*********To All CEO Poker Tour Participants******

[doublejoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Behold the power of 2+2.

There is strength in numbers.

I'd like to say thanks to Stephen for stepping up and following through. It looks like things are heading in a direction that will forever change the CEO Poker Tour.

Has anyone been in touch with the PPA to see if they can help in this matter? Sounds like this is a fight they need to be involved in. If this doesn't met the criteria of protecting Poker players; I don't know what will.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understood from the PPA thread that they are no longer pursuing the matter... Is this correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

the fact that this wasnt what was said at all and this is what you took from it worries me.

[/ QUOTE ]

just wrote and email to the Board stating that we need to either help the players who are going after the CEO PT, or we need to walk away from the whole thing (as opposed to our earlier published position of working with the CEO PT).

There is no doubt that helping the players correlates with our goals in the PPA. The internal question for the Board to decide is whether we should expend some of our resources on this issue, or instead spend those resources on something else that we think would be more helpful to the poker community.

I hope you will all understand this should the PPA choose not to actively get involved going forward.

Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

Sorry i missed the "should" in his last sentence. If you read it quickly it sounds like he is saying they have higher priorities

[stephenNUTS]

If the PPA turns their heads the other way after recruiting(again suckers like me),then ANY organization related to The Poker Players best interests are all worthless entities that put their "name" players on the Board of Directors,but get NOTHING accomplished..............sorta' like my Wall Street days!

Its one big game in the grand scheme of things!

[kaiser773]

If you're using "obligation" to mean being legally compelled to cover legal fees, I disagree. There's no legal mechanism that would create such an obligation.

If you're using "obligation" in a blackmail sense -- that the PPA should cover legal fees out of fear that otherwise they'd be sued on some theory of participation in the fraudulent activity, you're looking at a tough sell. I don't see how you'd be able to prove the elements required to claim PPA liability.

If you're using "obligation" to say that they should cover legal costs as a way of furthering the organization's mission, I can't agree there either. It's clear that the main purpose of the PPA (at least right now) is lobbying Congress to legalize internet poker. While Stephen's legal pursuit is a worthy cause, it doesn't seem like the PPA should be the party litigating it.

You could also argue that the PPA should pay the legal fees to protect its name, for fear that it would look bad due to whatever level of association it had with CEO Poker Tour. This seems like the most valid approach, but I still wouldn't agree. The amount of money spent in private litigation here could be large, especially relevant to the amount that could possibly be recovered (thus, inefficient way to spend the money, unless you're one of the lawyers litigating the case). It seems like it would be a better approach to have the relevant government body (such as the U.S. attorney in Nevada, or one of the other locales where a CEO Poker tournament was held) to do the grunt work. After they've proved criminal liability, it becomes much easier to prove the civil liability.

[Humble Pie]

[ QUOTE ]
Awwww SNAP


[/ QUOTE ]

[doublejoker]

Whatever happenned with their first offer of $100 to all venetian main event participants.....

[doublejoker]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're using "obligation" to mean being legally compelled to cover legal fees, I disagree. There's no legal mechanism that would create such an obligation.

If you're using "obligation" in a blackmail sense -- that the PPA should cover legal fees out of fear that otherwise they'd be sued on some theory of participation in the fraudulent activity, you're looking at a tough sell. I don't see how you'd be able to prove the elements required to claim PPA liability.

If you're using "obligation" to say that they should cover legal costs as a way of furthering the organization's mission, I can't agree there either. It's clear that the main purpose of the PPA (at least right now) is lobbying Congress to legalize internet poker. While Stephen's legal pursuit is a worthy cause, it doesn't seem like the PPA should be the party litigating it.

You could also argue that the PPA should pay the legal fees to protect its name, for fear that it would look bad due to whatever level of association it had with CEO Poker Tour. This seems like the most valid approach, but I still wouldn't agree. The amount of money spent in private litigation here could be large, especially relevant to the amount that could possibly be recovered (thus, inefficient way to spend the money, unless you're one of the lawyers litigating the case). It seems like it would be a better approach to have the relevant government body (such as the U.S. attorney in Nevada, or one of the other locales where a CEO Poker tournament was held) to do the grunt work. After they've proved criminal liability, it becomes much easier to prove the civil liability.

[/ QUOTE ]

The PPA was one of the chief sponsors of the CEO Poker tour itself according to the press release they put out....

[Nroz]

[ QUOTE ]
Whatever happenned with their first offer of $100 to all venetian main event participants.....

[/ QUOTE ]

They are probably still writing up a waiver to go with it. blah blah blah you accept this $100 payment as full settlement of any claims you may have blah blah.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

[ QUOTE ]
The PPA was one of the chief sponsors of the CEO Poker tour itself according to the press release they put out....

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the press release in front of me, but I sure hope that it really wasn't worded that way. The PPA never was a sponsor of the CEO Poker Tour, or a sponsor of any outside entity. The main reason the PPA got involved with teh CEO PT was just to get their help in raising members by having advertising present at CEO PT events. At least, that is my present understanding. If our relationship with the CEO PT was more than that, I was unaware of it.

Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[stephenNUTS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The PPA was one of the chief sponsors of the CEO Poker tour itself according to the press release they put out....

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the press release in front of me, but I sure hope that it really wasn't worded that way. The PPA never was a sponsor of the CEO Poker Tour, or a sponsor of any outside entity. The main reason the PPA got involved with teh CEO PT was just to get their help in raising members by having advertising present at CEO PT events. At least, that is my present understanding. If our relationship with the CEO PT was more than that, I was unaware of it.

Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Greg,based on that response and your ignoring my request to contact me for HELP, "the PPA did get involved just to get their help in raising members by having advertising" ............the way I see it, the PPA IS INVOLVED!

Sorry if you dont agree ,but it seems like abit of back-peddling to me?
~stephen feraca

I am STILL waiting for Greg,or ANYONE else fro the PPA to respond,and in fact if they dont take a stand here in my/OUR defense in an obviously questionable tournament structue/payout,I really dont know what they are worth,nor good for in the first place anyway!

[RickOSU]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The PPA was one of the chief sponsors of the CEO Poker tour itself according to the press release they put out....

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the press release in front of me, but I sure hope that it really wasn't worded that way. The PPA never was a sponsor of the CEO Poker Tour, or a sponsor of any outside entity. The main reason the PPA got involved with teh CEO PT was just to get their help in raising members by having advertising present at CEO PT events. At least, that is my present understanding. If our relationship with the CEO PT was more than that, I was unaware of it.

Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Greg,based on that response and your ignoring my request to contact me for HELP, "the PPA did get involved just to get their help in raising members by having advertising" ............the way I see it, the PPA IS INVOLVED!

Sorry if you dont agree ,but it seems like abit of back-peddling to me?
~stephen feraca

I am STILL waiting for Greg,or ANYONE else fro the PPA to respond,and in fact if they dont take a stand here in my/OUR defense in an obviously questionable tournament structue/payout,I really dont know what they are worth,nor good for in the first place anyway!

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree. Greg, the PPA needs to take action.
Not standing up against the scum at CEO Poker would be a crime at best. This goes against everything the PPA stands for.