Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Poker Legislation & PPA Discussion hosted by Rich Muny Discussions of various poker-related laws and steps players can take to push for better laws.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-31-2011, 04:02 AM   #176
Rich Muny
Poker Players Alliance VP
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: ***Only a PPA post if so stated***
Posts: 26,300
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st:

Let's start contacting mainstream media companies to tell them to increase their coverage of our important issue. Let's start with Fox News and go from there. Contact info:
Recurring actions we can take:
  • Let's continue to own a lot of Facebook pages (senators, Congressmen, Congressional committees, etc.):
    • The House Financial Services Committee's Facebook page is here.
    • Let's get some posts on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce page (here)
    • The Dept. of Justice's page is here.
    • Senators' FB pages: Senator Facebook Listing
    • We need lots of posts on the issue of poker and lots of "liking" of pro-poker comments.
Thanks!
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 05:11 AM   #177
kikadell
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kikadell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 9,913
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

If I may add a few things to TE's post, lets not forget there are other networks than Fox

MSNBC's contact form http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10285339/
CNN's contact form http://edition.cnn.com/feedback/tips/newstips.html
kikadell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 08:30 AM   #178
Shotglass
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 54
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 15th

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
Today's plan:

Email the House Financial Services Committee to request a hearing on HR 1174: http://financialservices.house.gov/C...ontactForm.htm. Full committee contact info is at http://www.contactingthecongress.org...=&commcode=hfs.
Evryone might want to be carefull about getting behind HR 1174 as quickly as they have been. If you take the time to actually read the bill (what a novel idea) then you'll notice a few REALLY BAD things:

here's some cliffs:

It does not clarify the issue of whether poker is a game of chance or skill and continues to use the definition of bet from the UIGEA of 2006, which leaves the same loophole that is currently in the UIGEA but attempts to close that loophole in a different way.

It prevents the use of credit cards for payments but does not adress debit or check cards.

It states that any gambling site that did not immediately pull out of the US market when the UIGEA was passed is NOT eligable for licensing.

It has some vague qualification requirements for licensing, such as "must be in good financial and legal standing, and of good character, honesty, and integrity" but does not clarify what is good character.

It requires that all US facing gambling sites are majority conrolled by US persons, that their buisinesses are in easily accessible locations for audits, but nullifies the first part if overruled by the World Trade Organization arbitration.

Enacts taxes on both players (must be collected at time of payout) and gambling sites.

Requires the development of datasets on player behavior.

Makes violations of the sites' TOS that can be considered cheating a felony with up to 5 years in prison.

Establishes programs to protect underage and vulnerable persons as well as an excluded persons list. There's a self exclusion list which you may remove yourself from and then there is an "not authorized" list which keeps you from playing EVER, if you wind up on this list. The "not authorized" list isn't only by your choise, the gov can place you on it for multiple reasons, including back taxes and child support. Any one on any exclusion list that is found to be gambling will forfeit ALL winnings to the general fund of the treasury.

And requires a study on preventing impaired gambling.


Because this thing does NOT clarify the poker issue, I urge everyone to contact their representatives to voice their opinions. I also urge every member of the PPA to contact the alliance and tell them to quit blowing smoke up our asses and to get POKER defined and legalized, not just gambling.

If anyone is interested in a complete rundown of this monstrosity, then just ask.

Last edited by Shotglass; 05-31-2011 at 08:36 AM.
Shotglass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 09:18 AM   #179
repulse
veteran
 
repulse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 3,066
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 15th

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotglass View Post
...Enacts taxes on both players (must be collected at time of payout) and gambling sites.
Just to clarify, no new taxes on the player are enacted, just withholding. Players will owe the same income tax on their poker as they always have, they will just have to deal with the inconveniences of withholding as they go.

