step in the right direction, but I have no idea who he is. We have also made it clear that we will not endorse the PPA until Mrs Shulman is no longer a board member. But they need more fixes than just that.

Best wishes,
Mason

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
On a side note, even though our current position towards the PPA is neutral, I would like to see a representative of their organization come on here and answer questions in a serious and professional manner.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this is that often the questions aren't going to come from serious, professional posters. Many of them are going to come from people like BluffThis who obviously have their own agenda.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On a side note, even though our current position towards the PPA is neutral, I would like to see a representative of their organization come on here and answer questions in a serious and professional manner.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this is that often the questions aren't going to come from serious, professional posters. Many of them are going to come from people like BluffThis who obviously have their own agenda.

[/ QUOTE ]


pokerBOY,

You are a huge tool. I do pose questions in a serious and professional manner, but I just do so with a healthy dose of sarcasm and overall agressiveness. I have a very good grasp of the overall situation and most of the details, including the online poker market players/economy, and various legal issues to do with same.

The plain fact of the matter is that there are some shortcomings in the PPA that are very severe and that the reason they refuse to engage us here is that they also refuse to make many substantive changes, especially involving CP mag giving up its straglehold on the board.

The ONLY reason that the PPA is worth supporting to any degree, is simply because they are currently the only game in town. But that still doesn't mean they should get a free pass from us *especially* when they don't truly represent all the goals we have. Instead they largely represent the goals and business models of certain existing online sites and advertising media.

I realize that the reason that you and many posters like you dislike my aggressive criticisms of the PPA is because you are scared of losing your livelihood if the upcoming regs have any teeth in them at all, or at least are successful in making it virtually impossible to play poker. However I too play fulltime and have those concerns as well, but probably with the difference that I can always go back to playing live, can still find a way to play online if I jump through a enough hoops, and also have enough savings that I am not going to be put in any immediate crunch.

But you and others are missing a VERY important point that Engineer confirmed from his conversation. Which is that the PPA is expending *zero* effort on neutering the regs as a mid-term fallback position. That *should* be a HUGE goal of yourself so that you can keep playing as now with some poker sites willing to take some measure of risk to spread games for US players when as likely the bills in Congress fail and we have to shift to a 3-5 year time frame to get what we want.

Instead, you and those private sites are being played for SUCKERS by Party Poker who takes contrary legal interpretations of the UIGEA than those sites in order to harm those competitors. Stars, FT and the others should wake the [censored] up on this. When those private sites get tired of being played for fools, then their support coupled with the base of posters on 2+2 could easily help start a new organization, despite all the difficulties involved. The PPA should keep that in mind.

And here's something CP magazine should keep in mind as well. Those private sites that now are being taken advantage of by the PPA's catering to Party Poker can afford to pull ALL of their advertising from CP and not suffer at all because every swinging dick who reads CP already plays or at least knows of those sites.