Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckle Puck
First I would like to point out that I didn't actually create this thread. My question was originally in another thread. I intended to keep the issue small.
My original question was left unanswered for a pretty long time. You guys are active all day and because of that I think it's safe to say my question was disregarded/ignored. I think anyone knowledgeable in public relations will tell you that was mistake number one. If my question transcended the PPA's public policy it would have been a good idea to address it in a quick concrete manner. A simple "we don't discuss things like this" would have been sufficient. If that route was taken this thread might not exist.
|
Well of course you are basically right about this. But 2+2 has its own dynamic that is not always the same as that for other forms of media. One way or another, once an issue is raised here it will be beat to death.
In general I actually think that is a positive aspect of this forum.
Quote:
|
There is a big difference between a demand and a plea for support especially if the plea is designed around bad government decisions and freedom. It also shows that there are REAL people behind the movement and not another organization looking for handouts. If the PPA made awesome basketball shoes would it be detrimental for the PPA to ask customers to contact FootLocker in order to get them stocked? The context is very similar. Why walk on egg shells? We're all on the same team here. If outside organizations with open poker interests have not gravitated to the PPA by now the current approach is failing.
|
Please, you well know that the various interests in play, while having a general interest in common, also have a lot of specific interests that conflict. Obvious lesson: creating alliances is not near as easy as your post suggests.
Quote:
|
I like what the PPA does but this is not a black and white issue. Unless an agreement is literally on the verge of happening then any "private discussions" are irrelevant. Zynga (and others) isn't some skittish mystical unicorn that can't be spooked if you ever want it to appear again. Going by the book is boring and it's a route that never leads to advancement. I know it takes two to tango but come on. We need new ideas to maximize what we have.
|
And I like and understand that we are both on the same side here and want the best for our mutual (poker-player) interests.
This is not a matter of principal, however. If it were an open debate is of course required.
This is a matter of tactics. Let me say clearly that I totally agree that "we need new ideas to maximize what we have." If you want to know whether the PPA actively tries to reach out to other potential allies, the answer is "of course."
But if you demand to know exactly who is being actively talked to and what is being discussed .... well, you are essentially asking that our side's battle plan be made open to the public (and therefore the enemy).
Also, please imagine that you are a PPA or Zynga representative and one of you has initiated contact with the other to discuss mutual interests and the possibility of working together. Both of you understand that it is good press if you agree on something and bad press if you can not. So the obvious agreement is to keep the existence and substance of the talks confidential until and unless an agreement is reached. ... Now imagine how you would feel if your agreement were compromised because the information that you were talking was revealed in a public internet forum by someone you trusted.
But that certainly doesn't mean you guys shouldn't post your ideas, quite the opposite in fact. But just remember that some things are right for public discussion and some things must, by their nature, be left to the private work of the representatives. So some ideas may be openly discussed; some ideas may only be met with a mere "thanks for your input."
Skallagrim
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
