PPA Update.

[coachkf]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you have clearly mis-represented what we did and our attitude towards the PPA. I believe, because of our initial work, the PPA did improve.

Also, Bolcerek was on here soliciting members/money and refused to tell us when asked how the money was being spent, who the lobbyist were, what their goals were, etc. You need to understand that we at Two Plus Two are a serious organization that is willing to spend our own money when necessary to do what's best for poker and to protect our members. We do this at no charge to you.

On a side note, even though our current position towards the PPA is neutral, I would like to see a representative of their organization come on here and answer questions in a serious and professional manner. This didn't happen before which is one of the reasons there was difficulty. But, as far as we are concerned, there is no reason it can't happen now.

Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't prove it, obviously, but if you had polled this legislation forum when the PPA was posting here, I believe the overwhelming opinion would have been that 2p2 held a negative view of the PPA, not neutral.

I think it's very safe to say that PPA has attempted to engage this forum in the past and were met with ridicule and mistrust. Not saying those aren't justified. End result was their going elsewhere though, to places that were more accepting.

I'd love to see them have a rep over here too, answering questions. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes though. Their resume would need to include "responds well to endless criticism in a positive manner."

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you have clearly mis-represented what we did and our attitude towards the PPA. I believe, because of our initial work, the PPA did improve.

Also, Bolcerek was on here soliciting members/money and refused to tell us when asked how the money was being spent, who the lobbyist were, what their goals were, etc. You need to understand that we at Two Plus Two are a serious organization that is willing to spend our own money when necessary to do what's best for poker and to protect our members. We do this at no charge to you.

On a side note, even though our current position towards the PPA is neutral, I would like to see a representative of their organization come on here and answer questions in a serious and professional manner. This didn't happen before which is one of the reasons there was difficulty. But, as far as we are concerned, there is no reason it can't happen now.

Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't prove it, obviously, but if you had polled this legislation forum when the PPA was posting here, I believe the overwhelming opinion would have been that 2p2 held a negative view of the PPA, not neutral.

I think it's very safe to say that PPA has attempted to engage this forum in the past and were met with ridicule and mistrust. Not saying those aren't justified. End result was their going elsewhere though, to places that were more accepting.

I'd love to see them have a rep over here too, answering questions. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes though. Their resume would need to include "responds well to endless criticism in a positive manner."

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets see, the POKER PLAYER'S ALLIANCE refuses to talk with players. Refuses to reveal its funding, activities, officers, and methods. Oh yeah, and does nothing but hang out at SF bars on our dime. We don't want to criticize but when we see nothing but obfuscation and inaction, wtf do you expect? We want to not be negative, we want to be active and positive. But the PPA hitched its wagon to a non player base.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
Take a deep breath.
.
.

Lets see, the POKER PLAYER'S ALLIANCE refuses to talk with players. They talked to me. Refuses to reveal its funding, $20 x 600,000? activities, I think John laid out their activities reasonably well in interview. officers, Well, you know who the president is. and methods. Uh, behind the scenes lobbying and trying to get our point heard by those who might help us?

..

..

Wierd rant follows..
.

Oh yeah, and does nothing but hang out at SF bars on our dime. We don't want to criticize but when we see nothing but obfuscation and inaction, wtf do you expect? We want to not be negative, we want to be active and positive. But the PPA hitched its wagon to a non player base.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure what you want unless it is a personal briefing every day by John Pappas.

Tuff

[Legislurker]

Exactly what I said I wanted. Get Mason's endorsement. Be open. Be active grassroots-wise. Get Mason's endorsement. The fact it hasn't come yet means they obviously haven't changed their ways enough. I said I want to be approached as a RANK and FILE member on a regular basis with what is going on. I think fact and prevailing opinion(here) is that behind the scenes lobbying is not enough and that we need mobilization and organization first. Im not ranting, Im laying out why I and I think many others are wholly dissatisfied with the PPA. Come clean and transparent, and start actually working with you hundreds of thousands(supposedly) members to make noise. Get Mason's endorsement.

[Cactus Jack]

I took the PPA to task on my radio show. I can't figure out why they have never bothered to recruit players in card rooms. Truthfully, there are a lot of things that the PPA has either done wrong, not done, or could have done better. It started out trying to be Macy's through garage sales. There has been little professional about it.

Getting support from 2+2 would go a long way. Getting support from the AARP would be better. Getting an agreement with the DNC would be best of all.

Are any of those things going to happen?

