Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Legislation for Poker & Income Taxes for Poker Players Discussions of various poker-related laws and steps players can take to push for better laws.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-22-2010, 01:23 AM   #1301
RGC2005
adept
 
RGC2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 888
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
+1

The quote thing is HUGE problem. Let's say someone posts the following:
  • Skallagrim said, "xxxxx"
The person making that post better be able to prove Skall said or wrote that exact text. I guess FDJ is now claiming ignorance on not understanding what quotation marks actually do.
I have a set of Google search queries to capture poker news that interests me and my business. Today I picked up a thread on REC.POKER started by FDJ attacking Rich, the mod nazis and the PPA. Funny read.
RGC2005 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 12:30 PM   #1302
schlucky1
veteran
 
schlucky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Fitness and nutrition coaching
Posts: 2,925
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Wow, this thread has gone to crap. How about some updates on what's going on?
schlucky1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 01:24 PM   #1303
cardboardvox
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 69
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

The House won't be back in session until mid September (13th i believe) so not a lot going on until then. Any new developments will probably be posted in a new thread anyway, as this one has served its purpose
cardboardvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 01:38 PM   #1304
trojanmana
adept
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 737
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

so in terms of getting this bill passed before the end of the year are we chasing a 2 outter on the flop?
trojanmana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 02:28 PM   #1305
totaltool
grinder
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 466
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by trojanmana View Post
so in terms of getting this bill passed before the end of the year are we chasing a 2 outter on the flop?
I say no, because we should not be chasing 2-outters, but we should be chasing (actively pursuing) the most expeditious route to getting this legislation signed into law
totaltool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 03:28 PM   #1306
PokerJeremy
centurion
 
PokerJeremy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 149
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cardboardvox View Post
The House won't be back in session until mid September (13th i believe) so not a lot going on until then. Any new developments will probably be posted in a new thread anyway, as this one has served its purpose
Yes September 13th is the correct date for Senate to come back. Otherwise, just do your business before this bill comes back in game.
PokerJeremy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 04:09 PM   #1307
DublingUp
banned
 
DublingUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: won click away
Posts: 780
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

My 2 cents on former DJ and the PPA. It was only a matter of time untill the "online Poker" debate and it's recent succeses were going to start tapping mainstream politicians and folks feelings. Along with that they ar enaturally going to want a platform to voice there oppinion, and where else but 2+2. You won this July PPA, and the ripple effect seems, they are going to 2+2 to vent the frustration's. "Whoever" Former DJ is, its apparent, he has been affected in some way by the success of our moverment, i.e- PPA and there funding are having a positive effect for Poker players. Otherwise, people like this, wouldn't bother to spend an ounce of their precious day here, with us.
DublingUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 04:09 PM   #1308
PokerXanadu
Commander X-2
 
PokerXanadu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,583
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by trojanmana View Post
so in terms of getting this bill passed before the end of the year are we chasing a 2 outter on the flop?
More like ATs vs JJ. Fortunately, it's a ring game and we can continue to play for as long as it takes to get unstuck. In the meantime, we are learning everyone's betting patterns and tells, and developing our desired table image.
PokerXanadu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 04:17 PM   #1309
repulse
veteran
 
repulse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 3,070
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerXanadu View Post
More like ATs vs JJ. Fortunately, it's a ring game and we can continue to play for as long as it takes to get unstuck. In the meantime, we are learning everyone's betting patterns and tells, and developing our desired table image.
Hopefully we don't get a forced table change in November to a tougher table with a lot fewer donkeys. Rebuilding our table image there might take a while.

(caveat: I haven't been keeping up with the political stuff of how much Republican victories in November would impact our chances, so I might be off-base here and I'm not operating from an informed viewpoint at all... just had to go for the sweet metaphor extension.)
repulse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 05:47 PM   #1310
sluggger5x
John Connor of poker
 
sluggger5x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fight for Poker Rights Action Thred
Posts: 5,592
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

interesting article:

http://www.bookofodds.com/Daily-Life...lace-Your-Bets

Quote:
Of adults 21 and older, 1 in 2.33 views casino gambling as perfectly acceptable for anyone, and another 1 in 2.78 as acceptable for others but not them personally. Just 1 in 5.88 views it as unacceptable for anyone. Our morals are in line with our money: 1 in 3.57 adults 21 or older visits a casino in a year. Almost half of adults, 1 in 2.17, will play the lottery in a year, 1 in 6.67 will play poker, and 1 in 14.29 will wager on races.
sluggger5x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2010, 12:49 PM   #1311
DeadMoneyDad
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,276
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by novahunterpa View Post
Many people who support the bill assume there in an "opt-in" state and there safe, hopefully they are but no one knows, their state may be one to opt-out. I just don't want people who support the legislation to be surprised if their state opts-out, and then be pissed at the PPA because they didn't know or weren't warned at the possibility.
Gee I thought you were trying to push the PPA to try and spend some time and money to try and get better information on where the states might end up BEFORE supporting an opt-out clause........

But I could be confused
DeadMoneyDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2010, 03:30 PM   #1312
LetsGambool
banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 26,578
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadMoneyDad View Post
Gee I thought you were trying to push the PPA to try and spend some time and money to try and get better information on where the states might end up BEFORE supporting an opt-out clause........

But I could be confused
From your lips to God's ears, but I dont think its going to happen.
LetsGambool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2010, 03:31 PM   #1313
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadMoneyDad View Post
Gee I thought you were trying to push the PPA to try and spend some time and money to try and get better information on where the states might end up BEFORE supporting an opt-out clause........

But I could be confused
If we spent only $100K per state to find this out, we'd spend $5M on this. As the answer would change every election, every time the bill changed, and every time a politcian changed his/her mind, we'd be spending millions each year keeping a running tally on opt-out states. Adding to the problem is that many state politicians are noncommittal on this right now.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2010, 03:47 PM   #1314
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGambool View Post
From your lips to God's ears, but I dont think its going to happen.
What would we get for that tremendous expense? For the sake of discussion, let's say PPA spent half our its budget on collecting data on opt-outs and learned that 20 states could potentially opt out (again, we'd never know precisely). Would we quit and decide to milk the status quo for a couple of years?
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 11:33 AM   #1315
DeadMoneyDad
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,276
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
If we spent only $100K per state to find this out, we'd spend $5M on this. As the answer would change every election, every time the bill changed, and every time a politcian changed his/her mind, we'd be spending millions each year keeping a running tally on opt-out states. Adding to the problem is that many state politicians are noncommittal on this right now.
Where do you get your figures? They remind me of the thinking back when you had less than 1,000 posts. We all thought everything was going to cost a lot more in dollars, but know now that with a little creative thinking and a little group effort, that the important things get done very cheaply in dollars just not time or effort. Utilizing all of the free tools you lauded in you 10k post I'm sure the cost could be much much less.
DeadMoneyDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 11:37 AM   #1316
DeadMoneyDad
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,276
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by repulse View Post
Hopefully we don't get a forced table change in November to a tougher table with a lot fewer donkeys. Rebuilding our table image there might take a while.

(caveat: I haven't been keeping up with the political stuff of how much Republican victories in November would impact our chances, so I might be off-base here and I'm not operating from an informed viewpoint at all... just had to go for the sweet metaphor extension.)
A table change seems to be coming. The lame-duck strategy looks to be a 2 outer as well.
DeadMoneyDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 12:08 PM   #1317
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadMoneyDad View Post
Where do you get your figures?
If we had to hire lobbyists to go out and get information from those who have never provided even a hint of a position on this, it would not be cheap. Not cheap X 50 = expensive -- any way you look at it.

Quote:
We all thought everything was going to cost a lot more in dollars, but know now that with a little creative thinking and a little group effort, that the important things get done very cheaply in dollars just not time or effort. Utilizing all of the free tools you lauded in you 10k post I'm sure the cost could be much much less.
You're right about that. That's why we're not spending millions quantifying opt-outs, especially as these quantifications would start going stale the day they were printed.

We're addressing the situation in the least expensive means possible. We're having our members write to state lawmakers. These letters are two-fers, so to speak, in that they both advocate and inform. We're also working to ensure that the legislation has the appropriate rigor for opting out, along with sufficient carrots to gain opt-ins. We're all also doing a lot of work with media to put our position into the mainstream.