Summary sounds about right otherwise, though it's been a while since I looked at the details of this bill.
repulse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 09:23 AM   #180
PokerXanadu
Commander X-2
 
PokerXanadu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,356
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 15th

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotglass View Post
Evryone might want to be carefull about getting behind HR 1174 as quickly as they have been. If you take the time to actually read the bill (what a novel idea) then you'll notice a few REALLY BAD things:

here's some cliffs:..
You are WAY, WAY behind on all the extensive discussions there have been on this bill (and its iteration last Congressional session as HR 2267). Besides blatant mistakes in your post (e.g., the bill does not enact any taxes on players; it only specifies that withholding rules apply to online equally as to live - which for poker only means tournament winnings of 5K or more are subject to withholding if they player doesn't provide a SSN), you have missed the whole point of supporting HR 1174 now:

It doesn't matter what the bill says right now. We all know that it has deficiencies (like the ones you stated, and more), but it is the only one right now that would accomplish licensing of Ipoker. If you write Congresscritters opposing the provisions of the bill and asking them to change it or oppose it in its current form, all the Congresscritter gets out of that is one constituent marked down as opposing a bill for Ipoker. It doesn't correct the issues or get recognized as "I support Ipoker but want changes to this bill."

We pretty much know that this bill won't get through in its current form. Any federal bill that advances will be Ipoker only (HR 1174 is for licensing of all Igambling) in the first place. And any bill that advances will see severe changes from the current form of HR 1174.

The point of expressing support for HR 1174 now is that you are expressing support for federal licensing and regulation of Ipoker. To do anything else is equivalent to expressing opposition to federal licensing of Ipoker.

We will soon have federal bills introduced in the House and the Senate that are strictly for Ipoker licensing. We can then switch to expressing support for those bills by number. In the meantime, getting up on a soapbox (from out of the hinterlands as a new, uninformed, 2+2 poster) to oppose HR 1174 is simply damaging to our cause.

Edit: Here are some posts you should read, minimally, to get informed:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...95&postcount=2
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...97&postcount=3
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...highlight=list

Last edited by PokerXanadu; 05-31-2011 at 09:31 AM.
PokerXanadu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 09:30 AM   #181
Ricepaw1226
Pooh-Bah
 
Ricepaw1226's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,987
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

word up
Ricepaw1226 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 09:43 AM   #182
72winner
adept
 
72winner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,076
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Regardless of 1174 it sounds like Barton from TX will drop a new bill specific to poker. Seems like that would be a good focus.
72winner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 11:10 AM   #183
Go Get It
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Posts: 11,249
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

This could be the first week of our chance at legalizing online poker. Please let Barton's bill be good.
Go Get It is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 12:42 PM   #184
schlucky1
veteran
 
schlucky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Daily Action Plan
Posts: 2,837
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

TE, did you start a new topic on the Fox News FB page? If not, fire that thing up so we can get cracking on it.
schlucky1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 12:53 PM   #185
Shotglass
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 54
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 15th

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerXanadu View Post
You are WAY, WAY behind on all the extensive discussions there have been on this bill (and its iteration last Congressional session as HR 2267). Besides blatant mistakes in your post (e.g., the bill does not enact any taxes on players; it only specifies that withholding rules apply to online equally as to live - which for poker only means tournament winnings of 5K or more are subject to withholding if they player doesn't provide a SSN), you have missed the whole point of supporting HR 1174 now:

It doesn't matter what the bill says right now. We all know that it has deficiencies (like the ones you stated, and more), but it is the only one right now that would accomplish licensing of Ipoker. If you write Congresscritters opposing the provisions of the bill and asking them to change it or oppose it in its current form, all the Congresscritter gets out of that is one constituent marked down as opposing a bill for Ipoker. It doesn't correct the issues or get recognized as "I support Ipoker but want changes to this bill."

We pretty much know that this bill won't get through in its current form. Any federal bill that advances will be Ipoker only (HR 1174 is for licensing of all Igambling) in the first place. And any bill that advances will see severe changes from the current form of HR 1174.

The point of expressing support for HR 1174 now is that you are expressing support for federal licensing and regulation of Ipoker. To do anything else is equivalent to expressing opposition to federal licensing of Ipoker.

We will soon have federal bills introduced in the House and the Senate that are strictly for Ipoker licensing. We can then switch to expressing support for those bills by number. In the meantime, getting up on a soapbox (from out of the hinterlands as a new, uninformed, 2+2 poster) to oppose HR 1174 is simply damaging to our cause.

