New Organization supporting online poker legislation - Page 11 - Poker Legislation

**TheEngineer** · 07-26-2011, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc T River

Given it sounds like the FairPlay account may be used by multiple people, how about each signs their posts so we know who we're talking to?

That's a good idea...at least a first-name signature.

novahunterpa · 07-26-2011, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonkeyQuixote

Did you perceive that as "the way it is" on the thursday before Black Friday ?

YES

Quote:

If so, how can you explain the millions of players who used Stars/FTP et al from the US ?

What about the millions of players who used Party Poker before it left the US ?

Not sure what you're getting at here? Do you men because millions playerd on Stars/FTP et al and Party before 2006 that online poker/gambling was accepted in the US? Well it wasn't. It wasn't accepted by the majority of people,law enforcement or lawmakers. Many (most?) poker players didn't play online for many different reasons. Many more would play if it was legal and licensed/regulated in the USA

Quote:

Excuse me, but I think the free market has spoken clearly that US poker players want to play poker online. Barriers to block their access or transactions may be effective, but it is nonsense to say that US players would not want PStars available today, in advance of any express legalization.

Some players decided to play on unlicensed/unregulated sites in the US. Lets not pretend most people wanted to play on sites that were perceived by US officials as illegal operators. PS/FTP were never going to get a license under current owners to operate in the USA. They violated US law and the feds and states weren't going to let it continue forever.

Quote:

I agree and have always said that a regulatory scheme will limit free market choices; that IS the way it is, but it is wrong to pretend we should like it.

It doesn't have to limit the free market but they certainly aren't going to allow criminal enterprises to participate. PS/FTP/UB and all current US serving sites are the past and need to be forgotten. We need to focus on trying to get a poker bill passed and part of that is going to be stronger laws/enforcement against unlicensed play.

**TheEngineer** · 07-26-2011, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenzor

they did it to themselves

How so? In that era, Congress was never going to pass legislation allowing them to offer the game. They were barred with or without UIGEA.

**TheEngineer** · 07-26-2011, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DonkeyQuixote

Ironically, CBS News is reporting that FPUSA's Internet Safety Advisor Parry Aftab had her house stormed by SWAT teams on Saturday:

(CBS/AP) NEWARK, N.J. - The home of Parry Aftab, a well-known Internet safety expert and lawyer, was swarmed Monday by New Jersey police and SWAT team members who responded to what proved to be a fake hostage report from an unknown male caller.

The caller, who authorities say was purposefully targeting Aftab, told police he was armed and had two hostages at Aftab's house in Wyckoff, a suburb about 15 miles west of New York City.

Police and SWAT units surrounded Aftab's home for about three hours Saturday and eventually shot in tear gas, but only found her cat inside."

Apprently, Aftab is a repeat target of some web-bullies because of her past public work against their activities.

Not sure how she gets to be an expert advisor on online gaming issues, but FPUSA can tell us, I guess.

PPA cites her work as well. From the current PPA member letter to Congress:

Quote:

Originally Posted by PPA member letter to Congress

Additionally, WiredSafety, the world's largest Internet safety group, commissioned an in-depth study of this issue. The study, which was conducted by Harvard University, examined issues like blocking of underage participation, prevention of money laundering, and providing of consumer protections against fraud and abuse. The study concluded that "combining a thoughtful regulatory scheme with education, technology tools, and support appears to be the most effective means of handling the realities and risks" of online poker. This groundbreaking study can be found at www.theppa.org/harvardstudy.

AKSharky · 07-26-2011, 05:05 PM

I just wanted to say thank you for standing up for our rights.

There is money involved so politicians won't be fair. Organizations like this are obviously needed to bribe our corrupt politicians. Good luck finding the right ones.

FairPlayUSA · 07-26-2011, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

That's a good idea...at least a first-name signature.

Everything posted today will be from me (Erin).

**TheEngineer** · 07-26-2011, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden

Why did it take weeks, after the funds were being withheld for Ferguson and Lederer to be removed from the PPA board?

They resigned. That being said, it's not like FTP announced they were not planning to repay players. We're not clairvoyants. Given the facts as we knew them, it made sense to give them the opportunity to do right by the players.

Quote:

LOL at you for thinking I was talking about you when I said Higher Ups. Wasn't it in another thread where Papas, or whatever his name is was making over 200k?

I saw no such thread or any proof of such a thing. Please post it.

Quote:

Not regulators? Everyone knows that. Herp Derp! Fighting for the release of our money? Effort and time might be better spent on regulation, as anything the PPA does or does not do will not speed up the process of getting or not getting our funds back.

You brought it up.

Quote:

About the tarnished reputation, read a thread in NVG when the PPA is brought up. It isn't pretty.

It's improving greatly.

Quote:

You are the only part of the PPA I like, as I see you actually trying to do something.

Thank you.