There are some states where we have full-time lobbying efforts. CA, MA, and KY come to mind. While it doesn't make fiscal sense to do this every state, we have been able to apply some of the lessons learned across the fifty states.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 12:28 PM   #1318
DeadMoneyDad
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,276
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
If we had to hire lobbyists to go out and get information from those who have never provided even a hint of a position on this, it would not be cheap. Not cheap X 50 = expensive -- any way you look at it.
This is IMO the biggest hole (the other word is blocked as a racial slur, i guess) in the armor of the PPA.

Why rent talent when with a fraction of the cost you can own it. The PPA is clearly not the Yankee's, where is the effort to build and train a homegrown farm team?

Last edited by DeadMoneyDad; 08-26-2010 at 12:29 PM. Reason: censor's humor
DeadMoneyDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 01:06 PM   #1319
Gordias
journeyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 248
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Please, someone convince me this bill has a snowball's chance in hell of passing. According to Alan Grayson, there are 300 bills that the house has passed sitting in a stack waiting to be addressed by the Senate. Won’t HR 2267 end up at the back of this line? And won’t the filibuster-happy Republicans become even more emboldened to obstruct if they pick up seats in November, as is predicted?

Then there is the issue of the Republicans possibly taking back the House in November. I don't want to be the voice of doom here, but I think the prognosis is pretty grim for internet poker becoming legal in the US any time soon.
Gordias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 01:07 PM   #1320
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadMoneyDad View Post
This is IMO the biggest hole (the other word is blocked as a racial slur, i guess) in the armor of the PPA.

Why rent talent when with a fraction of the cost you can own it. The PPA is clearly not the Yankee's, where is the effort to build and train a homegrown farm team?
I don't know about that one, D$D.

One area where we really can't skimp is in lobbying. We're up against the best, so we need the best as well. We also don't have a level load of lobbying need. Some weeks we need comparatively little lobbying, while at other times the full court press is on. I don't know that it makes sense to have a full-time team, given our needs.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 01:09 PM   #1321
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordias View Post
Please, someone convince me this bill has a snowball's chance in hell of passing. According to Alan Grayson, there are 300 bills that the house has passed sitting in a stack waiting to be addressed by the Senate. Won’t HR 2267 end up at the back of this line? And won’t the filibuster-happy Republicans become even more emboldened to obstruct if they pick up seats in November, as is predicted?

Then there is the issue of the Republicans possibly taking back the House in November. I don't want to be the voice of doom here, but I think the prognosis is pretty grim for internet poker becoming legal in the US any time soon.
If it doesn't pass, we'll at least have continued improving our momentum while keeping the status quo firmly in place.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 03:04 PM   #1322
DeadMoneyDad
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,276
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
I don't know about that one, D$D.

One area where we really can't skimp is in lobbying. We're up against the best, so we need the best as well. We also don't have a level load of lobbying need. Some weeks we need comparatively little lobbying, while at other times the full court press is on. I don't know that it makes sense to have a full-time team, given our needs.
I guess I wasn't clear. Yes I understand the need for lobbyists, but I do know from experience that members/volunteers can be trained to pick up part of the work.

Developing the talents of the membership to strengthen the grassroots activities will cost a few bucks to start but ultimately cheap in the long run. Heck if done right should increase donations.
DeadMoneyDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 03:06 PM   #1323
DeadMoneyDad
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,276
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
If it doesn't pass, we'll at least have continued improving our momentum while keeping the status quo firmly in place.
If the current tea leaves are correct, we are going to need all of that momentum and much more, as the power of those opposed to us will have increased.
DeadMoneyDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 03:37 PM   #1324
Gordias
journeyman
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 248
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEngineer View Post
If it doesn't pass, we'll at least have continued improving our momentum while keeping the status quo firmly in place.
That's true. It's probably going to take a lot more time than the optimists predict, but at least progress is being made.
Gordias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2010, 03:45 PM   #1325
Rich Muny
Former PPA President
 
Rich Muny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27,752
Re: HR 2267 Markup (Passed 41-22-1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadMoneyDad View Post
I guess I wasn't clear. Yes I understand the need for lobbyists, but I do know from experience that members/volunteers can be trained to pick up part of the work.

Developing the talents of the membership to strengthen the grassroots activities will cost a few bucks to start but ultimately cheap in the long run. Heck if done right should increase donations.
We have members picking up some of this. I've done a bit myself. That being said, we really don't have many situtations where we're paying lobbyists to do what volunteers could do on their own.
Rich Muny is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive