Brian, any chance you might one day enforce your "no smoking tobacco/nicotine pipes" at the table rule?

I've complained 5 times about the same person and each time the floor person is just amazed that someone would do that (even though its the same person every time - and she constantly holds onto the thing like a golden crack-pipe).

You've seen it hundreds of times, any chance you could enforce the rules and not have nicotine water vapor blown over all of us?

Thanks

What is this lady smoking? I'm one of the steadiest regulars there but I have never seen anyone smoking something at the table.

As far as moving the button I disagree becuz firehall players dont realize after someone gets bounced from a tourney that the button just may stay put for a hand or two, just sayin...and geeze they cant get the simple "who goes first when it goes chk-chk on- the- river" rule? absolutely iunfuriating

She smokes an electronic cigarette. You can clearly see the vapors (same vapors she breathes in) get blown out over the table. Purely disgusting. Granted walking through that casino is possibly 10xs worse on your lungs, but if a poker room bills itself as tobacco-free, then it should step up and enforce their rules...

Yes Brian, even against a daily customer who plays your tournaments on a daily basis.

PS - the amount of information published overwhelmingly states that these vapors contain harmful chemicals. Unless your research is from phillipmorris.com...

Hmm, I guess Brian is on vacation..?

Never saw her in action. Weird ill have to keep an eye out for her.

I am on vacation until Wed, but I had to respond to this real quick. First off, we are a tobacco free room, and e-cigs contain no tobacco. Secondly, the amount of information published actually overwhelmingly states that these vapors are considered safe (here's a good one, and I'd be happy to supply you with more: http://www.allvoices.com/contributed...e-vapor-safety). The only reason you see anything at all when a person using an e-cig exhales is that the same stuff that is used in fog machines is added to the device to give the person a psychological effect similar to that of smoking.

There was a considerable debate among management about whether these would be allowed and the decision was made to allow their usage.

That being said, we have asked players using an e-cig to not exhale directly in the direction of another player, out of consideration and courtesy for those who are offended by their use.

Brian, thanks for the reply. However, your information is completely wrong. First off, you quote an Internet site that is along the lines of the National Inquirer.

When have you become an expert on what is contained in an Electronic Cigarette? From what you read on the Internet - Marketing the device? That's laughable.

The same 'juice' filled with nicotine is blown out through this person's nose and all over the table. You're going to allow the device, but everyone (including the people sitting next to this person) will be guaranteed to not have any of these chemicals fill their lungs?

What are the chemical contents of this spray? Oh a "fog machine"..?! Please show me your analysis on a fog machine spray vs a Chinese built electronic cigarette and its specific chemicals.

If someone needs a nicotine fix, they simply do it on break.

Google "safety of electronic cigarettes" to quickly see the vast amount of articles which clearly show they are not as benign as your article states. I'd say the one simple article I have pasted below shows a legitimate study from a reputable group.

You really need to redo your research on this one. No offense, but you're clearly going out on a limb by stating this product is safe to use around other poker players. Are you going to allow 10 at a table?

I'm not arrogant enough to state I know everything about the contents of these devices. Are you?

Here is "one" article and its link, let me know if you need to see a few more....
-----------------------
Smokers looking for a safe way to help kick the habit should refrain from using electronic cigarettes, as experts presented new research Sunday suggesting that the devices can still damage a person’s lungs.

The research, which was presented at the European Respiratory Society‘s (ERS) Annual Congress in Vienna, originated from researchers at the University of Athens.

In order to measure the safety of these products, which use vapor instead of smoke to deliver nicotine into a person’s system, the researchers recruited a total of 32 subjects, officials from the European Lung Foundation (ELF) said in a September 2 statement.

Eight of those individuals had never smoked, 11 were smokers with regular pulmonary function, and 13 were smokers suffering from either asthma or COPD. Each study participant used an e-cigarette for 10 minutes, and were then given a spirometry test (to measure their lung function) and other, similar tests by researchers.

“The results showed that for all people included in the study, the e-cigarette caused an immediate increase in airway resistance, lasting for 10 minutes. In healthy subjects (never smokers) there was a statistically significant increase in airway resistance from a mean average of 182% to 206%,” ERS officials said. “In smokers with normal spirometry there was a statistically significant increase from a mean average of 176% to 220%. In COPD and asthma patients the use of one e-cigarette seemed to have no immediate effect to airway resistance.”

