Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Legislation

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 03-03-2007, 08:13 AM
Richas Richas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 484
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

Nice post, I pretty much agree.

One area I think that is missing is really local activities to give the PPA a local presence. Public opinion needs to be influenced and the best way to do this is to have a vocal active membership base with some visibility, local activities, fundraising and charity events. Essentially nice respectable members influencing their friends and colleagues and seeking out local media opportunities. How hard is it really to get poker players to meet and even play poker live together?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-05-2007, 06:04 PM
BluffTHIS! BluffTHIS! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: I can hold my breath longer than the Boob
Posts: 10,311
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

Richas,

I agree that local activities are a great way to get some positive PR. However in most jurisdictions you will have the catch-22 of wanting to host a tourney to benefit charity and raise awareness of efforts to legalize poker but not being able to precisely because of restrictive gaming laws. In a big enough metro area I guess you could try to get a local players association to do other things to raise money for charity or do some public work, but it would seem hard to get all but the most committed hard-core members to go along with that.

With all the college age members of 2+2 here, perhaps a good way to draw attention to poker would be to try to host a debate on gaming legislation on campuses and get media attention for same, and put emphasis on the hypocrisy of both favoring some forms of gambling over others, and of disfavoring poker while favoring other entertainment activities which also have a potential of addiction in a small portion of persons engaging in those activities (like compulsive shopping).
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-05-2007, 08:58 PM
Richas Richas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 484
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

I agree bluff. Starting with campus organisations is a good idea. As for the charity events I was thinking more of members organising them for charities they already support, sucking in people who would not normally play but using tables and chips used by the local PPA organisation, you could even have PPA members helping out as coaches/trainers for the non players sucked in by the charity ethos (wearing the T shirt obviously).

I understand that in some states this may fall foul of the law but the US has a long and proud tradition of civil disobedience, I do not understand why this freedom is not worth defying the law for (so long as people understand the consequences).

Yes it is hard work to engage with others, including non poker players, but that is how to influence public opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-05-2007, 11:08 PM
*TT* *TT* is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vehicle Chooser For Life!
Posts: 17,198
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

BluffThis: I fully support your proposal. But I do ask that you continue to push hard to have anyone that has a conflict of interest removed from the board of directors. As an example Jan Fischer and Linda Johnson are fine representatives of the poker industry and from what little I know wonderful people, however they are not representatives of poker players.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-06-2007, 04:10 AM
Mason Malmuth Mason Malmuth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 5,654
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

[ QUOTE ]
But I do ask that you continue to push hard to have anyone that has a conflict of interest removed from the board of directors.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi TT:

That's our position as well. It will be very difficult for us to support the PPA until this is resolved.

Best wishes,
Mason
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-06-2007, 06:26 AM
Richas Richas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: On the learning curve
Posts: 484
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I do ask that you continue to push hard to have anyone that has a conflict of interest removed from the board of directors.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi TT:

That's our position as well. It will be very difficult for us to support the PPA until this is resolved.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

For clarity are you asking for no industry representation or a majority of "player" representatives? I would have thought that the later - with an elected board would be sufficient.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-06-2007, 10:07 AM
BluffTHIS! BluffTHIS! is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: I can hold my breath longer than the Boob
Posts: 10,311
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I do ask that you continue to push hard to have anyone that has a conflict of interest removed from the board of directors.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi TT:

That's our position as well. It will be very difficult for us to support the PPA until this is resolved.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

For clarity are you asking for no industry representation or a majority of "player" representatives? I would have thought that the later - with an elected board would be sufficient.

[/ QUOTE ]


TT & Mason,

I agree with Richas here. Although any industry reprentatives are going to be subject to a conflict of interest, I think the strictest standard of only accepting player reps on a board totally elected by members is not necessary or feasible. This is as long as those reps are clearly being named as such, consitute a minority of the board, and also don't have direct conflicts to do with other forms of gambling, like online sports or casinos companies. I don't want such industry interests to dominate the PPA, but I also don't think that they shouldn't have any place at the table. This is especially the case as a lot of the members of the PPA would probably vote for such persons who have a lot of name recognition.

