Your responses have certainly put my mind at rest TE. I feel a lot more confident in what you're doing - and like I say, my perception of poor execution may just me my distance from the whole subject. It is surreal to a Brit to have gambling taken away from the populace, it's etched into the fabric of British Society. (And we're not morally abhorrent or 'evil' are we? I don't think its done us any harm...)

We are now facing the issue of being taxed on our winnings, due to our newly elected right-wing government. This seems trivial to the US I know, but it is huge for us. If they banned it all together there would be riots.

Thanks Nexus.

Yes, things are very different here with regards to gaming, unfortunately.

which is a better means of attack than going to DC and working with the politicians

doing a bad activity <<<<<<< doing nothing at all

and, I've gone to prison for my lifestyle. have you?

Do you have any solid evidence that can verify this claim? I saw similar claims where ppa taking credit for freeing up players money with the doj, much of which currently has not been returned to the players.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Basically, it is a freeroll for PPA to try to claim victory for something they did not achieve. If they convince people that PPA was responsible for something positive, then they have nothing to lose and it could help rally support. There will always be those who accept nothing short of total victory, but if you just skim the forums for an hour or two (and depending on which posts you read) then some people might believe that the PPA helped players get their money back or PPA delayed Black Friday.

It doesn't hurt us (the poker players) in any way. It might help rally support and build confidence in the PPA, especially among its dispirited critics...

PPA did a ton of great work getting everyone with a stake in this issue together to petition Treasury Sec. Geithner for the delay. I personally did my share of work in getting the entire KY Congressional delegation to sign on to the petition. I'm surprised PPA's work here isn't common knowledge in the poker community. It should be.

There's a good article on this at http://www.pokernewsdaily.com/uigea-...ix-months-6701.

I recorded another video on this issue, at www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGZ0ZqBMJGA. I mention the UIGEA reg delay in it, along with other stuff.

The biggest joke is any poker players who isn't doing anything to fight back. At least check out Fight for Poker Rights: Weekend of May 14th in Poker Leg. to see what you can do.

http://www.online-casinos.com/news/news1410625.asp

Gee, I wonder WHY poker has become politically acceptable in Congress....

The goals of the PPA are contradictory. there's no such thing as "enforced" free trade and they're incapable, or unwilling to defend poker on moral, philosophical grounds.

US GOVERNMENT, Goddamn you for making online poker illegal. How dare you, you small, mean little parasitic thugs who are afraid of your own freedom - never mind the freedom of others - to trade according to their own judgement. In a way, I feel like this was inevitable, given the philosophical decay and power grabbing which is metastasizing, and being tolerated by willing victims in the US today. Victims whom have failed to understand the principles required of a nation which created the greatest life-giving renaissance in human history; exemplified by a game of cards invented in the United States, and which requires above all else, good judgement. Poker has been a bastion of purity, of freedom, where individuals are free to bear the consequences - and to profit - from nothing but the exercise of their minds and the quality of their decisions, and online poker has been an example of justice-for-judgement in a form, and on a scale that is also unprecedented in human history. Gangster bureaucrats, you couldn't stand for it. And now you've chosen to initiate force, and acknowledge violence as the standard of men's relationships, because sitting at a table among men as equals is too much responsibility for you, and the people you purport to "serve." Goddamn you. You ****ing, ****ing cowards.

Coming from a guy who half his board of members don't even exist since black friday....give a rest brother....it's getting old!

I will tell you what...maybe if you started something on "your" own, and pulled the community back together on "your" hard efforts and "your" heart...we might actually follow you!

Even I would follow you...hint, hint....

I've provided my recommendations to PPA on that issue. It's being actively reviewed.

Still, that's not slowing PPA down in terms of executing.

I'm trying, but I'm just one guy. This fight really is hard and it really is expensive. PPA doesn't pay me, so I have no reason to spin this. That's just how it is.

I have a new Skype poker adovcacy group that is independent of PPA. We have some great members, too. I think that and my video explaining where we are is a starting point for what you describe.

To join the group, PM me with your Skype username. Learn more at the thread: New action: Skype poker advocacy group

I also have a daily action plan that's independent of PPA. The Poker Leg. thread is at Fight for Poker Rights: Monday, May 16th.

PPA's strategy of online poker being a game of skill was flawed from the start. No way they were going to achieve victory with that being their cornerstone, and indeed they failed despite a very large budget.

Good intentions, but stubbornness and a lack of realism led to poor execution.

