I don't think it's as simple as "fighters vs. naysayers," or "PPA supporters vs. PPA haters." These are false constructions. In a similar vein, the poll should have offered "yes," "no" and "neutral" options. That would have given a truer picture, and my guess is that the neutral position would be the largest segment by far (that's how I would have voted, anyway). The players obviously want an organization that truly represents the players, and we're not there yet. But wishing for improvement doesn't make anyone a hater or a naysayer.

In my opinion, DoTheMath's comments in this thread are very insightful. I'm not sure why he's receiving so much pushback from Skall (perhaps there's some history?). Skall, can you consider his suggestions with an open mind? He seems to have some very good ideas for helping the organization move towards being more representative of players' interests.

Well, they're not on the level of Sugar, Corn, Pharmaceutical lobbyists, but of course, they don't have the money behind them either. I don't really know how much you could expect out of them.

Their only shot was to play to the emotions of the general populous' fears of losing freedoms in general, IMHO. Instead, they took a far more focused approach from the start, almost getting away from politics, and getting more into specifics.

Ultimately I said that I have a favorable opinion of them because I do not have an unfavorable opinion of them.

The Gay and Lesbian movement doesn't purport to represent gays, lesbians, gaybashers and rednecks who like to use gays for skeet shooting. The civil rights movement didn't purport to represent blacks, the KKK, the Black Panthers and the skinhead movement. What's next? The BPA, the Blackjack Players Association representing casinos offering blackjack and gamblers who play blackjack? Like any legislators give a rats a$$ about either except for taxable income.

The Daily Action Plan isn't from PPA. It's a community-driven effort that I started in the aftermath of UIGEA's passage. I wasn't even a PPA member when I started it.

In my most nice voice ... this is in no way meant to be a "pushback" ... what "players' interests" can or should the PPA be more representative of?

Players want a safe and legal place to play, with choices of places so that the rake is not outrageous. That is what the PPA is fighting to get. What is missing?

As to DTM's proposed reforms, I have already posted that I have no problem with them intellectually or philosophically. The issue is one of practicality, and specifically practicality for an ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION.

I would love to see a poker players' union that sets rules, governs rankings, fights for deals, etc... and maybe does some political advocacy on the side. Such an organization would highly benefit from many of DTM's proposals.

Such an organization is NOT the PPA. The PPA is not going to get into those areas for the simple reason that it is using all of the resources it currently has to ADVOCATE for the legal right to play.

WHEN the legal right to play is firmly established, THEN maybe the PPA can move into becoming that "players union" type organization some seem to want. Maybe it can't and someone else will have to do it.

But until the legal right to play the game is established in the US, there rest is a diversion of resources needed to press home point one: US players need laws that establish the legal ability play on legally responsible, competitive, and regulated sites that are answerable at law to violations of players rights.

Skallagrim

So you only ever play in home games with no rake. That is what I suspected all along.

I also have to say it is profoundly revealing that you think the relationship between a business and its customers is similar to the relationship between blacks and the KKK.

Right now, sites and players have some common interests. One is to get online poker authorized. That's one reason IGC donates to PPA. Sites benefit by helping empower us to stand up for our rights.

Players unanimously reject the notion of playing in an unsecured, online poker environment of the past, where player protections were as good as the party that was vouching for them.

I'm gonna come back there, but first, you said some things last week that were hurtful and unbecoming of someone tasked with working toward the betterment of the game.

this is a mischaracterization and not true

Is that why you didn't challenge FTP for an insufficient response rate to customer service complaints, while eagerly accepting funding from them before Black Friday?

An expressed viewpoint, of a chairman of the board, at the Poker Players Alliance.

This kind of language is spiteful and condescending, and it contradicts the kind of public relations approach that supporters expect of one of a PPA leader. Considering you can say something like that, and still call me a “hater”, that seems hypocritical.

There was a reason I pulled money out of my pocket at one time, for the PPA. That you find my persistence for a re-organized PPA so objectionable, as to push back with name calling and the like as you have, it’s disappointing.

Two bold promises are made in the Poker Players Alliance mission statement:

• The PPA’s mission is to establish favorable laws that provide poker players with a secure, safe and regulated place to play.
• The PPA is committed to defending the rights of poker players.

In the first of two promises made above, the word, favorable, jumps out. How can the Poker Players Alliance strive for, “favorable” laws, without producing a list of basic, rights and protections for legislative consideration that meet with player approval?

The second promise, and extent of the PPA's "commitment", is the subject of continuing debate.

But without dissecting history, or further fingering sides with deserved or undeserved blame, maybe we can forge a new start, and make a truer Poker Players Alliance, that has a purposeful and functioning, player advisory board. And let the whole of the player and his poker experience, become more fundamental in the PPA mission.