DonkeyQuixote · 07-26-2011, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by novahunterpa

YES

Not sure what you're getting at here? Do you men because millions playerd on Stars/FTP et al and Party before 2006 that online poker/gambling was accepted in the US? Well it wasn't. It wasn't accepted by the majority of people,law enforcement or lawmakers. Many (most?) poker players didn't play online for many different reasons. Many more would play if it was legal and licensed/regulated in the USA

Some players decided to play on unlicensed/unregulated sites in the US. Lets not pretend most people wanted to play on sites that were perceived by US officials as illegal operators. PS/FTP were never going to get a license under current owners to operate in the USA. They violated US law and the feds and states weren't going to let it continue forever.

It doesn't have to limit the free market but they certainly aren't going to allow criminal enterprises to participate. PS/FTP/UB and all current US serving sites are the past and need to be forgotten. We need to focus on trying to get a poker bill passed and part of that is going to be stronger laws/enforcement against unlicensed play.

Did you EVER play poker at an unlicensed site serving the US ?

What do you think the market penetration was for online poker the day before the UIGEA passed ? People chose to participate in a free market, which was universally promoted on broadcast television. It is insane to think that online poker was NOT accepted by US poker players.

That a post-UIGEA smear campaign and confiscation/disruption of financial transactions tarnished the image of online poker is certain. But, do you believe that playing online poker was a crime all along ?

LetsGambool · 07-26-2011, 05:26 PM

No, I dont think playing online poker was a crime.

Its pretty clear that at least two of the "big three" sites were acting in a criminal manner and Poker Stars, as much as I love them, isnt looking too good on the bank fraud front.

Regard FT and the PPA, the PPA obviously made a mistake associating with FT given it turned out to be a criminal enterprise.

The PPA isnt perfect, but thats not a reasonable standard. It would be refreshing to hear someone from the PPA admit they made a mistake with hindsight for once, but their response post Black Friday was not unreasonable. Its not like they are still associated with FT or condone their actions.

**PokerXanadu** · 07-26-2011, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FairPlayUSA

Hi. My name is Erin. I am a poker player and I'm a member of the new media team at FP. I am not a casino employee. I do have a personal 2P2 account under the name 'hoftie'. It's new, when I use that account you can always assume it's me and I will provide full disclosure that I'm with FP.

You should assume that posts from this account are coming from staff at FPUSA.

Hi Erin. Nice to meet you.

Could you introduce the rest of the staff and Board of Directors of your organization (including titles)?

**TheEngineer** · 07-26-2011, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

This wont be a 50 state bill, so its worth discussing what happens to those in the many states left behind.

Sure.

With federal legislation:

States willing to participate get licensed online poker.
States unwilling to participate do not get online poker.
- Licensed sites, PPA and others will lobby these states to choose to participate.
- There will be new laws on the books to address unlicensed poker. As DoJ is enforcing current laws, it's not clear if this will change much for opt-out state residents

Without any federal or state legislation:

50 states get no licensed online poker.
DoJ will continue its efforts against the game.

Golden · 07-26-2011, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrewOnTilt

I suggest that they go after Greg Raymer.

While he's the best for someone like me to follow. He's not high profile, don't get me wrong, he's a great ambassador for poker, but he doesn't have a blind following. Take Durr for example, his fanboys would do anything he asks for some reason. That's the type of "celebrity" that needs to endorse both the PPA and FairPlay. Or actually get involved in the fight.

Imo, Raymer seems like a guy that likes to keep to himself, where as someone like durrr seems to love the spot light, and that is the type of person that is needed. Raymer is better for behind the scenes and the occassional interview, like he's done before, to speak on the issues intelligently and is well equipped for any tough questions.

caseycjc · 07-26-2011, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LT22

I find it ironic you have an avatar of Barton, yet you hate points 1 & 6, which are clearly in the Barton Bill.

One pretty important distinction is that the Barton Bill is filed as UIGEA 2011,
Fair Play makes the distinction of strengthening UIGEA 2006.

**TheEngineer** · 07-26-2011, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

I dont think FPUSA will call all the shots on a bill, but I do think if they get player support the PPA's influence on the Hill will wane. Its brand on the Hill may be toxic anyways given its alliance with FTP (not their fault).

We've seen to evidence of that at all (and we looked very hard in the aftermath of Black Friday).

Quote:

In terms of influencing a Federal bill, players might be better of working through the FPUSA given they will be more influential, but it remains to be seen what voice players may have.

We ought to work through all avenues.

Quote:

I will be interested to see what will happen should one of the FPUSA issues be codified into an i-poker bill in the form of player penalties. Will the PPA oppose a bill then?

That's a good reason for PPA to be here at the forefront.

FairPlayUSA · 07-26-2011, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

Hi Erin. Nice to meet you.

Could you introduce the rest of the staff and Board of Directors of your organization (including titles)?

The only other other member of FPUSA that would ever post from this account would be my colleague on the new media team; her name is Lindsay.

We don't have a board of directors, we have a board of advisors. Right now that includes Greg Raymer, the Honorable Tom Ridge, and Parry Aftab. We will update the site and the forums here as we add members.