PPA Update.

[tangled]

Why won't the PPA work to neuter the UIGEA regs? I submit it is because they are controlled by Party. Party has made it clear that they don't want other sites offering poker to the US player unless they can too.
If Party can't be here, then they don't want any site here. And the only way Party can be here is through legislation, not through soft regs workarounds.

Party's goals are similar to our goals but not identical. And with all due respect, we don't control the PPA, Party does. That is why they lack transparency, because if they opened up there books we would all be able see who is really funding them.

I support the PPA because what they want would be great for the player too, but they don't support "all" the things that would be great for the player.

Again, I support the PPA, but I refuse too be fooled by their happy spin. I try not to be a fish at the table, nor in regards to the true nature of the PPA. But I will try to keep an open mind.

[hollaballa]

Pappas is the new president.....michael b has stepped down

[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

[Wynton]

I hope the exciting news is not limited to a new president and new office location.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]

As for BluffTHIS’ “PPA Update”:

1) The issues with the board are still what they are.
2) BluffTHIS is correct, the PPA isn’t lobbying to neuter the regs. I expressed my thoughts that they should, but they won’t.
3) PPA states they’d like to engage the 2p2 community, but have not yet done anything in this area. In fairness, they do respond to me whenever I ask them a question, but I can’t relay every question we have via email. A PPA presence here would help.
4) I discussed the KY gubernatorial elections with John (if Beshear wins, Kentuckians will vote on a constitutional amendment allowing poker; if Fletcher wins, he promises he’ll stop any expansion of gambling in KY). They have an interest and will make a determination. If they do, we’ll see them in action and will be able to critique their performance. If they sit this out, that would make quite the statement as well.
5) We, the PPA members, control the organization. When we don’t like something, we need to write or post on their forums demanding action. I have been, as have a few others here. I’ve seen what a few hundred dedicated folks here can accomplish, and can only imagine what could be done with 660,000. I’m still constrained to imaging, but am hopeful.
6) I think they’re sincere in wishing to improve in terms of member outreach and in grassroots effort building. Of course, sincerity and results aren’t the same thing. Time will tell.

So, I’d say I’m guardedly optimistic. They’re not contemplating anything with the energy level of what we do here, but they are looking at how to enable their members to do stuff like that within PPA. Again, time will tell. I’ll post more after the announcement.

[/ QUOTE ]


Engineer,

Thanks for taking the time to talk to Mr. Pappas and report back to us here on same, and as well to specifically respond to the points I made earlier.

However although I too am "guardedly optimistic" about the overall situation, it has nothing to do with the PPA, but rather with the ongoing actions in congress, the judicial arena and the WTO. Re the PPA, all you have confirmed is that they only support a very small subset of the larger set of goals most of us here support, and largely act at the behest of the goals of the online sites and poker media, especially Party Poker. If we do end up with some favorable outcome in the legislative area, IMO it will only be 30% at best because of the PPA, and 70% despite them. And if it weren't for this 2+2 forum and the activities of its members, especially yourself at the grassroots level, the PPA wouldn't have a chance of accomplishing diddly squat.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope the exciting news is not limited to a new president and new office location.

[/ QUOTE ]


Substanceless spin is always exciting to the spinner.

[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.

[oldbookguy]

Congratulations to you, I see the PPA has put a link on their main page to your 'report card' on congress.

obg

[1p0kerboy]

BluffThis,

I don't mind your criticisms of the PPA. In fact, I think you have a lot of valid points.

What I do mind is the frequency and magnitude of your posts with your opinions on the matter. It's just plain annoying.

And also your misguided belief that this organization should use it's resources on every little thing that every single one of its' 600,000+ members wants is ludicrous. If you want something outside of what this organization is seeking then perhaps you should start your own?

[1p0kerboy]

Perhaps under new leadership the PPA will do some things differently.