Does the PPA need 2+2? - Page 6

TheEngineer · #51 11-11-2007, 05:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also I just want to note how few posters are actually answering the question Berge created this thread for, i.e. does the PPA need 2+2, and if so how much. And note again that the question is NOT the reverse and whether 2p2 needs the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe "the proof is in the pudding" so to speak. The PPA, starting with its former president Bolzerick (if I spelt his name correctly) has been all over this board for the past 15 months or so. We have also heard, sometimes privately, from a number of other people associated with them, including an attorney who originally organized the PPPA (which became the PPA) and one of their lobbyist. So based on that, and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting, it appears that they believe they need us.

As for whether we need them, I think that's a little more debatable. We want to see a successful poker industry, and if the PPA helps in that area, it's good for us. On the other hand, we should remain a successful publishing company, though perhaps a smaller version of Two Plus Two, no matter what happens.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I wouldn't post here anymore. I said I couldn't post non-PPA posts under the guidelines you initially laid out, which was accurate.

Why can't you comprehend that I don't represent the PPA?!?!!?!

I get the hint. Good bye.

Uglyowl · #52 11-11-2007, 05:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We have also heard, sometimes privately, from a number of other people associated with them, including an attorney who originally organized the PPPA (which became the PPA) and one of their lobbyist. So based on that, and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting, it appears that they believe they need us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, what the hell are you trying to do. The Engineer could just as easily disappear and say "I win". What is this some god damn contest to see who is more important. This reminds me of high school arguing who's [censored] is bigger. Let's move on.

Fortunately Engineer realizes the goal is get online poker legalized and not try going to war PPA vs. 2p2. Hell if you asked most of us, The Engineer is more engrained here than the PPA at this point.

We get the point, you control this board and what you says go. You are powerful, we get it.

whangarei · #53 11-11-2007, 05:36 PM

D$D, I hope some other campaign hires you on soon so you have an appropriate outlet for your many talents (where's that sarcasm smiley?).

As to the question posed in the title of this thread, of course the PPA doesn't need 2+2. This forum's members represent a small fraction of the poker community. It certainly wouldn't hurt to have their attention since the more the merrier, but it is far from essential,

frommagio · #54 11-11-2007, 05:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also I just want to note how few posters are actually answering the question Berge created this thread for, i.e. does the PPA need 2+2, and if so how much. And note again that the question is NOT the reverse and whether 2p2 needs the PPA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe "the proof is in the pudding" so to speak. The PPA, starting with its former president Bolzerick (if I spelt his name correctly) has been all over this board for the past 15 months or so. We have also heard, sometimes privately, from a number of other people associated with them, including an attorney who originally organized the PPPA (which became the PPA) and one of their lobbyist. So based on that, and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting, it appears that they believe they need us.

As for whether we need them, I think that's a little more debatable. We want to see a successful poker industry, and if the PPA helps in that area, it's good for us. On the other hand, we should remain a successful publishing company, though perhaps a smaller version of Two Plus Two, no matter what happens.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I wouldn't post here anymore. I said I couldn't post non-PPA posts under the guidelines you initially laid out, which was accurate.

Why can't you comprehend that I don't represent the PPA?!?!!?!

I get the hint. Good bye.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is sad. In another thread a few hours ago, I posted how nice it was that Mason and TE had come to a rational resolution.

TE, you're a great asset here (despite that one unfortunate incident where you refused to distance yourself from the "ChristoNazi" talk, which, in my opinion, hurts our chances to win normal people over to our side).

But this is at least the third time you've said you're leaving; and yet you're still here. Are you really sure that you want to stick around?

whangarei · #55 11-11-2007, 05:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
... and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice. We appear to reach an amicable agreement and then Mason throws in this little zinger. Good work Mason. TE please let us know where you'll be posting as most of us here will follow you.

TheEngineer · #56 11-11-2007, 05:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice. We appear to reach an amicable agreement and then Mason throws in this little zinger. Good work Mason. TE please let us know where you'll be posting as most of us here will follow you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. I'll be at http://webringamerica.com/4/pokerpla...wforum.php?f=2

BluffTHIS! · #57 11-11-2007, 05:54 PM

Engineer,

If Mason wanted you gone he'd make you gone. If you don't like what he says then ARGUE WITH HIM. He has a remarkably thick skin himself from what I've seen over the years, and he and David actually have put up with a lot of personal attacks that one wouldn't think the site owners would.

Don't be quitter and move to where very few are really listening. Politics includes not only dealing with opposing parties, but also with internal factional differences. DEAL WITH IT dude!

LeapFrog · #58 11-11-2007, 05:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
. So based on that, and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting, it appears that they believe they need us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets hope you finally chased him away. I would like to see a comparison of the # of unpaid hours devoted to keeping online poker legal and easy to access between you and TE for this year. You are really performing a service to the poker community.

DeadMoneyDad · #59 11-11-2007, 06:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
. So based on that, and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting, it appears that they believe they need us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets hope you finally chased him away. I would like to see a comparison of the # of unpaid hours devoted to keeping online poker legal and easy to access between you and TE for this year. You are really performing a service to the poker community.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look both sides of this issue are "freerolling" to some degree off the efforts of the other.

Perhaps it is best to get this resolved now rather than when it was really important for us to be able to move forward.

D$D

LeapFrog · #60 11-11-2007, 07:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
. So based on that, and the fact that TE who announced he wasn't going to post here anymore is still posting, it appears that they believe they need us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets hope you finally chased him away. I would like to see a comparison of the # of unpaid hours devoted to keeping online poker legal and easy to access between you and TE for this year. You are really performing a service to the poker community.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look both sides of this issue are "freerolling" to some degree off the efforts of the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree -- I just am upset at what I perceive as pettiness. I may not agree with MMs position on the PPA but I don't begrudge him it. This is what bothers me:

It appeared that things were finally calming down again MM had to throw in an unecessary jibe. Yes TE should probably get some thicker skin but hey, who is perfect? It is not like TE was trying to walk all over him and throw his weight around. MM should, imo, at least realize that further comments could cause him to avoid 2+2.

I think we can all agree that regardless of the make up of the board or other PPA issues TE is a valued member of the 2+2 community and has done a considerable amount of work (both before and after his affiliation with the PPA) to help protect online poker. Why risk driving him off, I just don't get it.