A Re-organized, Poker Players Alliance
Online poker consumers unanimously want greater protections when online poker comes back (not after it comes back). And The Poker Players Alliance is the vehicle to get it done.

This means, first, that the Poker Players Alliance re-organize, and work at developing and integrating a player driven, advisory board of its own, into the PPA organizational structure. Such a branch would be advisory in nature, but with measurable confluence on administrative efforts. The objective being, that players themselves have an initial say, about their own, online, poker playing rights and protections.

The Objective: The drafting of a “Poker Players Bill of Rights”, that could be signed by participating state Governors, and attached to any proposed, state or federal, online, poker legislation. The document itself to act as a self imposed, ‘safeguard threshold’, and will also help to see that the cart is not put before the (proverbial) horse.

But before this happens, the PPA has to be on board. If not, then online poker consumers will announce a divide by sending mixed messages to congressional leaders – one, same message from the Poker Players Alliance, and the second, from the “Players”, that the Poker Players Alliance, awkwardly, misrepresents.

In the “players” message will be a call for lawmakers to acknowledge that, market experienced, online poker consumers, highly recommend ‘said’ set of player rights & protections be adopted into law with the passing of ANY poker legislation. Such recommendations may be consistent with existing laws, and in State’s where online poker is legal. But recommended “rights & protections” should be advanced with any new, poker legislation being considered.

...and that's the start.

But as long as we are separate, lawmakers will be approached by an industry that’s conflicted, but lobbying for access to the bank accounts of every household in America. Is that helping, or hurting the cause of legalizing online poker in America?

We need to be able to get along, and you guys at the PPA MUST find a way to better interact with consumers that don't "hate" the PPA, but may be equally as passionate about the cause.

The 'no inclusion' policy concerning player/member proposals, and items for consideration on the PPA agenda is the crux. A re-org seems to be what's most desired by a poker consumer public that is fighting for more of a player voice.

Your words, not mine:
Are you people that delusional you equate yourselves with the civil rights movement? Things must be getting pretty desperate over there for a stretch like that. And don't try to turn a post like I do. You just don't have the horsepower.

There was certainly no intention on may part to imply that being able to play poker is even remotely as important as being free from discrimination based on race.

I think most people easily understood the point I was trying to make: in every collective effort to change the law in this country, whether big or small, there have been people who said things like: the leaders are crooks; they will never win; people don't matter, only money matters; the opposition is too strong...etc.

Sometimes these people were right and the movements failed. In which case nothing was really worse than before as laws did not change.

But much more importantly, sometimes these people were wrong.

Sometimes things did change precisely because some people fought long enough and hard enough despite being told it was useless by some.

And on the subject of the PPA let me say clearly that I am not OPPOSED to change. There are plenty of avenues for it in the future. Nobody wants to see players MORE involved than I do. All I have really been trying to point out is that, as Richas posted, the perfect should not be the enemy of the good, and also that stopping everything now in order to totally re-invent the PPA is a -EV strategy. The PPA can and will change as time goes on and circumstances dictate. But lets not take our eye of the main fact that between the states, the tribes, the AGA, and the feds vying for control of online gaming's and poker's future - the next 2 to 3 years are a critical time to make your voice heard in support of openly legal, regulated, and competitive online poker. It is also important not to get sidetracked.

And finally, all you really have to do to change the PPA is to work on whatever is your issue and prepare a detailed proposal, then shop it around gather a bit of support for your proposal, and then work with us to see if the PPA can provide resources to assist. If the PPA decides to concentrate its resources elsewhere it is not disagreement over value, it is a reasonable disagreement over tactical priorities. When the PPA does not chose to get directly involved it also encourages those folks to go ahead on their own and never tries to prevent or hinder them from doing that.

In the end it should be pretty clear BOTH that the PPA is far from perfect and can be improved, but also that it is a growing organization that has clearly been pretty effective in raising awareness among the public and the politicians that a poker community exists and cares. And so the PPA deserves "support" at the very least in the sense that it is fighting for a shared goal. We all should be able to work together but sometimes we do have to work parallel. We should never work against each other as that only helps the opposition.

And having said that, I am going to chill out of this thread for a time.

Skallagrim

Nah...you were overrating your importance in the grand scheme of things. To post that playing a game is anything other than just that, let alone analogous to the civil rights movement, bespeaks an ulterior motive and something more than a mere interest to see poker grow.

From reading his first post on the subject he obviously was not implying that the ability to play poker is as important as the civil rights movement. The purpose of the analogy was clear. I think you are just trolling him at this point and I hope he doesn't respond to the above quote.