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
I took the PPA to task on my radio show. I can't figure out why they have never bothered to recruit players in card rooms. Truthfully, there are a lot of things that the PPA has either done wrong, not done, or could have done better. It started out trying to be Macy's through garage sales. There has been little professional about it.

Getting support from 2+2 would go a long way. Getting support from the AARP would be better. Getting an agreement with the DNC would be best of all.

Are any of those things going to happen?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Thats been a pet idea of mine a long time. Recruit in the card rooms. Recruit in the bar leagues. The AARP is a good idea. Im not sure their view on this at all. Would be a good approach. The DNC we may have problems. A lot of higher ups in the Dems are just as whacky far out religious types as the Republicans, but we should be there. I think thats a battle we could win for support. The PPA should not stop at internet poker. At one point they had the stated goal of making all home games everywhere legal. After that who knows? Stopping anti-competitive rake-upping behavior from the rooms. But how ca they go hat in hand to beg for endorsements when they can't even get the most important poker constituency out there, 2p2, to endorse them.

[Mason Malmuth]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's very safe to say that PPA has attempted to engage this forum in the past and were met with ridicule and mistrust. Not saying those aren't justified. End result was their going elsewhere though, to places that were more accepting.


[/ QUOTE ]

No kidding. We had our attorney's report posted here for several months and it was very negative. We only took it down after we saw some improvements.

As to whether there are places more accepting or not, it doesn't really matter. This is where most people on the Internet who are interested in this subject come to exchange information.

If the PPA has an official representative come on here who is willing to engage in legitimate dialogue, something that Bolcerek refused to do, then I and Mat Sklansky, along with our moderators, will make sure they are treated in a professional manner.

Mason Malmuth

[coachkf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's very safe to say that PPA has attempted to engage this forum in the past and were met with ridicule and mistrust. Not saying those aren't justified. End result was their going elsewhere though, to places that were more accepting.


[/ QUOTE ]
...
As to whether there are places more accepting or not, it doesn't really matter. This is where most people on the Internet who are interested in this subject come to exchange information.

...

Mason Malmuth

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's true, then we've really got no hope. Except for infrequent upheavals brought on by major events (UIGEA, Neteller, etc.), this particular subforum stays pretty dormant.

Thankfully there are many other places where folks are talking on this topic. 2p2 is just one of many I frequent, though I do consider this the best place by far to keep up to speed.

It's my humble opinion that PPA does not feel it needs 2p2 support. If they needed it, they wouldn't have deserted this forum.

Shook the dust off their feet and moved on, I suppose.

[Hock_]

[ QUOTE ]
exempt poker tournaments, as the sponsor is not betting or wagering,

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't read the rest of this thread, or many of the others lately, but I want to point out that the limitation in the quoted sentence to tournaments is unnecessary and counterproductive. Maybe this point has been made before, but just in case it hasn't this is really important:

The point -- which was actually made to me by a former colleague of mine who just happens to have been an Assistant US Attorney General -- is that poker sites do not "accept wagers". Unlike sports bookies, poker sites do not take one side of a wager such that their profit depends on the outcome of the game. Poker sites simply charge a fee for use of their services, completely independent of the outcome of any hand.

Like I said, sorry if this is redundant.

[Cactus Jack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's very safe to say that PPA has attempted to engage this forum in the past and were met with ridicule and mistrust. Not saying those aren't justified. End result was their going elsewhere though, to places that were more accepting.


[/ QUOTE ]
...
As to whether there are places more accepting or not, it doesn't really matter. This is where most people on the Internet who are interested in this subject come to exchange information.

...

Mason Malmuth

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's true, then we've really got no hope. Except for infrequent upheavals brought on by major events (UIGEA, Neteller, etc.), this particular subforum stays pretty dormant.

Thankfully there are many other places where folks are talking on this topic. 2p2 is just one of many I frequent, though I do consider this the best place by far to keep up to speed.

It's my humble opinion that PPA does not feel it needs 2p2 support. If they needed it, they wouldn't have deserted this forum.

Shook the dust off their feet and moved on, I suppose.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true, and I don't doubt that it is, then there's another mistake Bolcerek made. The PPA doesn't need 2+2, only the people here. As Mason said, who is more dedicated to playing poker than 2+2 members? How many more intelligent, educated and well-read?

Many of us thought the PPA was a joke, in the beginning. Like Blutarsky shouting let's go and running off, then looking back when no one followed. Perhaps they're moving in the right direction, now. A gigantic step in that would be a small but important step. Being here.