However I will say that, if the PPA was as good at lobbying as they are at spin-doctoring their results and attacking their critics, we would be playing online poker right now on the Harrah's Poker Network.

This by far is the stupidest thing I ever heard in my life....even I can't shutup....you think the PPA shoved down your throat that poker is a game of skill??? Better research better brother....your only at the tip of the iceberg!

Here is a great question for this community that I haven't seen one educated person tell us....whoever told you it was a game of skill??

THIS!!!!

Those who don't back what the PPA is doing and come on this thread to slander their efforts.....what have you done to help get online poker back in the U.S.A.???? Have you wrote your state reps or the DoJ(like I and countless others fighting for regulation have)? Have you started a petition drive to try and legalize it on a state basis? It is so easy to critique from the comfort of our own homes waiting for OTHERS to go out and do the dirty work but when things don't go our way you guys love to play Monday Morning Quarterback. So I ask those of you who aren't thrilled with the way the PPA is handling things what are you doing to help regulate online poker in the USA?

The time it took me to create this post I was able to send email's to all of my state reps AGAIN.

If you guys used as much energy helping those who are fighting the fight instead of bashing them we would have had poker regulated in 2006. Get off your high horses and help out!

WTF are you talking about?

That's the argument the PPA has been using from the start: Poker isn't gambling because it's a game of skill.

It's the truth, but it's horrible from a lobbying standpoint.

PPA does not believe poker is not gambling – as least not as the term is defined in the dictionary. It would be foolish to pretend it isn’t. However, many state laws do define gambling as wagering on games of chance. In these states, offering of online games of skill is lawful under the laws of those states. For example, Worldwinner.com – based in Mass. -- offers solitaire, duplicate bridge, and other games for real money. These games are permitted in over 35 states because they are recognized as games of skill (although these are surely gambling games just as poker is). So, there is legal as well as legislative precedent for the skill vs. chance argument.

Additionally, poker is different from most casino games in that it is a peer-to-peer game that is not house-banked (in most states, CA being a notable exception). In my personal experience on the Hill, lawmakers like that distinction because it enables them to draw a bright line between poker and other player-to-player games and casino-style house banked games. On top of that, “gambling” is a loaded term to many. Most of our supporters there – especially more conservative ones – are pleased that we don’t routinely refer to online poker as “online gambling.” Even gambling supporters often refer to the activity as “gaming”.

Changes to the PPA Board

I apologize if this has already been pointed out explicitly, but the PPA's most recent tax form (it's form 990; the most recent available, at least from one of the links I found earlier itt, is from 2009) makes some amusing reading to anyone who might wonder how the money gets spent. Here is the form (it's a pdf, retrieved from this site); check out page ten.

Highlights:

• Total employee costs of $436,250. (This is separate from the ~$1.1 million paid to non-employees for legal services, the ~$2.1 million spent on lobbying, and the ~$1 million spent on public relations.)
• Professional development expenses of $514,124.
• Board member fees of $250,000. The board members draw no salary, but those fees sure do add up.

I suppose just how interesting this is depends primarily on what the "professional development" expenses are, which I have no way of assessing; anyone more familiar with form 990 line items, feel free to chime in.

Thanks for posting that, Atakdog.

I see nothing unusual there. It is an expensive fight.

The board member fees are likely a function of the fact that two of the members -- Ex. Dir. John Pappas and Chairman D'Amato -- are compensated. FWIW, I draw no salary or fee.

I'll ask about the expenses categorized as "professional development."

Do you know, roughly, (and I apologize if this has been answered recently) how many employees there are? A half million is either a lot or a little, depending; it struck me as odd because so much of what the organization does is, based on this document and other things I've read, the hiring of outside contractors (legal, lobbying, and PR). that employee number doesn't include those, nor a couple hundred thousand on advertising.

If the only two board members who are compensated are the two you named, then that's a pretty nice gig for them, though perhaps those are normal fees, particularly for d'Amato.

But yes, the most interesting (or not, we'll see) item is a half million for professional development.

Welcome to Wash. D.C. where you need to spend the money and rub elbows to get what you want passed. You do understand to fight this type of fight millions will need to be spent right?

Absolutely. But we're not talking about lobbying expenses here. I'm just interested in what Pappas and d'Amato got paid (though in fact if it really was just them I find it much less interesting; it would be much worse if, for example, Lederer was getting paid to be a board member of a nonprofit organization that's widely perceived to be working primarily in support of the company he controls).

Do your homework brother....where did the PPA start from??