Of all the posts ITT, this one paragraph cuts right to it. Thinking the PPA isn't doing enough is no reason to tear down the PPA, it's reason to step and flesh out the improvements one believes need being made.

We need players to step it up and get involved, and frankly I think most of the PPA bashing I see appears to be an excuse for choosing to do nothing. I want to see more get done, so I'm doing more. It's not easy starting from scratch, and if we destroy or discredit the PPA, then scratch is where we will all be.

If you want to wallow in cynicism that's up to you, but that won't get it done. Instead, step up the effort in your state. If you have better ideas, implement them.

It's not simple, but it is what it takes.

Well, maybe the PPA would have more support if they didn't try to paint everyone that's critical of them as lazy.

Obviously this isn't a scientific poll, but this is one of the most poker friendly environments in existence. If a group's primary mission is to advocate for legalized poker and poker players' rights, and slightly less than half of the people here have a favorable opinion of them, what exactly does that say about their effectiveness?

Good luck winning over politicians when you aren't even liked by poker players.

To me, the larger point isn't that particular player interests aren't being represented or weighted properly (of course there's some of that), but rather that the players themselves aren't being represented. I referenced DTM's posts because he so clearly articulated my own views, and he described a structure that could really include players as true members, rather than subscribers. That kind of organization would have a lot of energy.

I understand that's not the PPA, and again, I agree that there's considerable overlap between players' interests and the PPA's primary focus on online poker, albeit with some misgivings regarding industry interests.

As a poker player, what I really want is the organization that's implied by the name "Poker Players' Alliance." The PPA is an OK organization, but I do have a serious problem with its name, because it tacitly claims to be something that it's not.

Hopefully this makes some sense.

Muny on 4/24

R Muny now after this thread
so which is it Muny? who was I insulting? funny cause all of the poker players in the group added me as a contact.....but they didn't feel insulted enough to remove me...

You kicked me out cause I came in the group and wasn't scared to speak my mind about what I saw

As far as I'm concerned you need to stop calling yourself the PPA, the real PPA is Ron Paul and the liberty movement

Most everyone there IMed me to ask me to get you out after your crazy rants. It wasn't your position...it was your obnoxious, rude behavior.

BTW, the two quotes you posted say the same thing.

I was thinking the same thing.

Neutral. A great idea in theory, but they don't get anything done. PPA needs to take a leaf out of the books of GLAAD and NARAL and stop being so weak and passive, and really pick up some strong support from people passionate about this if anything is ever going to change. Stop "trying" to "negotiate". Just put your foot down and say We Ain't Gonna Take It no more!

Thread bump.

Don't be one of the sheeple, understand what you're voting for.

The post below is from a dormant thread from 2013. It accurately explains what the PPA's mission is, and what it is not. In a nutshell, The Poker Players Alliance seeks your support, but does not offer you any support in return for your vote. Do you want an on-line, poker marketplace like we had before, one that serves the operators and disregards the consumer and his/her safety and concerns? Because the PPA mission is only fighting for access, not player protections.

Time for a thread bump.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=208

What has the PPA even done? People talk about "trying" like that means anything. It feels like the PPA is like trying to bluff by betting $5 into a pot of $10k, you're just burning money.

When politicians are talking about felony charges for playing poker, and regulation entails felony charges for playing poker on unregulated sites, then I would say what is going in the USA with online poker is very similar to civil rights movements. We're not talking about mere restrictions on access to the sites. We're talking about LEGAL PENALTIES that could cause problems for a person in other areas of life down the road. When it gets to that level we are stepping into civil rights violations territory, imho.

People chose to be Jewish and the German Nazi run government violated their rights and punished them for it. I don't see the difference between a person choosing to be Jewish, and worshipping some coo-coo religion, and a person choosing to play poker. Which, is something that involves a lot more logic and reason than religion.

The government has no place issuing legal penalties for accessing poker sites when lottery tickets are available on every street corner, race tracks are everywhere, and casinos flourish. Their only job under such circumstances is to tell the poker sites/players how much of a cut they want in the form of taxes. Beyond that they shouldn't be saying another word when they're $20 TRILLION in debt.

The government's actions are not only a violation of civil rights, but a terrible misuse of resources that is causing the national debt to clime because they REFUSE to tax a multi-billion dollar market.

PPA didn't form to fight the fight for poker players. We organized as players to stand up for ourselves. So, if you want a stronger fight back, I encourage you to donate, volunteer, take action, etc.

I believe it would be a good publicity stunt to rename PPA to PPAP.

I assume the PPA grandfathered DAP as soon as you went on the payroll, just to show they're doing "something".