PPA should fire Annie Duke

[Skallagrim]

I work with people I dont personally like every day; if its good or necessary for my business, I put up with it and feel no need to mention it.

Whatever Annie's faults, to put her in the same league as the 1919 White Sox is way over the top.

She did a great job testifying, no question.

Leave the personal animosity outside of the cause, no one is asking you to socialize with her.

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

My point Skall, I am not against here in any way.

Those who are need to get over it.

I do hope the reply was not intended at my post, rather simply was the last post in line?

obg

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
I work with people I dont personally like every day; if its good or necessary for my business, I put up with it and feel no need to mention it.

Whatever Annie's faults, to put her in the same league as the 1919 White Sox is way over the top.

She did a great job testifying, no question.

Leave the personal animosity outside of the cause, no one is asking you to socialize with her.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone seems to be focusing on the one incident last year.
Daniel Negreanu has given many personal anecdotes of her BLATANTLY cheating.
HUNDREDS of posters here and on rgp have given personal anecdotes of her angle shooting, and THOUSANDS of posters posted condemning those actions. (feel free to use search engine)

The 1919 White Sox don't compare to Annie's compulsive problem imo.

I thought that by posting that I could drum up support to pressure the PPA into not being involved with Annie Duke. Obviously the posters of this subforum, or at least the ones trolling this post, are too starstruck to care about her credibility or how that might hurt our cause.

My mistake.

DN an AD

In case you missed it

Terrence's Nightmare

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]

I thought that by posting that I could drum up support to pressure the PPA into not being involved with Annie Duke. Obviously the posters of this subforum, or at least the ones trolling this post, are too starstruck to care about her credibility or how that might hurt our cause.

My mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not trolling nor starstruck.

The Chairman requested her personally. I personally didn't see her as the most persuasive speaker from the fly-in, I don't pimp the PPA.

All said I still totally disagree with your position on this issue. She was by all measures an effective witness. I can't stand Helmutt, but if he was effective I suport his use as well.

There are very few perfect allies in this world, none in politics.



D$D

[Skallagrim]

No, Emporer, you are the one who misses it.

Even if I agree (I dont know honestly) that AD is a despicable person and poker player, that does not mean that we should shun her when she is doing good work for all of us.

The idea that our opponents or members of congress would care even a small bit about AD's reputation in the poker community is laughable - most of them have no idea a poker community exists. The idea that they COULD try and use it against us is the only arguably legitimate point you have, but it too is minor compared to the other factors previously mentioned.

Consider: Larry Flynt is one of the most notorious pornographers out there, and his person life contains more than a small amount of human failings. Yet his defense of his parody of Jerry Falwell was one of the high points of free speech rights in the last 50 years.

By your logic the ACLU and other lovers of free speech should have distanced itself from Flynt and his case because of distaste for him personally and the fact that there are "better" representatives for the cause. If they (we) had done that, what fools we would like now.

You are asking us to make the obvious mistake of turning on an effective ally simply because (if you are correct) she is far from perfect in her personal/professional life.

Since when did being perfect become needed to represent a cause?

Ever heard the quote "let he who is without sin cast the first stone?"

And OBG, I guess I have to be more careful about using the "quick reply" option.

Skallagrim

[Emperor]

Thank you for educating me on the requirements to be an effective spokesperson. I guess this also translates to the current election.

Hillary's lack of credibility isn't deterring the liberal base.

Ron Paul's exceptional credibility isn't inspiring the conservative base.

Hijacking my own thread due to the fact that nobody cares about credibility.

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
Thank you for educating me on the requirements to be an effective spokesperson. I guess this also translates to the current election.

Hillary's lack of credibility isn't deterring the liberal base.

Ron Paul's exceptional credibility isn't inspiring the conservative base.

Hijacking my own thread due to the fact that nobody cares about credibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

Emperor,

As long as the members of that Congressional Committee find Annie credible that is all that matters. In war, a common phrase that is tossed around is "my enemy's enemy is my friend". That is the approach you need to take with Annie.

I have no idea about her conduct because I do not keep up with what the pros are doing. I only know that Congress is interested in her testimony so that is what counts. The fact that our opponents are not attacking Annie does speak volumes. (To be fair, maybe they realize that arguing that collusion can have any impact on the outcome in a supposed "game of chance" isn't in their best interest.)

[Skallagrim]

Would anyone disagree that Annie Duke is knowledgeable about the game of poker, how and where it is played, who plays it, and what is needed to preserve the freedom to play it? I dont think even Emporer would deny she has credibility on those points, and those are the points the committee was interested in. She also did pretty good on WTO questions, and "problem gambling" questions.

When they have a committee hearing on INTEGRITY in poker rather than the LEGALITY of poker, I will then investigate your claims to see if she has credibility as a spokesperson.

Skallagrim

[metsandfinsfan]

[ QUOTE ]
My mistake.

DN an AD

In case you missed it

Terrence's Nightmare

[/ QUOTE ]

all i see is stupid forum bs gossip ... there is not one shred of evidence that any of this is true

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I work with people I dont personally like every day; if its good or necessary for my business, I put up with it and feel no need to mention it.

Whatever Annie's faults, to put her in the same league as the 1919 White Sox is way over the top.

She did a great job testifying, no question.

Leave the personal animosity outside of the cause, no one is asking you to socialize with her.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone seems to be focusing on the one incident last year.
Daniel Negreanu has given many personal anecdotes of her BLATANTLY cheating.
HUNDREDS of posters here and on rgp have given personal anecdotes of her angle shooting, and THOUSANDS of posters posted condemning those actions. (feel free to use search engine)

The 1919 White Sox don't compare to Annie's compulsive problem imo.

I thought that by posting that I could drum up support to pressure the PPA into not being involved with Annie Duke. Obviously the posters of this subforum, or at least the ones trolling this post, are too starstruck to care about her credibility or how that might hurt our cause.

My mistake.

DN an AD

In case you missed it

Terrence's Nightmare

[/ QUOTE ]

TL;Dr do not care. She did a FANTASTIC JOB(volunteered her own time and received no payments) was personally asked to testify by a Congressmen that was so impressed by her he called for the Hearing....

Yeah what a terrible choice she was...I would like to hear OP opinion on who would've made a good choice because I am at a loss for what it take to satisfy some people..