What I Would Like to See From the PPA (and 2+2)

[BluffTHIS!]

I realize that the past couple months I have been mostly critical of the PPA for various reasons that have been discussed ad nauseum in other threads. Plus as well Mason/2+2 have similarly voiced concerns that mainly have to do with issues of transparency. But I really do wish for the PPA to succeed, and I really don't want those of us currently dissatisfied with them to have to try to surmount the great difficulties involved in setting up a similar organization, especially as that will obviously dilute or even confuse our joint message. So I am going to make some proposals here, which I hope are viewed positively by all, as to how I believe the PPA can change itself to be the organization we all want and can support 100%.


1) State clearly that the PPA represents and is accountable to its larger membership and organize the board to reflect same.

This doesn't mean that there isn't some commonality of interests with online sites and advertising media, but it does mean that they aren't the primary stakeholders. And when I say "state clearly" here or later, I don't just mean in a post in this forum, but on the website and in promotional literature.

The board needs to be pruned and expanded so that it doesn't look as it does now, like just a collection of poker players who have backing/endorsement contracts from major online poker sites and writers for CP magazine. This doesn't mean that people in those organizations don't have a place, but just that since they clearly represent certain vested interests in the gaming industry, that there should be a sufficient number of other directors who not only aren't beholden to such interests, but also can give the board the wider representation and wealth of expert competency that it needs. Thus IMO at least half the board should not be seen to represent the interests that the current one does, and surely some of the state directors would be good individuals to be on the main board.


2) Transparency

a) Be fully transparent as to organizational structure and finances

This shouldn't really be an issue, but apparently is. Of course full transparency means just sticking the names of all current board members, paid staff and lobbyists on the website, and a reasonbably detailed income/expense report on a quarterly basis. Sure you can get criticized for spending too much on office supplies or someone's salary, but that goes with the territory.

b) Be fully transparent as to political strategy (i.e. get a carve-out), while keeping specific tactics/contacts secret (i.e. what congressmen to contact re same)

We don't expect the PPA to divulge lobbying contacts, but we do expect the overall strategy to be discussed, especially with a wider range of knowledgeable and competent individuals (see more below).


3) Make a clear statment of the PPA's *full* set of goals and general tactics

a) Clear statement of overall goals

This should be something like:

"The goals of the PPA are to educate and inform the players in the political process about the interests of the poker playing American public, and to work at both the national and state levels for legalization and expansion of legal poker games in both B&M and online venues, with "appropriate" regulation and taxation. While the poker players the PPA represents do not oppose other forms of gambling like casino and sports betting, they are not tied to any initiatives to legalize same, and believe that poker as a skill and community game that has a notable place in American history, should be considered and treated differently from those other forms."

This means that the PPA will not tie itself to the business models of any online poker sites, whether those currently servicing the US market or those that have exited, and that it will also push for legal intra-state online poker as well, especially with the creation of multi-state player pools as is done with lotteries, and that it will not *publicly* ally itself with initiatives to legalize online sports or casino betting.

b) State level initiatives

The PPA should target a handful of the largest states that are most conducive to legalizing poker, or at least which have larger populations of poker players like New York and Texas, with an eye to legalizing not just B&M poker, but also intra-state online poker, and provide expert assistance to its state organizations there to achieve those goals. Expert assistance would include helping to craft model constitutional ammendments and legislation for poker in the targeted states, and providing expert public relations assistance with promoting same. The examples of just a couple such states legalizing poker could have a ripple effect and also help greatly the national legislative initiatives by keeping poker in the public spotlight and leading other states to conclude that they are missing out on additional tax revenue that could be had. What should be the goal regarding B&M poker at the state levels is California style mostly un-regulated cardrooms, instead of poker being dependant on casinos which care more about their -EV house games like slots.

c) General tactics for national and state initiatives

I) Promote poker as a skill game, albeit one with a strong element of chance
II) Emphasize that just as citizens are free to spend their money on other "non-productive" entertainment activities and luxury shopping, that they should be free to do so as well by playing poker.
III) Support a study to craft a model regulatory/taxation model for national legalization of online poker