While there is no combustion involved in e-cigarettes, the nicotine contained within the device is still derived from tobacco, the respiratory agency explained. To date, there has been little scientific evidence establishing the relative safety (or riskiness) of these smoking cessation aids, which inspired the University of Athens team to conduct exactly how they impact different types of people, at least on a short-term basis.

“We do not yet know whether unapproved nicotine delivery products, such as e-cigarettes, are safer than normal cigarettes, despite marketing claims that they are less harmful. This research helps us to understand how these products could be potentially harmful,” Christina Gratziou, one of the study authors as well as the Chair of the ERS Tobacco Control Committee, said in a statement.

“We found an immediate rise in airway resistance in our group of participants, which suggests e-cigarettes can cause immediate harm after smoking the device. More research is needed to understand whether this harm also has lasting effects in the long-term,” she added. “The ERS recommends following effective smoking cessation treatment guidelines based on clinical evidence which do not advocate the use of such products.”

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/...damage-090312/

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1112706713/new-ecigarette-study-shows-no-risk-from-environmental-vapor-exposure/
As a poker player and e-cig user (Blu) I felt the need to mention this. Also, the study you linked did not suggest any lasting or damaging effects. It in fact says the airway resistance lasted for about 10 minutes in all subjects but the the COPD and asthma patients. This indicates that it's the body's reaction to the water vapor itself that is causing the restriction. Since the lungs can't exhale water as easily as air one could easily assume the body would have to get rid of the material with a little more effort. COPD and asthma patients already have restrictive breathing because their bodies are already fighting other problems, thus no increase.

Ahh, another expert who is going to quote something from the Internet, and determine the vapors coming out of a device made in China, which burns nicotine with water is 100% safe to be blown all over you at a poker table. Really?

Long lasting effects? How would anyone know, they were just developed a few years ago...? So they're safe long term since the study didn't include it?

That's some interesting logic there.

In regards to the study, the facts are the vapor/chemicals are what caused the restriction. Those same vapors and chemicals are blown out across the poker table - they can be clearly seen in the light.

I don't care if you think it's just the water vapor (naive to believe so) or the chemicals that causes restriction, the fact is, the study showed restriction.

And yes, I'd complain if Brian decided to install a fog machine in the poker room as well (these days I wouldn't be surprised).

These things may be better for you than cigarettes, but there's no proof that are harmless to others around them. In fact, from FDA sites to studies, the chemicals exhaled have been proven to be more than water vapor.

Anyone who would state otherwise, assuming that once Inhaled, the body cleans 100% of the Exhaled vapors free of nicotine and glycol, is a fool.

Reread my post and the link (from a site you said was reliable but others aren't). It mentions in there that the study concluded any remaining chemicals in the vapor were of such minute amounts as to not be harmful.

Do you own a cell phone? What are the lasting effects of frequent cell phone use? Oh, we don't know that either but studies have suggested brain impairment and memory loss to be possible side effects.

The study showed temporary restriction on all but the COPD and asthma patients. If there was an increase in their restriction as well it may suggest a possibility of actual harm.

The link I cited actually showed it was harmless. Did you read it?

Who are you? Phillip Morris in the 1970s??

I read your link. It was a weak study done by a no name group.

I find it hilarious you think anything you find on the Internet to be true.

The point I made to Brian and to you Mr. Scientist, is that you both are CLUELESS to the actual contents of these Vapors, yet will subject players to the risks involved.

There is an equal amount of articles for both sides, but the majority of evidence (and common sense) shows that re-breathing these vapors is harmful.

Based on your BS logic, you would allow a young elementary school kid to smoke these since they are 100% safe? Didn't think so.

Cell Phone? Irrelevant. My point is to to cut down on yet another thing that is hazardous to my health. I guess your brilliant logic is if I do one thing hazardous to my health I should just accept it.

That's pretty dumb.

Study after study shows these things to be harmful - THEY ARE CIGARETTES! Yet fools like you and Brian think the vapors spewed over someone else at a poker table are just water vapor.

That's pathetic, and Brian, you were clearly duped by this person into believing the vapors "are just water".

Based on what reasoning? It came from the same "reputed" website that you linked to earlier.

Yet you post links from the web...

I cited a study that shows what's in the vapors to be of no threat. If there are equal amounts of articles for both sides how can one have a majority?

I thought we're talking about second hand vapors? The direct inhalation of them is a different issue.

No, what's dumb is you can't see the bigger picture. Based on your reasoning and "evidence" of what's harmful we should ban cell phones in the poker room as well since they have been shown to contribute to brain cancer. I don't want to catch any of your harmful radiation at the table!