Edit: Here are some posts you should read, minimally, to get informed:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...95&postcount=2
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...97&postcount=3
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...highlight=list
I agree with most of what you state in your post, especially showing support for regulation, but not all of it. Since you go and accuse me of making blatant mistakes show me some proof because I've got some for you:

You tell everyone in your post:http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...95&postcount=2 that the current sites will be eligable for licensing under the current itteration of this bill when in fact the bill states this:

5383( d)(3)UNSUITABLE FOR LICENSING- An applicant or any other person may not be determined to be suitable for licensing within the meaning of this subchapter if the applicant or such person--

(E) has, on or after the date of the enactment of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006--

‘(i) knowingly participated in, or should have known they were participating in, any illegal Internet gambling activity, including the taking of an illegal Internet wager, the payment of winnings on an illegal Internet wager, the promotion through advertising of any illegal Internet gambling Web site or service, or the collection of any payments to an entity operating an illegal Internet gambling Web site; or

‘(ii) knowingly been owned, operated, managed, or employed by, or should have known they were owned, operated, managed, or employed by, any person who was knowingly participating in, or should have known they were participating in, any illegal Internet gambling activity, including the taking of an illegal Internet wager, the payment of winnings on an illegal Internet wager, the promotion through advertising of any illegal Internet gambling Web site or service, or the collection of any payments to an entity operating an illegal Internet gambling Web site;
While it may be true that once the definition of poker as a game of skill is finalized then the current US facing sites may be eligable for licensing, as this bill stands now, they will not.

There are a few other misleading statements in your reply and since I can show you facts using the wording from the bill on all of my claims then why don't you show me some sort of proof about yours using the same: direct wording from the bill.

Edit: But you are right on this: It would be much better if people contacted the PPA and got them to work on getting the bill reworded than for them to contact their congressmen directly about it.

Show support to congress and get the PPA to fix it.

Last edited by Shotglass; 05-31-2011 at 01:08 PM.
Shotglass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 01:07 PM   #186
PokerXanadu
Commander X-2
 
PokerXanadu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,356
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 15th

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotglass View Post
I agree with most of what you state in your post, especially showing support for regulation, but not all of it. Since you go and accuse me of making blatant mistakes show me some proof becuase I've got some for you:

You tell everyone in your post:http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...95&postcount=2 that the current sites will be eligable for licensing under the current itteration of this bill when in fact the bill states this:

5383( d)(3)UNSUITABLE FOR LICENSING- An applicant or any other person may not be determined to be suitable for licensing within the meaning of this subchapter if the applicant or such person--

(E) has, on or after the date of the enactment of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006--

‘(i) knowingly participated in, or should have known they were participating in, any illegal Internet gambling activity, including the taking of an illegal Internet wager, the payment of winnings on an illegal Internet wager, the promotion through advertising of any illegal Internet gambling Web site or service, or the collection of any payments to an entity operating an illegal Internet gambling Web site; or

‘(ii) knowingly been owned, operated, managed, or employed by, or should have known they were owned, operated, managed, or employed by, any person who was knowingly participating in, or should have known they were participating in, any illegal Internet gambling activity, including the taking of an illegal Internet wager, the payment of winnings on an illegal Internet wager, the promotion through advertising of any illegal Internet gambling Web site or service, or the collection of any payments to an entity operating an illegal Internet gambling Web site;
While it may be true that once the definition of poker as a game of skill is finalized then the current US facing sites may be eligable for licensing, as this bill stands now, they will not.

There are a few other misleading statements in your reply and since I can show you facts using the wording from the bill on all of my claims then why don't you show me some sort of proof about yours using the same: direct wording from the bill.
I don't want to start nitting it up about the wording of the provisions of HR 1174, as this bill will be irrelevant very soon anyway. Just take my other point: Opposing HR 1174 now will be read by Congresscritters as general opposition to licensing Ipoker.

And, when the new bills come out, let's not hear the cacophony of "we have to oppose this bill because it says..." That's not the way to accomplish what we want in American politics. We have to support the bill, but lobby for the changes we want. It's a long process of committee hearings, amendments, votes, etc. before a bill gets close to a final vote. There will be plenty of opportunities to get changes to the bill (even after passage during development of the regulations), and a real opportunity to reverse course and oppose the bill when it makes it to that final vote if the bill isn't good enough at that point to support it.
PokerXanadu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 01:12 PM   #187
Shotglass
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 54
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 15th

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerXanadu View Post
I don't want to start nitting it up about the wording of the provisions of HR 1174, as this bill will be irrelevant very soon anyway. Just take my other point: Opposing HR 1174 now will be read by Congresscritters as general opposition to licensing Ipoker.