4) Recruit from this forum expert volunteers for advisory panels

It *should* be clear to the PPA and all here, that there are many posters with expertise in the law and politics and lobbying, as well as in the gaming industry, and that this forum could thus provide a valuable resource of volunteer advice and counsel to the PPA board. Naturally a lot of this would need to be private, and in line with what I suggest below, could be given in private forums not freely accessible on the internet. There could easily be a legislation strategy panel, a political lobbying panel, and a public relations panel, each chaired by a board member. The PPA doesn't have a big staff and is always under funding pressure, but I have no doubt that members of the 2+2 forums would be willing to volunteer to provide extremely valuable private advice on an ongoing basis.


5) Reorganize/expand the PPA's website

a) Take forums private

The current PPA forum is a wasteland and gets virtually zero traffic and posting. It should be eliminated and taken to a private forum for the board and the members of the advisory panels to discuss issues and strategy privately, while this 2+2 forum can be easily be utilized as a general discussion forum for issues of relevance regarding the efforts of the PPA that don't need to be kept private.

b) Provide a comprehensive information resource for state organizations, friendly legislators and the media

The PPA site already has some of this, but it should be expanded so that any PPA state organization, friendly legislators, or the media, can quickly download professional looking PDF documents about the PPA, why poker should be legalized, and what is needed in various targeted states to achieve state goals, like model legislation and regulation for same. When you get that legislator willing to sponsor a bill or attach a rider, he should be able to find what he needs to argue for same, and possibly even state specific model langugae that was pre-crafted by volunteer attorneys in that state and who are PPA members.


6) Find a new paradigm of fundraising not tied to online sites

The PPA simply cannot allow its funding to be tied to the willingness or ability of online sites to provide avenues for same, although of course such is welcomed. Too great a dependance on those sites or poker publications risks being tied to the business models of those corporations which many times will be at variance with all the goals expressed here. A wider mix of fundraising methods needs to be found as in charity tourneys, promoting recurring donations from members and such. Again this doesn't mean eschewing help from the online sites, just not relying on them to faciltate the majority of fundraising.



7) Regularly communicate with 2+2 readers in this forum

Although of course the PPA is communicating with its membership on its site and via its blog, the members with the most to contribute in the way of providing ideas for strategy, both national and state, will likely be found here. The readers of these forums represent some of the most motivated members of the PPA who can be organized on short notice for letter/email/phone campaigns, but they have to feel like their advice and input is important to the PPA for them to be so willing to help when there is an urgent need to do so. In line with the suggestions for volunteer advisory panels to assist the PPA, one of same or a board member could be delegated as the official representative to 2+2 and liason for same with the board, since the PPA president obviously will have demands on his time that don't make regular reading and response here as feasible as it would be for a delegated representative.




What 2+2 can do

I don't speak for Mason, but I am moderately certain that he would agree with most if not all of the above proposals, and that if he saw them implemented he would support the PPA and recommend it to the readers of these forums as deserving of their support, both financially and otherwise. Many posters of the past few months have thought that 2+2 should do much more, because of these forums' status as the premier poker forum on the net, and because 2+2 obviously benefits financially from online players who buy many of 2+2's books. However as Mason has pointed out, 2+2's core competence isn't in the political arena, and he has had many concerns about the PPA regarding transparency issues.

If all of those issues are resolved, and the PPA were to implement the proposals above and Mason approved of same, then there is something I think 2+2 could easily do to show its support. And that is to make this forum, the legislation forum, a PPA sponsored forum, but freely to them instead of requiring that they pay for same as do other advertisers. Thus at the top of this specific forum, could be a line "This forum sponsored by the Poker Player's Alliance" and a line underneath: "If you would like to donate to support the efforts of the PPA, you can visit their website here." This would cost 2+2 nothing and would be a way to provide a visible link to their site and induce posters to donate to help fund the efforts of the PPA. I would think, again given that the PPA addresses the issues raised here and in other threads in a manner largely satisfactory according to Mason's judgement, that Mason and 2+2 would like to support the PPA and the interests of its posters in such a fashion.



