Player-Funded PPA Possible??

[Doc T River]

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

No help has been refused....absolutely none....

He didn't ask if you guys refused help, he asked if you sought out help. There's a difference.

Regarding FairPlayUSA, did it come about due to your efforts of seeking help from CE or did it spring up by itself? That's what he's asking.

[TheEngineer]

Originally Posted by Doc T River

He didn't ask if you guys refused help, he asked if you sought out help. There's a difference.

We've asked everyone for donations. Again, if these companies typically gave donations to independent organizations, any number of players could have started their own groups and received these donations.

Regarding FairPlayUSA, did it come about due to your efforts of seeking help from CE or did it spring up by itself? That's what he's asking.

FPUSA is perfectly aligned with the agenda of Caesars and MGM, as one would expect. I'm not saying that's a problem. In fact, we need a coalition to win this and I'm glad they are in it. Rather, I'm saying that is what these companies will fund, and that's not us. We're an independent group with some crossover and some shared goals, but not with 100% alignment.

[Doc T River]

In regards to seeking greater funding by players, what forms have those efforts taken?

[TheEngineer]

Originally Posted by Doc T River

In regards to seeking greater funding by players, what forms have those efforts taken?

Off the top of my head, we've sent out numerous email requests. I've many many personal requests via my weekly member update as well (emailed, featured on the PPA website, and posted on 2+2). PPA has a banner ad in rotation here on 2+2 as well.

We also have a new deal, where memberships are $15 rather than $20. I've mentioned this several times on my webcast, QJs, the PokerCast, my weekly interview on Short Stacked radio, and other places.

[TheEngineer]

www.theppa.org/donate and http://members.theppa.org/2012-join/

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by Jonaspublius

Look, if I wanted to jettison everything I would be piling on with that fool DQ.

...

.

Where do you get this from ?

I started this topic as an issue because I thought player funding is a requirement for the PPA to become a truly player representative organization. Sajeffe moved my post here to develop the discussion.

Just to be clear for your better reading comprehension, I will repeat my post content in this thread just two days ago in BOLD:

I think that, after last week, every US poker player should donate to the PPA with a message to play DEFENSE on Capitol Hill, against the inevitable FoF type of assault on the DOJ's restated Wire Act view.

I expect prospective licensees to seek draconian application of the Wire Act to "unlicensed poker". The PPA should resist that call and push for States to act, not the federal government.

[Jonaspublius]

I tend to disagree on the level of seeking help.

I don't like it, and I know you don't, but the PPA has to accept being a junior partner in any effort. You simply lack the money, the organization, and the relationships. Make a public, in the press offer to act with the casinos to move this forward. Hell, stage a public tourney in Vegas at MGM or Caesar's with half the entries going to the PPA, and donations coming from the casinos, and put it on tv. The sort of thing that generates publicity. Give them board seats.

As it is, you're shut out from whatever goes forward this year. You might be politely asked some questions or told something, but the PPA will not in any substantive way affect ipoker legislation that has a chance to move this year. MGM and Caesars and Harrahs will.

The bottom line is it is my opinion that the PPA is set on staying the course with their current model, their current staff, and current funders. I believe it is not in the best interest of the player world, but I'm powerless to do much besides voice that opinion in the correct places, and that is what I felt I have done. And, I still see the PPA as being the tool of the IGC, and determined not to help other entities gain the market they lost, based on the evidence of the shape current efforts are taking.

I agree with Mason there is a more urgent need than ever for the PPA, or something like it. How it will be paid for is the big question, but what it is now is woefully inadequate and almost at a dead end.

[Jonaspublius]

Originally Posted by DonkeyQuixote

Where do you get this from ?

I started this topic as an issue because I thought player funding is a requirement for the PPA to become a truly player representative organization. Sajeffe moved my post here to develop the discussion.

Just to be clear for your better reading comprehension, I will repeat my post content in this thread just two days ago in BOLD:

I think that, after last week, every US poker player should donate to the PPA with a message to play DEFENSE on Capitol Hill, against the inevitable FoF type of assault on the DOJ's restated Wire Act view.

I expect prospective licensees to seek draconian application of the Wire Act to "unlicensed poker". The PPA should resist that call and push for States to act, not the federal government.

Most of us all here have different politics. You seem to be living in this libertarian nirvana world outside pragmatic possibilities and reality. The FoF has very little say in how this goes forward. It has morphed from a social issue into a business issue. You're bogged down in a 2006 world that doesn't exist at present.

You're acting like the PPA is a powerful lobbying interest, or that players alone
can do anything. Wake up, dude. Read a real newspaper, not the Ron Paul Survival Report. Everyone would love for justice to come to pass and be allowed poker in our homes, as is our constitutional right. Ain't gonna happen.
States that need revenue aren't going ot embrace poker players and sing cum bah ya either.

I'm sorry if your offended, and you feel attacked, but you seem to lack any insight on politics or reality. And, every time I relent on my resolution to not read what you write, you seem to be in an endless feud with Skall over minutiae.

[Mason Malmuth]

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

I'm also a member who posts. You are welcome to report my post, which will go to other mods and admins, if you think it violates forum rules.

