|
|
#11
12-13-2006, 11:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
[ QUOTE ]
Who gives a rats azz if 2+2 supports the PPA or not? People can read the threads and decide for themselves. It is not like membership is going to shoot up to a million if mighty 2+2 doesn't endorse it. Mason can endorse anything he wants. [/ QUOTE ] While I'm sure Mason thinks his endorsement could move mountains, I agree, 2+2 is only a very small peice of the pie and whether they endorse the PPA or not is no big deal. But, I do think putting out a half ass due diligence report that clearly does nothing to help the efforts is BS, to say the least. 
|
|
#12
12-13-2006, 11:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] "PPA does nothing" "PPA is a scam" Time to put this [censored] to rest, this is just another example that they are out there fighting for us. They may not be the best at communicating to their members and followers but the facts are this, THEY ARE THE ONLY ORGANIZATION CURRENTLY WORKING FOR OUR CAUSE! It is time for 2 + 2 to take whatever beef it has w/ bolcerek / PPA and put it behind because they are the only ones fighting for our cause right now. 2 + 2 not endorsing the PPA is a huge dissapointment. Name one other organization working for us? [/ QUOTE ] Exactly. Has two plus two gone to Washington and actually tried talking some sense into congressmen? No. All they do is sit back and critizice everyone who tries to do anything. Two plus two is a joke just created to sell books and everyone in the poker community who isn't a two plus two lapdog knows it. [/ QUOTE ] Why are you hear again?
|
|
#14
12-13-2006, 02:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
[ QUOTE ]
Very good, he did well. Whenever I hear this "what about the gambling addicts?!?!" argument I want to [censored] puke. [/ QUOTE ] Do you often get this feeling whilst not playing poker? :-)
|
|
#15
12-13-2006, 03:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
[ QUOTE ]
I agree, 2+2 is only a very small peice of the pie and whether they endorse the PPA or not is no big deal. [/ QUOTE ] If it was no big deal, you wouldn't be harping on this issue, now would you? It is important to remember that while Mason recently posted the statement from his lawyer... Mason, along with many others on 2+2ers have been asking for the items PPA is ***"refusing"*** to make available, for MANY months... This REFUSAL was made quite clear to 2+2 directly by the PPA President, in his posts here on 2+2, to date! To be honest... given the fact that the PPA President has posted on 2+2 in the past... and has been made aware of Mason's post... and has been asked to respond... His lack of response, at this point, is a true tell!!! At this point, I would settle for even something as simple as... "Our lawyers are reviewing the statement, and we will respond shortly".
|
|
#16
12-13-2006, 05:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
The PPA is looking into how to respond, which probably could include some type of defamation claim.
The PPA has given probably in excess of $500k in lobbying efforts on behalf of poker players, and this is what they get in return from 2+2? I wouldn't repond either. I honestly think 2+2 will be the one who looks bad in the end.
|
|
#17
12-13-2006, 05:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
[ QUOTE ]
The PPA is looking into how to respond, which probably could include some type of defamation claim. The PPA has given probably in excess of $500k in lobbying efforts on behalf of poker players, and this is what they get in return from 2+2? I wouldn't repond either. I honestly think 2+2 will be the one who looks bad in the end. [/ QUOTE ] Wait... now you are saying that PPA is in some way defamed, because 2+2 can't endorse them? (Now it seems you are saying that the value of a 2+2 endorsement must be really high) I seriously suggest you reread the statement... As I said before... the PPA can only be judged on its own actions... and if its not important enough for the PPA President to get on here and respond... then it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that the PPA has no interest in representing the poker players that read and post on 2+2.
|
|
#19
12-13-2006, 07:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The PPA is looking into how to respond, which probably could include some type of defamation claim. The PPA has given probably in excess of $500k in lobbying efforts on behalf of poker players, and this is what they get in return from 2+2? I wouldn't repond either. I honestly think 2+2 will be the one who looks bad in the end. [/ QUOTE ] Wait... now you are saying that PPA is in some way defamed, because 2+2 can't endorse them? (Now it seems you are saying that the value of a 2+2 endorsement must be really high) I seriously suggest you reread the statement... As I said before... the PPA can only be judged on its own actions... and if its not important enough for the PPA President to get on here and respond... then it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that the PPA has no interest in representing the poker players that read and post on 2+2. [/ QUOTE ] There's no need for me to continue to argue with someone who works for 2+2. You opinion is obviously bias. There's a big difference between not endorsing the PPA and posting a letter that clearly tries to question the integrity of an organzation who's given hundreds of thousands of dollars on behalf of poker players. Has 2+2 been on TV defending poker? Has 2+2 given one dime to help the cause of poker? My company has been on CBS, funded lobbying efforts, and other things. Again, what has 2+2 done? I think 2+2 posters should be asking this question. The fight for poker will go on, with or without 2+2.
|
|
#20
12-13-2006, 07:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PPA President on Bloomberg
We did some research and were able to determine that you are a poster, KKSuited, who was previously banned for spamming Bluff Magazine and insults. That ban was and is forever.
Mason Malmuth Publisher Two Plus Two Publisher LLC
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