And, when the new bills come out, let's not hear the cacophony of "we have to oppose this bill because it says..." That's not the way to accomplish what we want in American politics. We have to support the bill, but lobby for the changes we want. It's a long process of committee hearings, amendments, votes, etc. before a bill gets close to a final vote. There will be plenty of opportunities to get changes to the bill (even after passage during development of the regulations), and a real opportunity to reverse course and oppose the bill when it makes it to that final vote if the bill isn't good enough at that point to support it.
I can agree with that.
Shotglass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 02:11 PM   #188
72winner
adept
 
72winner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,076
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 15th

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotglass View Post
I can agree with that.
Look at it this way.

Flop may be lousy, but he's looking to float it for a steal later when the better bill hits the board.






If we limp now (or fold) they'll REALLY see weakness will think we're in hands with air.
72winner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 02:46 PM   #189
Rich Muny
Poker Players Alliance VP
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: ***Only a PPA post if so stated***
Posts: 26,300
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kikadell View Post
If I may add a few things to TE's post, lets not forget there are other networks than Fox

MSNBC's contact form http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10285339/
CNN's contact form http://edition.cnn.com/feedback/tips/newstips.html
True. We'll get more networks in future actions.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 03:18 PM   #190
Thew92
Lone Star Advocate
 
Thew92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 498
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?ui...35&topic=63062
Thew92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 03:50 PM   #191
demon102
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
demon102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,259
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thew92 View Post
I posted on this and on the Fox sunday FB page and sent a letter to them.





TE have you updated all the other threads in forums like NVG and Internet poker? After Im done on this page Ill bump then with ur post on this page if you havnt.


Keep up the good work everyone!! Thanks TE.



edit: nevermind looks like you already did it...
demon102 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 04:04 PM   #192
efficacy
veteran
 
efficacy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: bloggin
Posts: 3,477
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st:

Let's start contacting mainstream media companies to tell them to increase their coverage of our important issue. Let's start with Fox News and go from there. Contact info:
Just wrote messages to all these, plus about ten of the individual news programs. Many of my emails to the ind. shows bounced because their inboxes are full. -_-
efficacy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 08:51 PM   #193
IntenseDawg
centurion
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 178
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Got a reply back from a congressman

"Dear Alan:



Thank you for contacting my office to express your opinion on internet gambling. I believe that current law constitutes an unwarranted intrusion into the marketplace. I support enacting proper regulation of internet gambling, rather than banning it outright.



Internet gambling is currently heavily restricted by the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. This legislation prohibits financial transactions from banks and credit card companies to internet casinos, poker rooms and sports betting sites, thereby stripping Americans of their ability to use credit cards or debit cards to partake in internet gambling. In order to correct this wrong, I am a cosponsor of H.R.1174, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act of 2011, which would establish a federal regulatory and enforcement framework to license companies to accept bets and wagers online from individuals in the United States, to the extent permitted by individual states, Indian tribes and sports leagues. Of course, any license would include protections against underage gambling, compulsive gambling, money laundering and fraud. The Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act would protect the consumer rather than make unnecessary intrusions into the freedom of commerce.



Thank you for again for contacting me and I hope you will continue to share your concerns with me in the future.



Sincerely

GARY L. ACKERMAN
Member of Congress"
IntenseDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2011, 09:59 PM   #194
YoureToast
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 3,582
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Tuesday, May 31st (see post #1 for today's plan)

David Scott is at least paying more attention to the issue:

Dear Mr. Pierce:

Thank you for contacting me regarding internet gambling and H.R. 1174, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act. I appreciate your thoughts on this issue.

On April 15, 2011, the Department of Justice issued an indictment against the owners and founders of the three largest internet gambling websites: PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker. These three companies were charged with bank fraud, money laundering, and illegal gambling offenses. Restraining orders were issued against over 75 bank accounts used by the poker companies and their payment processors in 14 countries, and five internet domain names. Eleven individuals were also charged regarding their involvement in operating the internet sites.