But obviously it gets my point across - Jonas' post is just a speculative conspiracy theory about the PPA made from whole cloth out of his own mind rather than empirical evidence. Who knows - it could happen to be true. But that doesn't make the method that Jonas used to come to his conclusion valid. Tinfoil hat stuff, imo.

He's certainly allowed to have his opinion. You also need to remember that we at Two Plus Two have not always been happy with the PPA and we still have questions about their top leadership.

However, our view is that at this point in time the PPA is needed, and that TheEngineer is a significant asset. But your post, in my opinion, is certainly out of line, and as a moderator my recommendation to you is to delete it since it's our policy on Two Plus Two not to have insults.

Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Originally Posted by DonkeyQuixote

Where do you get this from ?

I started this topic as an issue because I thought player funding is a requirement for the PPA to become a truly player representative organization. Sajeffe moved my post here to develop the discussion.

I agree. If the PPA was fully player funded then it would be a 100 percent player representative organization. But you and me both know that's not going to happen because there won't be enough players to donate. So the question is: Are the current goals of the players and the IGC close enough for the PPA to represent both?

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Originally Posted by Jonaspublius

I tend to disagree on the level of seeking help.

I don't like it, and I know you don't, but the PPA has to accept being a junior partner in any effort. You simply lack the money, the organization, and the relationships. Make a public, in the press offer to act with the casinos to move this forward. Hell, stage a public tourney in Vegas at MGM or Caesar's with half the entries going to the PPA, and donations coming from the casinos, and put it on tv. The sort of thing that generates publicity. Give them board seats.

So you expect a large Las Vegas Casino to give up lots of their floor space, plus the paying of their staff, to get this done. And how much money will it really make. Suppose you get 200 entries at $100 each, If half goes to the PPA, that's $10,000 which is nowhere close to what the PPA needs to do their job.

As it is, you're shut out from whatever goes forward this year. You might be politely asked some questions or told something, but the PPA will not in any substantive way affect ipoker legislation that has a chance to move this year. MGM and Caesars and Harrahs will.

Perhaps that's true. But that doesn't mean the PPA is not doing its job.

The bottom line is it is my opinion that the PPA is set on staying the course with their current model, their current staff, and current funders. I believe it is not in the best interest of the player world, but I'm powerless to do much besides voice that opinion in the correct places, and that is what I felt I have done. And, I still see the PPA as being the tool of the IGC, and determined not to help other entities gain the market they lost, based on the evidence of the shape current efforts are taking.

As stated in another post of mine, I think this is the real question. Are the goals of the players and the IGC via THE PPA currently close enough that they can both work together? It's my opinion that the answer at this point in time is yes, but that can always change in the future.

I agree with Mason there is a more urgent need than ever for the PPA, or something like it. How it will be paid for is the big question, but what it is now is woefully inadequate and almost at a dead end.

I still see The PPA playing an important role. But I do believe that it has made decisions, such as the poker is a skill game and therefore it is not gambling argument, that are damaging to its current credibility. However, in the recent dust-up with I. Nelson Rose, the PPA did show that it can play a constructive and influential role.

So what the PPA needs to do, and this may not be as simple as it sounds, is to make the right decisions and arguments in the future, and use the best people to speak on their behalf. If that happens, their credibility should grow.

Best wishes,
Mason

[TheEngineer]

Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth

However, our view is that at this point in time the PPA is needed, and that TheEngineer is a significant asset.

Thanks Mason. I appreciate that.

[TheEngineer]

Originally Posted by DonkeyQuixote

I started this topic as an issue because I thought player funding is a requirement for the PPA to become a truly player representative organization. Sajeffe moved my post here to develop the discussion.

Let's start with the Daily Actions. If we, the people most committed to this, can all do these each day, we can start the process that will cause this to grow more and more. It's up to each of us. Let's all go to the Daily Action Thread, take two or three minutes to do the actions, bookmark the thread, and repeat each day.

[PokerXanadu]

Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth

He's certainly allowed to have his opinion. You also need to remember that we at Two Plus Two have not always been happy with the PPA and we still have questions about their top leadership.

However, our view is that at this point in time the PPA is needed, and that TheEngineer is a significant asset. But your post, in my opinion, is certainly out of line, and as a moderator my recommendation to you is to delete it since it's our policy on Two Plus Two not to have insults.

Mason

If you say so, boss. Post deleted.

[Jonaspublius]

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

If you say so, boss. Post deleted.

Leave it up, it doesn't bother me. I have an ego, but I don't let it get in the way of trying to say and accomplish things. I have never, ever reported a post on any message board, complained about an insult to a floor, or reported one in chat at a poker table. I wanted some attention to the malaise at the PPA in moving on from IGC, and I got it. I'm an *******, I expect things like that.

No one has countered the argument that funding will dry up......and inactivity at the top is related to professional ethics(I wouldn't want my high dollar lobbyists assisting companies that ****ed mine) and industry competition. Most of my ideas are that, just ideas. But it seems we are at a crux. The PPA is going broke and slightly rudderless at the time most likely to see legislation and enforcement policy radically change. If we aren't willing to get desperate, we will be on the sidelines.