Please review my generic letter to Congress

[Berge20]

Good letter

I really think this use of ";" breaks away from the flow of the rest of the letter. Minor detail.

"These safeguards will work; the June 8, 2007 House Financial Services Committee hearings on Internet gaming proved conclusively that Internet poker can be effectively regulated. Neither bill forces any state to permit online poker; states can opt out if they wish."

[Wahoo73]

Superb letter and terrific initiative!

I have a few word-smithing suggestions.

1. "...right to play poker online was inadvertently restricted...": I don't understand your inclusion of the word inadvertently, as I thought the UIGEA specifically mentions poker. If so, then I suggest you delete "inadvertently" for accuracy.

2. "...UIGEA does not apply to Internet poker nationwide...": If my first point is correct, then your use of the word "apply" in this sentence is incorrect. Perhaps you should change "apply to" to "criminalize," inasmuch as this would be more accurate.

3. "...hearings on Internet gaming proved conclusively that...": I believe this is unneccessary hyperbole. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "...hearings on Internet gaming provided highly convincing expert testimony that..."

Again, thanks for all your hard work on these initiatives the past several months.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Now all we have to do is manage the little trick of getting a legislator to read the letter.

[/ QUOTE ]

As my 12 year old daugher would say;

"Good luck with that...."


D$D

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
Now all we have to do is manage the little trick of getting a legislator to read the letter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Try a color copy of a check for $xxx. Say, "this either goes to you if you support poker players of the US, or it goes to your opponnent irregardless of his/her position.

This works best for incumbants, but is ok for anyone running.

Tuff

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now all we have to do is manage the little trick of getting a legislator to read the letter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Try a color copy of a check for $xxx. Say, "this either goes to you if you support poker players of the US, or it goes to your opponnent irregardless of his/her position.

This works best for incumbants, but is ok for anyone running.

Tuff

[/ QUOTE ]

I sent KY Gov. Fletcher and Sen. McConnell color copies of my check to Beshear. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
Superb letter and terrific initiative!

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the compliment.

[ QUOTE ]
I have a few word-smithing suggestions.

1. "...right to play poker online was inadvertently restricted...": I don't understand your inclusion of the word inadvertently, as I thought the UIGEA specifically mentions poker. If so, then I suggest you delete "inadvertently" for accuracy.

2. "...UIGEA does not apply to Internet poker nationwide...": If my first point is correct, then your use of the word "apply" in this sentence is incorrect. Perhaps you should change "apply to" to "criminalize," inasmuch as this would be more accurate.

3. "...hearings on Internet gaming proved conclusively that...": I believe this is unneccessary hyperbole. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "...hearings on Internet gaming provided highly convincing expert testimony that..."

Again, thanks for all your hard work on these initiatives the past several months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the comments. I appreciate the points. As for points #1 and #2, UIGEA didn't mention poker by name, fortunately, so the letter is fine there. As for #3, I don't disagree with your comment, but the little bit of over-the-top hyperbole was an intentional attention grabber. We did own that hearing, so I thought we should crow about it a little.

[Chimpsmack]

[ QUOTE ]
I am proud to play it, and I do not believe there is any reason for the federal government to treat a poker game that individuals play against others online any differently than a Friday night poker game played around a kitchen table.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont want to be insulting, but imo anyone that reads this letter that isnt already on board the poker bandwagon will find that particular point silly. the friday night poker game is generally conducted among small groups of friends, while internet poker is a raked game, spread by businesses that use advertising and promotions to maximize profits, and taking place among a geographically separated group of people subject to varying local laws. ianal, but because of that i think many elected officials see such a clear line between home play and online gaming that the line i quoted may cause them to see you as a touch overzealous.

and while everything else in the letter stands on its own merit, when you need your letter to hit a homerun to even have an impact, it does not pay to have even a single point that makes someone say 'Well, now, wait a minute. Can't he/she see that..."

anyway, good luck whatever you decide and thanks for all the effort youre putting in on behalf of the game

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am proud to play it, and I do not believe there is any reason for the federal government to treat a poker game that individuals play against others online any differently than a Friday night poker game played around a kitchen table.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont want to be insulting, but imo anyone that reads this letter that isnt already on board the poker bandwagon will find that particular point silly. the friday night poker game is generally conducted among small groups of friends, while internet poker is a raked game, spread by businesses that use advertising and promotions to maximize profits, and taking place among a geographically separated group of people subject to varying local laws. ianal, but because of that i think many elected officials see such a clear line between home play and online gaming that the line i quoted may cause them to see you as a touch overzealous.

and while everything else in the letter stands on its own merit, when you need your letter to hit a homerun to even have an impact, it does not pay to have even a single point that makes someone say 'Well, now, wait a minute. Can't he/she see that..."

anyway, good luck whatever you decide and thanks for all the effort youre putting in on behalf of the game

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think "officials" will disagree with the letter’s premise that a social game and a game spread by a rake-profiting internet business are equivalent, what “clear line” shows their differences? The failure of the premise would affect almost “everything else in the letter”, IMHPO.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am proud to play it, and I do not believe there is any reason for the federal government to treat a poker game that individuals play against others online any differently than a Friday night poker game played around a kitchen table.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont want to be insulting, but imo anyone that reads this letter that isnt already on board the poker bandwagon will find that particular point silly. the friday night poker game is generally conducted among small groups of friends, while internet poker is a raked game, spread by businesses that use advertising and promotions to maximize profits, and taking place among a geographically separated group of people subject to varying local laws. ianal, but because of that i think many elected officials see such a clear line between home play and online gaming that the line i quoted may cause them to see you as a touch overzealous.

and while everything else in the letter stands on its own merit, when you need your letter to hit a homerun to even have an impact, it does not pay to have even a single point that makes someone say 'Well, now, wait a minute. Can't he/she see that..."

anyway, good luck whatever you decide and thanks for all the effort youre putting in on behalf of the game

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think "officials" will disagree with the letter’s premise that a social game and a game spread by a rake-profiting internet business are equivalent, what “clear line” shows their differences? The failure of the premise would affect almost “everything else in the letter”, IMHPO.

[/ QUOTE ]

And whether or not "officials" agree with it, it is stating the opinion of the writer, which is my opinion, and likely the opinion of the vast majority of PPA members. 800,000+ such opinions will hopefully start changing some "official" opinions.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am proud to play it, and I do not believe there is any reason for the federal government to treat a poker game that individuals play against others online any differently than a Friday night poker game played around a kitchen table.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont want to be insulting, but imo anyone that reads this letter that isnt already on board the poker bandwagon will find that particular point silly. the friday night poker game is generally conducted among small groups of friends, while internet poker is a raked game, spread by businesses that use advertising and promotions to maximize profits, and taking place among a geographically separated group of people subject to varying local laws. ianal, but because of that i think many elected officials see such a clear line between home play and online gaming that the line i quoted may cause them to see you as a touch overzealous.

and while everything else in the letter stands on its own merit, when you need your letter to hit a homerun to even have an impact, it does not pay to have even a single point that makes someone say 'Well, now, wait a minute. Can't he/she see that..."

anyway, good luck whatever you decide and thanks for all the effort youre putting in on behalf of the game

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think "officials" will disagree with the letter’s premise that a social game and a game spread by a rake-profiting internet business are equivalent, what “clear line” shows their differences? The failure of the premise would affect almost “everything else in the letter”, IMHPO.

[/ QUOTE ]

The birght line in the law seems to be operating a game for profit.

In many places you can hold a poker game with as many of your "friends" as you have space for to do so in. Once anyone makes any money from the operation of the game it is against the law.

The AZ AG even wrote an opinion that a bar can't host a free no buy-in tourney as they profit from the operation of the game indirectly from increased bar and food sales.

One AG went on to even deem illegal biker poker runs in some states becuase the chance of winning is determined by the use of playing cards, even if the main benificary of the event was a charity!


D$D