Does the PPA need 2+2?

[w_alloy]

[ QUOTE ]
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!

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this 100%.

Engineer, you are an asset to this community. I, like many other players here, read many of your posts now but will not if you move.

It would be easy to leave now and blame Mason. But, from what I know of you, you are not someone who just takes the easiest path.

Fight through this, and do what you know is best for your professed goals and the community. Keep posting!

[IndyFish]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi IFish:

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand: does 2p2 need the PPA? 2+2 LLC made it very clear around the time UIGEA was passed that it was simply a book publisher and not a lobbyist organization. If left to 2p2 alone there would never have been as strong a fight as the PPA is putting up (if there was a fight at all). I mean in no way to discredit 2p2, because as publishers of books on gambling they are simply the best, as is this forum.


[/ QUOTE ]

There's a misconception here that I want to correct. We hope that the PPA is successful, and we also hope that our concerns are not necessary.

On the other hand, we do believe that our concerns have the potential to become significant and therefore damage the cause as they are better understood by those entities which want to see online poker and Internet gambling in general severely restricted. So that's why we are only neutral towards this organization even though we do share the same goals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, I never meant to imply that you didn't want the PPA to succeed. As your books prove, you are inherently logical. Online poker pads your already successful business, both with book sales and affiliate advertizing on this board. Of course you want the PPA to succeed.

I honestly don't know what the problem is with the PPA board makeup. I assume you have valid reasons for your criticism. My only point--that I perhaps did not make clear--is that RIGHT NOW the PPA seems to be the best shot we have to get explicitly legal online poker here in the US. I really do hope you and the PPA can resolve your differences, by whatever means. I think the result would greatly help our cause.

IndyFish

[canvasbck]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi canvasbck:

[ QUOTE ]
That goal will be reached MUCH easier if organizations like 2+2, the PPA, CP mag, and whoever the [censored] else can help will work together.


[/ QUOTE ]

We would very much like to be able to work with the PPA and have certainly cooperated with them in some areas. (An example is allowing their officials to post here unrestricted as long as they identify themselves and their positions.) But we also feel, as I just mentioned in my other post, that the concerns we have might eventually hurt the cause, not help it.

As I also mentioned in one of the other recent threads, since these boards are now read by many people, some of whom may be representing non-friendly entities, I won't list out our concerns here. In fact, I'm little uncomfortable with making this post at all since we don't want to damage the PPA. However, we are trying to do what's right and what's best for poker in the long run. We're not being motivated by profit though I agree that easy access to Internet poker would certainly be to our benefit.

best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the better posts you have made on this topic. As a PPA member, I would really like to know what issues there are with the PPA that could adversly affect our plight. I understand why you will not post that publicly, but if you could outline these problems in a PM with possible action items, it would be greatly appreciated. I REALLY want to see the PPA succeed, if there are problems with the board hampering that effort, I want to know about it. If it is just the pizzing contest that many here believe it is, then I want the involved parties to get over it and quit fighting each other, save your battles for Heir Frist. If there are legitimate hurdles within the PPA, I will be doing all that my insignifigant azz can do to change/remove those hurtles.

I'm a resident of Texas that is several hours from legal poker (and it's at the Isle of Crappy). Local underground rooms have a capped rake of $10 per pot in 1/2 NL!!!!!! I have a definant vested intrest in seeing the return of the fishies to the internet.

[chrisptp]

there's no great mystery here.

any organization that promotes gambling of any sort and lacks transparency opens the door for opposition groups to raise the specter of proxy involvement of organized crime, etc.

that PPA forum is ugly and i don't want to read it. engineer, please come back.

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
Also please keep one thing in mind. You are after all a fish, i.e. losing poker player, albeit one who can afford to do so. So your opinions on anything can't really be given a lot of credence.

[/ QUOTE ]

What planet are you on? The PPA should represent just winning players? Only winning players shold have the right to play or the right to campaign and be listened to as part of the campaign? Oh shoot 90% of players excluded from having any meningfull opinion - I am (just) a winning player so does that make my (negative) opinion of you valid?

[ComeOnNine]

probably not

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also please keep one thing in mind. You are after all a fish, i.e. losing poker player, albeit one who can afford to do so. So your opinions on anything can't really be given a lot of credence.

[/ QUOTE ]

What planet are you on? The PPA should represent just winning players? Only winning players shold have the right to play or the right to campaign and be listened to as part of the campaign? Oh shoot 90% of players excluded from having any meningfull opinion - I am (just) a winning player so does that make my (negative) opinion of you valid?

