Burn the bridge with the Venetian/Adelson? Ethics and principles? Adelson is actively buying politicians so he can eliminate online poker. The TDA is actively supporting Adelson by having their conference there.

Everyone conveniently continues to ignore the fact I have stated multiple times that I would not have scheduled the event there.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using 2+2 Forums

It still just strikes me as weird that you are so adamant about poker organizations not using any Adelesen properties, and so quick to condemn the TDA, yet the PPA refuses to actually call for a boycott on its website.

It strikes me as weird that you are adamant that someone needs to call for a boycott to do the right thing. 2+2 knows from experience that poker players in general and 2+2 members in particular don't like to be told what to do. Just ask DNegs and the folks that hated the fact that we endorsed a couple candidates.

2+2 is showing by example where we stand. We have turned down advertising/promotional requests from two Adelson properties that I know of and thousands of dollars in ad revenue. I personally have played about an hour of poker there in the last year, and that was only because a friend was playing. I felt dirty doing it, racked up and left. Won't be back. Other staff/ownership will not play there.

The rest of the community can think for themselves and should do what they think is right without anyone telling them what to do.

Well my point is that it seems like there are an awful lot of people, the Engineer especially, who feel that people, or more particularly the TDA, don't have the right to do what they wanted to do. Instead, they have jumped on the organization and its leaders for not boycotting the V, yet both the PPA and 2+2 are unwilling to call for a boycott officially, hiding under the excuse that "we don't want to tell people what to do". So after the fact, everyone is fine telling the TDA what to do. They just aren't willing to say it upfront.

You wouldn't even be "telling people what to do". You would be recommending what people should do. You would be informing people of an action that you believe will help in the fight. And just like the phonecalls to congressmen, one is good, but you really need a critical mass to make a difference. So when an influential organization like 2+2 or the PPA, with a platform that reaches thousands of poker players, decides NOT to try and help bring a critical mass to the boycott, but then openly criticizes others who don't boycott, it is a cop out.

If you feel that not using Adelsens property is so important to the fight, then why don't you tell people that? 2+2 had no problem telling people to vote for that NM ex governor because he was "best for poker". And please don't use the excuse of "it probably wouldn't work anyway". Because that's the very same criticism lots of people throw at the PPA and the Engineer about his daily action items.

So IMO if an organization that is leading the fight against Adelsen is not willing to advocate for a boycott, the they should STFU when people don't boycott them. Both PPA and Mason said "it's up to everyone to decide". So then let them decide.

+1 to all of this.

Time for all parties to call it as it is.

True Fact !!

Just throwing out, the HPO isnt the biggest buyin outside of WSOP this summer.
5k venetian main, 10k bellagio cup, plus the aria/bellagio 10/25/50/100/500k

Having a contract in place didn't prevent Adelson/Venetian from kicking out the online reporting site during a VDS.

Why should Adelson/Venetian be treated better than they have treated people?

I completely forgot about this. It's actually a very valid point.

I never heard about this... what happened? I remember the basics but I didn't know about a contract or anything binding.

Of course, I would have liked that online reporting site to have refused the DSE, not the other way around, but maybe I'm just being greedy.

Venetian $5k is after the wsop. Bellagio cup gets 100 players. $500k events don't appeal to the masss. So around mid June this is the biggest event outside wsop.

PokerNews was supposed to cover the MSPT event held during last summer's DSE, until they were told not they couldn't.

You'd struggle to find someone who has publicly called out Adelson and LV Sands more than I have.

It's a statement of fact that people will decide where to play. I can't physically stop them.

You've never asked PPA for a boycott, nor have you asked for one here. Rather, you seem to be attacking anyone critical of TDA potentially having this event at the Venetian.

Of course they have a right to do what they want to do, just as the poker community has a right to question why they'd want to do this.

No one said TDA has to boycott the V (i.e., tell others not to go there). Rather, the discussion centers around them choosing not to have it there.

PPA, and I personally, have often and continually recommended that people not play, eat, sleep, or patronize their properties. What about that confuses you?

What confuses this guy and other people is why you, (PPA) and Two plus Two, don't call for an official boycott of the Venetian. This makes no sense if you really believe Adelson is such a terrible person. The explanations provided so far by representatives of PPA and Two plus Two make no sense.

A boycott doesn't have to be an all or nothing stand. It an be "On the 1st and 15th of the month, don't play at the V". That gives the players the option thorughout the month to make their decisions on the long term decision of wether to play there or not, and the specific dates makes a direct point to the room and everyone else that action should be taken.

As for the part of your post I bolded, if you believe so strongly in your position against Sheldon, why spend even an hour there? If your friend wanted to play there let him. But you spending time in there yourself tells me that you're position is not as strong as you want people to believe.

How you came to that conclusion after reading the portions of Professionalpoker's post I bolded is beyond me.

browser is the best poster.

Maybe it would clear things up if you explained the difference between calling for a boycott and merely recommending one. Because this sounds an awful lot like calling for a boycott.

"We are not calling for a boycott, we are continually recommending that people not play at, eat at, sleep at, or patronize their properties."

Uh.

The challenge with a term "boycott", as I'm sure you're well aware, is that it sets up as a metric of success the business reduction at the boycott target. As I have little influence over tourists and retirees at the nickel slots, my goal is more about those who care about this issue showing solidarity.

So, I again very strongly recommend no one play, eat, stay, or otherwise patronize LVS properties. It's not rocket science.

Are you asking PPA to call for a boycott?

Why the obsession over the terms boycott?

So you very strongly recommend that we stand in solidarity against LVS by not playing at, eating at, sleeping at, or patronizing their properties. Got it.