Does the PPA need 2+2?

[Berge20]

Bluff this returned from his self-exile in true form in another thread, but I felt it warranted additional discussion on its own.

His post is below and my basic question is, does the PPA need 2+2 to succeed?

[ QUOTE ]
I've been absent for a while but I'm back, and would like to comment on this situation. Mason's position and the thoughts of various posters were detailed in the other thread, but let's summarize the situation. Mason has a neutral at best position on the PPA and won't change to positive unless issues dealing with the conflicted interests on the board, and with transparency, are first addressed in a satisfactory manner. BUT in the meantime, he is perfectly willing to let the PPA be discussed, and for official reps of same to post here as well, with no censorship of their views even when they differ from Mason's. All he has required is that those official reps like Mr. Pappas and Bryan be so identified, and that board members of the PPA be as well. That's not really a lot to ask for unlimited and uncensored access to these forums, which brings together the largest body of poker players on the net.

And again, all the Engineer has to do to address his own concerns is simply add to the PPA board member note that he is speaking his own views and not acting in that instance as an official spokesman.

"PPA board member speaking his own private viewpoints and not necessarily those of the PPA" - or someting similar.

It might be tedious, but the Engineer could simply cut & paste a standard such ending or even use an AHK script. Super easy.

I hope the Engineer doesn't get hung up on this and even if he disagrees with the demand, views it as worth complying with in order to help continue advance the work of the PPA as he has so ably done in this forum.



Now I have something to say to the rest of you professing outrage. You are the ones who by your refusal to take seriously important problems with the PPA (which admittedly are getting better though after two years of misteps and failure) who are hurting the cause we have. Instead of working to try to get two or so board members to resign (*without* first voting on their replacements), and then the newly constituted board to deal with the transparency issue, you make every excuse and sweep every criticism under the rug.

Sure you might say you understand, but how does that understanding translate into action? Have even one of you emailed Ms. Schulman asking her to resign and take one other affiliate farm interest board member with her? Or have you emailed Greg Fossilman Raymer to ask him to broker such resignations for the good of the PPA? Instead of always criticizing Mason or those other of us who have expressed concerns in the past about the PPA, why can't YOU try to do something to address these concerns instead of just demanding everyone ignore same and kowtow to the PPA *in its current state*?

And here's the main issue in all this. Either this forum and 2p2 in general (and Mason's positive endorsement) is very important to the success of the PPA or it's not. If not, then why waste words arguing against Mason's actions and the viewpoints of some of us who share his concerns? Just move on.

BUT if 2p2 is important, as I believe it is, because it has the ability like no other place on the net or in the B&M world to bring together the largest mass of poker players who can be induced to act in concert for our cause by the great efforts of posters like TheEngineer, then I would submit that you should spend as much effort seeking to remove the concerns some of us have, as you do in criticizing us. That means as I said above contacting relevant board members and asking them to resign for the good of the PPA. And it means taking seriously the board and transparency issues, which you *should* given headsup Berge gave us to the Politico article which shows our foes are trying to capitalize in typical political fashion on *any* perceived negative to deflect attention away from our arguments which they can't rebut.

Even if you think that Mason and others like myself are totally wrong, motivated in part by personal animus or whatever, the bottom line *if 2p2 is important to the PPA's success* is that you need to work on addressing those long term criticisms so that we have an internal unity, and a lack of conflicted or tainted interests that can be used against our cause by our foes.

[/ QUOTE ]

[JPFisher55]

I'm sorry but I do not have any facts or other information to suggest that any members of the board of directors of the PPA need to resign. I am a full member of the PPA and quite satisfied with its board of directors.
I am not sure that the PPA needs 2+2 to succeed. In addition, it is possible that, in time, Mason's position may cost him readership on these forums and some business.

[BluffTHIS!]

JPF,

Read the last part of my quoted post above about even if you think we're wrong. Perception is often more important in politics than facts.

And how exactly does the PPA not need 2p2? Do they have a forum of their own with *viable* traffic? No. Do they have any other venue where they can quickly reach thousands of member poker players who are willing to act? No. At least not if the alternative is a mass email that isn't able to target the most active of their membership. Does the PPA have any other place where there are industry and politics insiders and knowledgeable attorneys whose brains can be picked? Not that I'm aware of.

I suggest that if you and others are going to take a "I'm not sure" position in response to Berge's question, that you should instead quantify that. 2p2 has to be important on a scale of 1 to 10. When you know precisely where on that scale 2p2 is, then you know also how much effort and accomodation should be made to the concerns of posters on 2p2 and Mason himself.

And tell me something else. Even if you don't personally have a problem with the PPA board being dominated by online affiliate farm interests who cannot benefit from, and thus are less likely to see the PPA help promote, certain forms of poker like intra-state and B&M, would you if you were one of those board members be willing to resign for the good of the PPA? The higher up the scale of importance of 2p2 to the PPA, then the more willing you *should* be to do so.

[Cactus Jack]

This is absurd.

This is like what's left over from Ivory's 99 44/100% pure fighting about who's more important. The truth is neither are more important in the grand scheme of things.

The vast majority of the poker playing population--the 99 and 44/100%--do not know about either the PPA or 2+2. Do you understand that??? 2+2 is important to SOME online poker players--among the ones still playing--but totally unimportant to the ones who WOULD BE PLAYING if the PPA is successful. 2+2 is important to us, but the rest of the world could give a fat rat's derierre.