According to the indictment, the companies' owners sought methods to circumvent restrictions placed on U.S. banks that prohibited them from handling financial transactions connected to online gambling. The indictment alleges the poker company owners "relied on highly compensated third party payment processors who lied to United States banks about the nature of the financial transactions they were processing and covering up those lies through the creation of phony corporations and websites to disguise payments to the poker companies." The charges filed against these online gambling companies are quite serious, and I will be monitoring this situation as it develops.

Currently pending in the U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 1174 would regulate internet gambling activity and would require licensed operators to adopt safeguards to combat compulsive and underage gambling, money laundering, fraud, and identity theft. This bill strongly resembles H.R. 2267, which was approved by the House Financial Services Committee in July 2010, but it did not receive any action by the full House or the Senate before the end of the 111th Congress. The legislation would implement new technologies to prevent underage play and problem gambler abuse. H.R. 1174 expands consumer protections not included in the current Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, and contains provisions to investigate potential licensees, set deposit and loss limits, and combat cheating, fraud, tax evasion, and money laundering.

Like, H.R. 2276 in the 111th Congress, H.R. 1174 has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services, of which I am a member. In addition, the bill has been referred to the House Committee on Judiciary and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. If I have an opportunity to consider legislation on this subject again, I will certainly keep your views in mind.

Again, I thank you for sharing your views with me. I hope you will continue to give me the benefit of your opinion in the future. In addition, I encourage you to visit my web site at http://davidscott.house.gov, where you can view the latest news and obtain information on issues and legislation that is important to you. You can also sign up for my electronic newsletter, and receive periodic updates on my activities as your representative in Washington. Thank you again for contacting me, and I look forward to continuing to serve you.



Sincerely,
David Scott
Member of Congress
YoureToast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2011, 04:40 AM   #195
Rich Muny
Poker Players Alliance VP
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: ***Only a PPA post if so stated***
Posts: 26,300
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st:

Let's continue contacting mainstream media companies to tell them to increase their coverage of our important issue. Let's go with CNN for today. Contact info:
Recurring actions we can take:
  • Let's continue to own a lot of Facebook pages (senators, Congressmen, Congressional committees, etc.):
    • The House Financial Services Committee's Facebook page is here.
    • Let's get some posts on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce page (here)
    • The Dept. of Justice's page is here.
    • Senators' FB pages: Senator Facebook Listing
    • We need lots of posts on the issue of poker and lots of "liking" of pro-poker comments.
Thanks!
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2011, 08:42 AM   #196
KingKongGrinder
Pooh-Bah
 
KingKongGrinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,593
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Jump on here and help take care of Mark White. We can't have this as the last post on Fox.

Fox News Sunday FB page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Fox-Ne...ay/10674237167

Also, the CNN wall has 2mm likes and there is a lot of time betwen wall posts. We can own the CNN wall if we all get involved.
KingKongGrinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2011, 04:11 PM   #197
beachbum
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Trying to start playing again
Posts: 1,420
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st:
Are we still doing this one? There are no comments on CNN's FB page yet. Are they deleting our posts?
beachbum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2011, 05:46 PM   #198
DrewOnTilt
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
DrewOnTilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 106 miles to Chicago
Posts: 7,732
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st (see post #1 for today's plan)

beachbum you have to hit the "Top Posts" link to show comments posted by the public. By default Facebook shows only the comments of the page owner/administrator. There are a handful of poker comments on there.
DrewOnTilt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2011, 06:12 PM   #199
ladybruin
old hand
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,211
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st (see post #1 for today's plan)

I missed a few days in this thread. Did the Barton plan drop?
ladybruin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2011, 06:15 PM   #200
sba9630
Pooh-Bah
 
sba9630's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: This space intentionally left blank
Posts: 4,511
Re: Fight for Poker Rights: Wednesday, June 1st (see post #1 for today's plan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ladybruin View Post
I missed a few days in this thread. Did the Barton plan drop?
No, but the Ivey bomb did.
sba9630 is offline   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 12:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.33 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online