So I would hope that the PPA and their supporters who are less critical than myself and others find these suggestions constructive and that the PPA seeks to implement something similar at the earliest opportunity. Such an implementation of all of them in a clear manner will be proof that they are a spokesman for the interests of American poker players, and not offshore poker sites and the media they advertise in.

[poorolrich]

Wow! After all the negative crap you received from your last post you are asking for it again. That being said, I basically agree with you.

[LesJ]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow! After all the negative crap you received from your last post you are asking for it again. That being said, I basically agree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff's post was far from negative here. He presented several possible positive action steps that could conceivably help the PPA as well as the population of online poker players. I will say that at least a couple of these ideas/concepts are already in play in one form or another.

Thanks,

Les

[demon102]

ciff notes?

[dlk9s]

[ QUOTE ]
ciff notes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read the section headings.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I will say that at least a couple of these ideas/concepts are already in play in one form or another.


[/ QUOTE ]


Les,

Regarding the items on the list I gave, I believe that if the ones regarding the makeup of the board and the creation of advisory panels were implemented, that most posters here who have often been critical, would be willing to trust them a lot more about other things because they would be seen as getting a wide range of competent advice, and also not being tied too closely to vested online interests which just leads to members rightly questioning whose interests the PPA primarily serve.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I will say that at least a couple of these ideas/concepts are already in play in one form or another.


[/ QUOTE ]


Les,

Can you comment further on the above remark?

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Bluff:

They are definitely in play since we are now communicating some of the same to the appropriate people since our meeting Monday with our attorneys. I haven't heard directly from Mark Tratos (who represents us) so I don't know if the exact communications have actually taken place as of this moment.

Best wishes,
Mason

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will say that at least a couple of these ideas/concepts are already in play in one form or another.


[/ QUOTE ]


Les,

Can you comment further on the above remark?

[/ QUOTE ]


Les,

You still around? I would still be interested in your answering the above question.



Note to other posters: this thread got sidetracked a little with discussions of whom should be on the PPA board. Please make comments on that in the other thread: How the PPA's board should be composed

[LesJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will say that at least a couple of these ideas/concepts are already in play in one form or another.


[/ QUOTE ]


Les,

Can you comment further on the above remark?

[/ QUOTE ]


Les,

You still around? I would still be interested in your answering the above question.



Note to other posters: this thread got sidetracked a little with discussions of whom should be on the PPA board. Please make comments on that in the other thread: How the PPA's board should be composed

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff,

I guess I missed that post a few days ago. I apologize. I will post in this thread as well as your "Board of Directors" thread before I head off to bed tonight.

I guess the biggest area I am knowledgable about at this point that I know is being worked on is Point #5 "5) Reorganize/expand the PPA's website."

In 5-A, you suggest that the PPA take their forums private so that the "board and the members of the advisory panels to discuss issues and strategy privately." When the State Directors were put in place, we began testing a forum thru "People Aggregator." There is a forum dedicated to just the State Directors and PPA leadership which will hopefully be used for just the type of thing you suggested.

There is also a forum and blog for each State Director to run. It is our duty as State Directors to keep our blogs and forums updated. It is planned to incorporate this network into the main PPA site in the coming months, but there seem to be some issues with the functionality of the site to work out, imho. As soon as I finish these posts, I am going to fire off an email to Randy Lau, who seems to be my main point of contact with the PPA, to share some of my concerns with this network as it exists right now.

You also state that the current PPA forum is a "wasteland" and should be eliminated. It is lightly used right now, but is also difficult to even find. I will suggest that when links to these "state specific" forums go up, that they are much more prominent on the site, to increase traffic, input, and potential volunteerism.

"5-b) Provide a comprehensive information resource for state organizations, friendly legislators and the media"

I know that a State Director "Starter Kit" is in the works right now to provide us with standardized material and talking points to share with other poker players, legistlators and the media.

Thanks for your input, Bluff. You have several good ideas that will definetly be passed on.

Les