I'm a supporter of 2+2, but I'm in the same position here as I was before the invasion of Iraq. I can't criticise without being considered a Communist. Well, at the risk of offending some people I'd rather not, I'm going to anyway...

This is totally and utterly ridiculous and I'm appalled!

C'mon, Mason, gimme a break. While you may have good reasons in your own mind, in the minds of your customers you're out of your mind. Frankly, 2+2 did nothing before the passage of the UIGEA to prevent it, to educate poker players, and has since done nothing to repeal it. You've sold a bunch of books. You haven't done what the PPA is at least trying to do.

In my eyes, the PPA is the one who's gaining respect, while 2+2 is losing it. You are, simply, wrong. (and sadly unlikely to change your mind.)

So, in conclusion, I believe in this case, 2+2 needs the PPA much more than the PPA needs 2+2. If the PPA fails, there's nothing to take it's place, the market shrinks further, and you sell fewer books over time. Duh. The PPA has made it this far without 2+2 at all. The only thing to come out of 2+2 which has been of great help to the PPA is The Engineer, if that's a true statement at all.

Stop this nonsense before it hurts us further. And stop acting like Democrats. Sheesh.

CJ--a member of the Democratic Party and as such, his views should be taken as the policy of the Democratic Party.

[Lostit]

I think this is a great question.

I think the PPA DOES need 2+2.
I also think 2+2 needs the PPA.

2+2 provides a congregating place for all things that a poker player cares about. Poker instruction, like minded conversation, news, etc. There are many reasons to come to this site. As a result it provides an organization like the PPA, an easy place to communicate with many people who are concerned with their cause. In fact there probably is no greater concentration of these people than what 2+2 provides. As a result, I say the PPA needs 2+2.

In the last year however, we've all seen how much our passtime (and income) can be threatened by legislation. 2+2 provides a great place to comizerate (sp?) and cry together, but what good does that do? We've got a few posters who come up with great ideas and make great leaders (The Engineer), and can stir people to action on a certain level, but we need more than that. We need political action. We need people with political ties like Al D'Amato. We need fly-ins to Washington DC. We need someone to set up a grass roots structure by designating a representative for each state to track events and coordinate efforts there. I haven't seen that on 2+2 but I do see it from the PPA.

The PPA may have issues, I get that. Something is better than nothing.

If we get no political action, the forces against us remain unchecked in the political arena, the poker community will dwindle as it won't be worth it to fight hard just to play poker in a contracting rock garden. It won't be profitable, and it won't be worth the effort just for some fun.

The PPA needs 2+2 for the people they provide. 2+2 needs the PPA to keep fighting in the politcal arena so that there is a reason for 2+2's people to keep coming back.

One last thing, specifically for Mason. We've got a ton of threads on the whole Engineer thing and I see both sides, fine, enough on that. Please be careful with someone who has motivated so many of us to do things that we wouldn't have otherwise done. I appreciate the board, and all the hard work that goes into this place. But for all of us who have been writing letters, making phone calls, and getting politically involved for the benefit of all poker players, it was the Engineer who caused most of that. Not 2+2. Not You. Work with this man to keep him here, show him the respect he deserves, because while you may make a profit off this site, he did it all for free, for the good of the game, and accomplished amazing things. Lets not drive those people away. We need them now more than ever. Perhaps at this point in time, more than 2+2 or the PPA.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
The vast majority of the poker playing population--the 99 and 44/100%--do not know about either the PPA or 2+2. Do you understand that???

[/ QUOTE ]


And do YOU not understand that isn't what is important? The statistic that *is important*, is what percentage of active, letter writing and phone calling members of the PPA are also 2p2'ers. And where is the place most likely to induce more members to such active measures. This is the same as in politics where it's not just registered voters, but those most likely to in fact vote, who are the most sought after.

[Kraize]

[censored] 2+2.

I don't post here often but I do read the legislation board every day and do the things asked of us by TE in his weekly action threads.

This situation is complete BS and I won't be visiting this site or buying anymore 2+2 books.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[censored] 2+2.

I don't post here often but I do read the legislation board every day and do the things asked of us by TE in his weekly action threads.

This situation is complete BS and I won't be visiting this site or buying anymore 2+2 books.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm curious whether you are also mad at the CP mag and affiliate farm board members of the PPA who could resign but won't because of either their vested interests tied to only certain forms of online poker, or their animus against 2p2? Will you also be boycotting CP magazine and urging your friends not to sign with affiliates advertised on their website?

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
I'm curious whether you are also mad at the CP mag and affiliate farm board members of the PPA who could resign but won't because of either their vested interests tied to only certain forms of online poker, or their animus against 2p2? Will you also be boycotting CP magazine and urging your friends not to sign with affiliates advertised on their website?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff This,

Please go back into hibernation where ever you were.

PPA has done more for MY poker interests in a week than you have EVER.

Nobody but nobody cares a fig what you think.

Tuff

[VP$IP]

Let's see. We have crummy laws that make it difficult for many people to fund their poker accounts, and there is a major online cheating scandal. Meanwhile, many of the people here are on Tilt, playing Russian Roulette, and we are eating our young.