Your logic says "since we don't know if it's harmful, let's allow it anyway".

Dumb

Ban cell phones? Your feeble mind can't distinguish between a Chinese cigarette burning nicotine and cell phones that have been around for 30+ years. Downright funny, no further debate on that one.

Internet websites? My point was that Brian stated based off the web that these are safe. My point that I shared 5 times was that if anything, the vapors are harmful - clearly.

I'm guessing you stated yes to allowing these in elementary schools? Lol brilliant discussion.

One person uses websites to argue that e-cigs vapors are harmful and one uses websites to argue that they aren't and yet one is a fool and the other is 100% correct (also, I'd be happy to share as many links as you if you'd really like, I didn't realize that whoever linked the most articles automatically is correct)? Neither of us is a scientist or are conducting the experiments ourselves, so researching news articles and studies that are published online is the only way either of us is going to gain information.

The issue is whether or not second hand "vapors" pose a medical threat and initially I did not know either. When researching this OBJECTIVELY, I came to the understanding and conclusion that they would not be a harm to our guests. I am not a smoker or e-cig user (nor have I ever been). I do not like being near second hand smoke (please note that I said smoke, not vapor). I understand that some people aren't going to like it or change their mind. If the decision had been made to ban them then the exact same discussion would be going on right now on these boards only it would be someone else leading the charge.

Every decision I and the rest of management are going to make is going to have opponents and proponents and this is but one of many.

This will be my last post or response on this subject.

If only the e-cigarettes were the biggest problem with this poker room.

+1

Brian, I linked one article. THAT should have been enough to not risk the health of your guests. Some links are conclusive, others are inconclusive.

THE POINT IS - When you are unsure or the facts are inconclusive, you favor NOT taking the risk of it being harmful to your guests.

I come back to my basic question, would you let your young child smoke these if they are 100% safe. No, because they aren't.

I also wonder why you're asking these smokers not to blow in the direction of a player if the air is so pure, clean and safe?

You also act like there WOULD be a discussion of proponents arguing FOR nicotine spewing cigarettes and thinking for a second they wouldn't be quickly put down by the no tobacco policy. It's not even arguable.

Lastly, you made a statement that although you hate second hand smoke, you'd be completely comfortable by sitting next to 9 people spewing vapor.

That was a good one Brian!

Good to see this is your last post on the subject, if I were you, I wouldn't embarrass myself with any more discussion of this poor decision.

I think he's trying to tell you nicely that there are two sides to this issue and he's trying to be fair to all of his customers.

Or maybe, like the rest of us, he's just tired of you bitching and moaning.

fivetenman,

Relax a little man. Is it a perfect poker room? Of course not. I agree there are many opportunities for improvement, but...you're getting all jacked up over something that I have NEVER once encountered in all my times there (yeah, I've been there more than a couple times.)

I would like to offer up some friendly advice. Be a man and talk to Brian in person. I have found him to be accessible, friendly, accommodating, and open to suggestions much more so than some other poker room managers. All the hating and personal insults towards him here is not helping your cause.

Yeah a decision was made so respect it. If you are that upset, play elsewhere. No need for personal insults.

This. No more discussion of this in this thread. Start a new thread in the main B&M forum if you wish to continue the e-cig debate.

edit: Here's a 94 post thread already in B&M: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/27...tables-891945/

Granted the last post is 5 months old, but it's a good read on the issue. Feel free to bump it if you wish to continue.

Back to poker. I'm assuming January tournament schedule hasn't changed, since December's is only one listed on website. Also, lists for qualifying for the HPO are as of Dec 19th. Time to update!

Instead of back to poker, I would have typed, "while we're discussing mismanagement".

The fact that 2+2 users have to continually remind management of the need to update its website, make obvious recommendations for change, and detail out obvious issues with the room (broken and stained chairs), should tell a story.

We're there for a few hours and see these things, why aren't the people who work there and make it their livelihood on top of these issues?

You can choose to accept everything and simply "respect it", but I choose something different.

This poker room rakes the highest and charges for drinks. The least it can do is provide the best service and have a little thicker skin than to essentially say, "I make the rules and I don't want to talk about it".

This poker room should be shining our shoes while we play. It's lucky though, because it has players like you that say, "it's great no matter what".

Accept mediocre, get mediocre.

Accept mediocre, get mediocre.

Mediocre? I wish.