However as noted above, those persons need to clearly state who they are representing, instead of trying to maintain the fiction that a writer for CP magazine isn't a representative of CP. Thus I would think Allyson Jaffrey Schulman, who is also an attorney, would be a legitimate member of the board, as she does have something to contribute, and also will clearly be seen as a rep of CP, and thus indirectly the sites that advertise with them.

The reality is that the PPA would most likely not be able to conduct elections for members of its board from its total membership, as only a small majority of same would actually be interested enough to vote or assign a proxy. A system where the board is partially self-chosen for a minority of the board, and the rest elected by state chapters by region or something similar, is probably going to the best that is practical.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-06-2007, 11:57 AM
hollaballa hollaballa is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 131
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

I don't think having a completely independent board is going to be possible or do I think it is necessary.

You also have to consider that with now "free" membership, and the hiring of a major lobbyist, someone besides poker players is footing the bill for all of this.

If pokerstars is pumping in a bunch of money, they are going to have more say than a vote of the memebership or whatever.

I think because of the money it will take to make something happen, that's how it's going to have to be.

I personally do not care how it works as long as poker gets a carve out.

I think if anyone has a problem with the board and not liking the fact that they can't do anything about it, then they should form another organization.

I think people are getting to hung up in whether this is a lobbying group for players or for people in the poker business. Both have the same goal, so why does it matter.

Do "players" feel the big pokersites are going to somehow get a bill passed that is bad for players? That's the only reason I could think of that makes a difference.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-06-2007, 12:56 PM
*TT* *TT* is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vehicle Chooser For Life!
Posts: 17,198
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

[ QUOTE ]
However as noted above, those persons need to clearly state who they are representing, instead of trying to maintain the fiction that a writer for CP magazine isn't a representative of CP. Thus I would think Allyson Jaffrey Schulman, who is also an attorney, would be a legitimate member of the board, as she does have something to contribute, and also will clearly be seen as a rep of CP, and thus indirectly the sites that advertise with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Allyson Jaffrey Schulman seems to have more conflicts on interest than the other board members I previously mentioned. Her business is not to further the needs of poker players, she is there to further the business of Card Player. Lets be honest, without the online poker room industry Card Player loses over 3/4's of its advertising revenue, at this point it's operations may be in jeopardy (I don't claim to have insider knowledge, my statement is only an assumption based on my extensive knowledge of the publishing and poker industries). Her statements and articles to date make her appear to be a bad person to represent the PPA, she is taking a myopic approach to the issue which will backfire in the eyes of congressmen. To borrow a broken campaign promise, we need a uniter not a divider - Allyson Jaffrey Schulman comes across as the ultimate divider for this cause. Now this doesnt mean that her intentions are not good, nor does it mean I dislike her or her opinions; but it does mean her unique position does not make her the proper representative of the Poker PLAYERS Organization. If the PPA choses to change it's name to the Online Poker Room Lobbying Organization and change its mission to protecting the rights of Online Poker Rooms to operate in the USA then she would make an ideal board member, her mission would therefore match perfectly. As it currently stands, I see a conflict of interest. This is my opinion, hopefully my opinion will be shared by others.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-06-2007, 01:18 PM
KotOD KotOD is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Born to lose, destined to fail
Posts: 1,656
Default Re: What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

So who do you people want to sit on this board? Your reasoning has become so skewed that it's like you're arguing for the sake of arguing. "Look at me! I'm doing cool stuff over here!"

Most well-known professionals already have some endorsement deal with some site. Would putting them on the board be a conflict? Mason obviously can't sit on the board - he's got way too many vested interests.

So who sits on this board? Random 30/60 B&M geezer? Random $100 HU SNG 22 year old college dropout?

Put together your ideal, sayyyyy, 12 person board.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.