Where's Our Statement

[malo]

The Publisher's Note is the statement? Looks like this got to it first:


[/ QUOTE ] (That cat looks like someone just told him how Bill Frist treats homeless kitties.)

Hope Mason didn't pay too much for a statement that includes "we will know more when the 270 days are up and the procedures required by the new law are written." Does one really need a lawyer to make that observation?

[iH8poker]

[ QUOTE ]

Hope Mason didn't pay too much for a statement that includes "we will know more when the 270 days are up and the procedures required by the new law are written." Does one really need a lawyer to make that observation?

[/ QUOTE ]
MM statement is at bottom. I would have put it in the other thread on MM statements but it is now locked, link MM Statements, as a moderator felt it was redundant. The Mr. Fabulous added, "You are only pointing out what we already know."
- The original goal was to compile all of MM statements in crono order...but then a pattern formed which solved the mystery of 'why no statement?' IMO. Of course, I would LOVE for MM to make a real statement (one that includes an action) and prove me wrong. Like him, I too am an optomist and would love to be disproven by him or quotes by him, but as others have tried, don't posts 'I think MM hasn't said...' without looking it up for yourself.
- If a quote is grossly taken out of context, I'm sure someone would have cited the original example and proved me wrong...especially a moderator. As when citing, "..." indicates words are left out, but a proper cite should convey the same meaning. Enjoy!

Below is the OP:
This is a summary of what Mason Malmuth has written in his: Where's our statement thread. I believe his opinion is very clear, read below:

Mason Malmuth 10/04/06 10:13 PM
- Pleasant up-lifting post. Promises updates. Says his lawyer "apologized for the delays" [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 04:29 AM
- Defends Frist, asserts "those who call Frist a Nazi...are much closer to being a real Nazi than Frist is."
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 04:36 AM
- Oh snap! "-...issuing a statement on behalf of your attorney after the bill has already been passed...which you say may not do any good...and which you do not know completely what it will cover. Help me to understand the motivation behind this.- The motivation is simple: We don't hide anything...Best wishes"
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 04:43 AM
- Downplays Republican involvement "...that is the way many bills are passed...the bill was approved by an overwhelming majority...it's very clear to me that there was virtually no one in our legislative...who was going to oppose it...Frist could argue, and correctly so, that there was no need to...waste time debating it when everyone was going to agree with it anyway...Best wishes"
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 04:49 AM
- Oh snap! "-I would be very interested in your plans and opinions- We don't plan to do anything. We don't have the capability...I wouldn't hold your breath...Best wishes"
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 04:55 AM
- "-many consider a "crisis" it is natural for people to look to their mentors for guidance. Thus far you and David have not been there- We haven't been there...it's not what we do...We're much better at how to play a poker hand...Don't expect anything else...best wishes"
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 05:03 AM
- Oh snap! "We're well aware that this bill can affect our business...we are on top of our market...that's what we do...Do you think we just print an infinite amount of books...? It doesn't work that way...Best wishes"
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 05:05 AM
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 05:13 AM
- "-it seems like a waste of your money and your lawyers time- It is a waste of money...and it is also a waste of our attorney's time since we can't accomplish anything anyway...Best wishes"

Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 12:10 AM
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 12:13 AM
- Pleasant, eludes that Republicans in office died fighting Hitler (apparently they came back from the dead).
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 12:15 AM
- "-Was your OP here sarcastic humor or not?- There was no humor in what I wrote. We do intend to get a statement up."
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 12:17 AM
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 12:24 AM
- "-What exactly is this statement covering? (I know tons of "statements" are needed...- I don't know...We rely on our attorney...The original statement was just suppose to address the Poker Player's Alliance. We have now asked him to include anything else that's appropriate...Part of the problem is that...His firm has...not yet analyzed the language in the bill...the procedures are not yet written...Best wishes"

Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 02:41 PM
- Discusses regulating forum
Mason Malmuth 10/05/06 02:49 PM
- Oh snap! "...we have a constitution...I support that, I'm not a thug and neither are the members of Congress...Best wishes"

To recap, he feels that he can't do anything (giving several excuses) and strongly defends Frist and other Republicans. Given this to be true, a statement that reads "We won't do anything. Vote Republican. PPA is worthless." would summarize his thoughts but could create negative feelings toward Mason Malmuth and his business. I believe he is waiting to either make a statement after the elections or will not make one at all, as his intentions are clear.

