Please allow me to introduce myself

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
Bryan please keep in mind that the official stance of 2+2 does not necessarily reflect the views of a large portion of this community. I believe majority of the people here greatly appreciate the efforts of people like you and the PPA organization.

[/ QUOTE ]


I believe this to be a true statement.

[OldNantucker]

Mr. Malmuth - your post does not seem to convey a "neutral" stance towards PPA.
If you refuse to speak to Mr. Pappas, how will you ever reach agreement on some of your concerns?
PPA seems to be moving in right direction with 2+2 by hiring the Engineer and by starting a friendly dialogue with forum posters. Can't you meet them half way?

[TheEngineer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mason,

Nice to meet you,

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you won't be meeting me. I have refused to meet with John Pappas until these issues are cleaned up more and that refusal will apply to any officer of the PPA with the possible exception of former Senator D'Amato.

[ QUOTE ]
As I stated earlier, I am new here, so I don't really know what issues 2+2 may have with the PPA

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the sort of thing I find very frustrating. You should do your homework before you begin posting on a site like ours.

[ QUOTE ]
but I believe my presence here will hopefully begin to deal with some of those issues

[/ QUOTE ]

Based on conversations that I have had in the past with people who are far more important than you to your organization, your being here will have zero impact on these issues.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason,

Bryan joined PPA to help us with our fight. Many of us, including me, met him in D.C. and found him to be a good guy committed to the cause.

[canvasbck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mason,

Nice to meet you,

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you won't be meeting me. I have refused to meet with John Pappas until these issues are cleaned up more and that refusal will apply to any officer of the PPA with the possible exception of former Senator D'Amato.

[ QUOTE ]
As I stated earlier, I am new here, so I don't really know what issues 2+2 may have with the PPA

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the sort of thing I find very frustrating. You should do your homework before you begin posting on a site like ours.

[ QUOTE ]
but I believe my presence here will hopefully begin to deal with some of those issues

[/ QUOTE ]

Based on conversations that I have had in the past with people who are far more important than you to your organization, your being here will have zero impact on these issues.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, I am very disapointed in your attitude. I agree that the PPA has some conflicts of intrest in it's board, but Brian comes here in peace looking for common ground in our common fight and you come across as a pompas arse. I would hope that any new employee of the PPa should be welcomed here with open arms since he or she will be having direct dialog with real poker players, the same ones who purchase books from 2+2.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Brian comes here in peace looking for common ground in our common fight and you come across as a pompas arse. I would hope that any new employee of the PPa should be welcomed here with open arms since he or she will be having direct dialog with real poker players, the same ones who purchase books from 2+2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Be realistic and look at this issue from both sides.

The PPA comes here because their own forum is a joke. This forum and perhaps 3 or 4 others are the cheapest form of communication to the on-line poker world. Bryan comes here to better do his job.

Mason as one of the owners of this communication medium has some rights of ownership. Not all of his concerns are completely wacked out. There are some serious issues that will affect the future of on-line poker in the US that have not been addressed by the PPA. How they are addressed in future strategy will ultimately shape on-line poker for quite awhile.

Yes they should get together hold hands and sing Kumbyah for the good of all mankind. But each feel so far that the other's issues can be ignored. Or that at least is my take on it.

2+2 is a private company and has the right to choose who it serves like any other business. If 2+2 decides there are issues that require it to take a nominally netural stance in regards to the PPA, who are we to question 2+2?

Yes, my passion for fully legal and minimally regulated poker is perhaps as great as anyones who does not have a lot invested in its future. I have pledged to help the PPA to the best of my ability and for it to utilize whatever talents I have to further that goal.

But just as we have to be realistic in the political world we must be realistic in the business world of poker. Just because many of us are sick and tired of all the manuvering doesn't mean it will stop just because we wish it so.


D$D<--middle child nonsense again.

[Skallagrim]

Let me add my "Welcome" to the list PPABryan.

Let me also say please dont get too offended by MM's tone in his response to you. He always sounds that way, but then he usually ends up doing the right thing.

You will find extensive discussion in past threads about 2+2's official concerns about the PPA board. A handful of regular posters here have the same concerns.

Most of us do not, at least yet, have these concerns and are enthusiastic about the recent improvement in PPA activity. I hope you become a valuable contribution to that activity. You wont find a more intelligent discussion of the legal issues surrounding poker anywhere else on the internet than here in the 2+2 legislation forum. It why I post and read here regularly.

At some point, when we have had some success and are actually beginning to work on what legal, regulated online poker will look like, the issues relating to the membership of the PPA board, and their corresponding potential conflicts of interest, may become relevant. Until that time, I believe, as do most here, that there are far more important things to worry about, and far more important work to do.

First we have to get the momentum and votes for clear legal status. Thanks for your anticipated help with that, no matter what develops thereafter.

Skallagrim

[MayorHerb]

[ QUOTE ]

Mason,

For a world class poker mind you sure are coming off as a real jerk with this post.

Your fight with the PPA and their members does nothing to advance our interests. Even if this is how you feel, what is to be gained by your outward show of hostility?

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I wouldn't dare call Mason a jerk, but maybe "over the top". Hello Bryan. I hope there's help out there for the case in PA (having nothing to do with online).

[oldbookguy]

Let me say, welcome aboard, and may you help us in ways we have not even imagined yet.

As Robert Frost said, "I have miles to go before I sleep" and we too have miles to go before we rest from this fight for poker.


obg

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
Just so you know, the official 2+2 position concerning the PPA is neutral. It will not become positive until issues with your board are improved. This means that you can post here and interact with other forum posters, but you cannot solicit memberships or ask for money in any way.

Also, so there is no confusion as to exactly who you are, we also ask that you finish each post with your name and position with the PPA.

Mason Malmuth
Owner and Publisher
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
www.twoplustwo.com

[/ QUOTE ]

Does 2+2 publishing LLC have an "official" opinion on either the Wexler Bill or the Frank Bill???? I have not heard..

IMO there is no "neutral"...To me neutral is negative..When the reason in the make up of the Board and a "potential" conflict interest..This IMO is not "neutral" but clearly "negative"..

FWIW I fully support the PPA..I am yet to see evidence that the PPA is not working in and for "my" best interests..The PPA Fly-in IMO was a huge success a proof of the PPA intentions..

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO there is no "neutral"...To me neutral is negative..

[/ QUOTE ]

If we were negative, PPA representatives would not be allowed to post here.

MM