[/ QUOTE ]


Believing that 2+2=6 isn't a disqualification for either voting or enjoying the rights of citizenship in either my country or yours, but it still doesn't make the opinions and thought processes of such persons relevant or worth taking seriously.

And hey, why don't focus your energies on starting a British PPA instead of worrying about us Yanks?

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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!

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this 100%.

Engineer, you are an asset to this community. I, like many other players here, read many of your posts now but will not if you move.

It would be easy to leave now and blame Mason. But, from what I know of you, you are not someone who just takes the easiest path.

Fight through this, and do what you know is best for your professed goals and the community. Keep posting!

[/ QUOTE ]
Just had to third this, please keep posting TE.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

TE:

Your posts are very informative and are the way I keep up with the legislative issues. However, I work a full time career and am a semi-pro poker player. I don't have time to follow you to another site. This site is where I improve my game. Its why I'm here. I'd much prefer that you stay, and I think that the PPA title or moniker is a reasonable mechanism for you to provide your message to 2+2ers.

Additionally, I think MM's underlying concerns should be taken seriously, and addressed now. I have no great concerns of my own, but I strongly suspect that issues like the issues 2+2 has pointed out will be used as talking points by opponents in attempts to diminish the PPA. I would suggest that complete financial and operational transarency (as big of a pain as that is) is extremely important as is the make up of the board. The title of the organization should give an indication of where ultimate operational control needs to reside. Anything less creates an opportunity for "spin" by your opponents. And that would be unfortunate.

In any event, I hope you choose to continue to keep us informed on this board. If not, good luck in your efforts and thanks for the work you have already done.

[MassPoker]

Greetings:

I'm fairly new to this forum, so I won't even pretend to know all of the issues outlined here, but I do want to opine what I do know of TE and the PPA as well as my own personal views as to what I have seen here, but first, I want to chime in on what this thread represents and why I think it is ultimately counterproductive to all our goals.

I really think this bickering back and forth is sad. It doesn't (and won't) lead to anything positive coming from this. Who really cares who needs who more. This thread is reminiscent of childhood battles as to "whose uncle can beat up the other's uncle." Please, spare me the sanctimonious, holier than though, argument that this thread seeks to demonstrate a greater purpose than what which we all know it truly is, "an old fashioned pissing contest!" If some of you that post here would put a fraction of the effort into the salvation of poker than you put into trying to be right in these threads, it's possible that poker rights wouldn't be where they are today.

Getting credit means absolutely nothing to me personally. I work as a "volunteer" for the PPA and have put in COUNTLESS hours in support of MA right's to play poker...period! However, it was TE who brought the MA issue to my attention initially. TE doesn't live in MA and he has NO vested interest in the MA law being passed other than the obvious trickle down effect of the bill's passage. His commitment to the rights of all poker players is solid, and I, for one, appreciate that commitment.

Just as this forum is only as good as the quality of its readers/posters, so too, is the PPA in it's members/volunteers. 2+2 and their support faction admits that recently things have improved with the PPA. Things are getting done. (Can we all agree on at least this single point!) I've said this before and I'll say it again, as far as I am concerned, the PPA never really "existed" until John Pappas came on board. So, whatever happend prior to that means absolutely nothing to me...NOTHING! The work that is being done now at the PPA far exceeds what little
that was done previous to John's appointment. The PPA has recently demonstrated some aggressive PR, and in a very short amount of time, we have managed to get NATIONAL attention to our cause. People are starting to wake up!

OK...to be fair about this, I'll give credit where credit is due; when it comes to forums, 2 + 2 is the ultimate poker forum out there...Ok, is that what you want to hear? BUT, it isn't the only poker forum out there...At the moment, there is no other "reputable" organization that is fighting for the right's of poker players except the PPA. If Mason wants 2+2 to remain "neutral", then so be it. That's better than fighting against us.

Look at what has become of this situation. Some fo you will blame PPA, some will blame 2+2...who cares?...Let's start acting like responsible adults and less like warring children. also, NO ONE is "entitled" to see the PPA books anymore than I have a right to see the 2+2's books. The PPA has complied with what is "legally" expected of them and that is just fine by me until such time that flagrant abuses surface, which to date they have NOT! The only thing I see here is a lot of misguided speculation and from what I have read based on personal issues rather than from any sense of real grievances.

There are those who just have to be right. No amount of talking will change their mind. And I'm willing to bet that if Mason were to change his mind right now...I mean at this exact second, the rest of the dissentor's would follow suit. It's truly sad that people cannot think for themselves. Anymore room on that coat tail, Mason?

All In,

Randy C~
MA Rep PPA