iH8poker
[ QUOTE ]
Just so everyone knows... some are saying this is his statement (the one we have been waiting for, lawyer approved):
Two Plus Two Internet Magazine, Vol. 2, No.11
- As I’m sure everyone here knows, Senator Frist managed to attach the anti-Internet gambling bill to another provision. The intention is to stop Internet gambling by Americans, and this of course includes poker. Since the passage and signing by President Bush, our website traffic has been up dramatically, and the one overwhelming question is: Will this bill be effective?
- Based on the reaction by the poker websites, what some gambling law authorities are saying, comments from our posters, and a little common sense, it’s my opinion that ending Internet poker as we currently know it is unlikely. That because it appears that there are too many ways to fund accounts, and it will be too expensive and time consuming for our banking institutions to stop them all.
- But I do expect, once the procedures are written, for it to be more difficult and cumbersome to get the funding to some of the sites. This won’t affect the regular players who will just get it done. But it may cause some potentially new players to not bother which in turn will cause shrinkage of the player pool, and that’s not good for our game in the long run.
- That’s my opinion. But I need to qualify it by stating that my opinion is not necessarily a good one since I’m not very knowledgeable in banking or legal matters. However, one thing is for sure. We will know much more when the 270 days are up and the procedures required by the new law are written. Since I’m an optimist by nature, my hope is for the best, and my expectation is certainly not for the worse.
Mason Malmuth
Publisher
Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

[/ QUOTE ]

[WhatDoesCallMean]

[ QUOTE ]
Just so everyone knows... some are saying this is his statement (the one we have been waiting for, lawyer approved):
Two Plus Two Internet Magazine, Vol. 2, No.11
- As I’m sure everyone here knows, Senator Frist managed to attach the anti-Internet gambling bill to another provision. The intention is to stop Internet gambling by Americans, and this of course includes poker. Since the passage and signing by President Bush, our website traffic has been up dramatically, and the one overwhelming question is: Will this bill be effective?
- Based on the reaction by the poker websites, what some gambling law authorities are saying, comments from our posters, and a little common sense, it’s my opinion that ending Internet poker as we currently know it is unlikely. That because it appears that there are too many ways to fund accounts, and it will be too expensive and time consuming for our banking institutions to stop them all.
- But I do expect, once the procedures are written, for it to be more difficult and cumbersome to get the funding to some of the sites. This won’t affect the regular players who will just get it done. But it may cause some potentially new players to not bother which in turn will cause shrinkage of the player pool, and that’s not good for our game in the long run.
- That’s my opinion. But I need to qualify it by stating that my opinion is not necessarily a good one since I’m not very knowledgeable in banking or legal matters. However, one thing is for sure. We will know much more when the 270 days are up and the procedures required by the new law are written. Since I’m an optimist by nature, my hope is for the best, and my expectation is certainly not for the worse.
Mason Malmuth
Publisher
Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

[/ QUOTE ]

i DO NOT believe this to be a statement that requires attorney approval.

if this is his statement, then he is more of a cowardly, obnoxious [censored] than i initially thought.

and just to put my opinion forward on the whole "why does he need to make a statement?" point - cos he said he was going to. simple as that.

if he wants to tell blatant lies to his band of happy followers, he can but at least he should now make a post saying that he has absolutely no intention of making a statement even though he started this monster of a thread by saying that it will be posted in the not too distant future.

guess his expert legal advice told him that the ban wasnt expected to hit book sales as much as initially thought [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[LadyWrestler]

LOL at this thread refusing to die! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Lawman007]

Mason Malmuth started this thread, and until he has posted his official, certified, attorney-approved, long-awaited statement HERE, then he has not made his statement and this thread will continue on. All of his other posts are not THE statement that he promised us.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason Malmuth started this thread, and until he has posted his official, certified, attorney-approved, long-awaited statement HERE, then he has not made his statement and this thread will continue on. All of his other posts are not THE statement that he promised us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is every statement of intended action a promise?

Is, I'm going to make a statement, the same as I promise to make a statement?

[Mickey Brausch]

When casinos (and not the political leadership) introduced 6:5 "blackjack", most of the blackjack experts went up in arms (metaphorically speaking). Some went as far as to initiate or agitate for write-in campaigns, boycotting, patron warning campaigns, etc. At the very least, they argued online or in various publications about the ignominy visited upon their "beloved game". At the very least, they engaged in or provoked heated but, at the same time, most educational and helpful debates. I've seen the same thing happen on other occasions as well, e.g. cheating and impunity on Indian reservations, California gambling inititatives, etc etc. What's so different about poker?

One would have expected, at the very least, a succinct commentary from the poker experts and owners of this website on the recent anti-gambling legislation. While politics might not indeed be their forte, or their preferred field of activities, the debate of ideas certainly seems to be.

Such experts (eg on SMP) can proffer commentary, insights and fighting words on the existence of God or gamma rays across galaxies but have little to say on the wave of restrictive policies in the U.S.?

Considering our experts' willingness to often take up contrarian views, and quite bravely sometimes, this is mystifying.

Mickey Brausch

[poker12]

Just checking back in on this thread to see if it was dead yet. Nope, still alive.

[abarber]

bump for Mason

[ProsperousOne]

I'll wait to bump this until it's been off the top of the list for a month... oops too late. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

But Since it's bumped, why and where did Mason (and I assume Miller and Sklansky) say he doesn't support the PPA?