Not everybody agrees with me about Mason and Poker Player's Alliance
Elaine Vigneault is Ed Miller's wife and got offended about how Mason treated her and her husband a while back and can't let go of it. I understand that feeling, I don't care for Mason either, he's not a nice person, he's not an honest person.
The thing about Elaine that I suspect she doesn't want to face is that everything that happened between her husband and Mason was perfectly predictable from publically available information about Mason and his personality and world view. He's the guy that told me years ago, "If you'll be nice to me I'll make you a lot of money". I passed on that opportunity. Her husband didn't. He was young and naive. You can't blame Mason for that.
When I praised Mason for spending the money to investigate this money grubbing Poker Player's Alliance I didn't do so because I thought Mason's motives were pure, or that I think Mason was trying to do the right thing. I don't know what Mason's motives were, and I don't care. He provided some very helpful information to the poker community and I think he should get credit for it.
Elaine is very confused about how the PPA piggybacked on the new law that bans internet funding for illegal online gambling. That law in no way makes poker illegal. I only addresses poker if poker is already illegal. And in the US, the question of the legality of poker is a state-by-state question.
Elaine says,
What are you talking about, Elaine? What rights?
Here's waht PPA says on their website:
Let's just skip over the part about using scare quotes. People who use scare quotes can't be trusted to have any communication skills or intent to actually engage in straightforward communication.
But what federal legislation are they talking about? (and why capitilize it?) There is no federal legislation to ban poker. None.
The law they refer to is a bad law. The primary problem with it is the way it was passed. But it doesn't ban poker.
They are simply using the objections that poker players might have to that law as a hook to raise money for no purpose. If you really want to lobby to make sure poker is legal you don't open a mail drop in DC, you open real offices staffed with real people in Austin, Albany, Oklahoma City, Sacramento, Little Rock, etc, etc. State Capitols.
There is no evidence at all, none, that PPA has any intention of doing anything or any competence even if they do intend to do anything.
Yes, it's a bad law. But that doesn't mean that you should support PPA. They aren't going to do anything with your money that helps you.
The thing about Elaine that I suspect she doesn't want to face is that everything that happened between her husband and Mason was perfectly predictable from publically available information about Mason and his personality and world view. He's the guy that told me years ago, "If you'll be nice to me I'll make you a lot of money". I passed on that opportunity. Her husband didn't. He was young and naive. You can't blame Mason for that.
When I praised Mason for spending the money to investigate this money grubbing Poker Player's Alliance I didn't do so because I thought Mason's motives were pure, or that I think Mason was trying to do the right thing. I don't know what Mason's motives were, and I don't care. He provided some very helpful information to the poker community and I think he should get credit for it.
Elaine is very confused about how the PPA piggybacked on the new law that bans internet funding for illegal online gambling. That law in no way makes poker illegal. I only addresses poker if poker is already illegal. And in the US, the question of the legality of poker is a state-by-state question.
Elaine says,
Poker Player’s Alliance is the only organization that works to protect poker player’s rights. I’m not a member, but I support what they do. They could do more.
What are you talking about, Elaine? What rights?
Here's waht PPA says on their website:
The PPA is committed to protecting the game of Poker in the face of Federal Legislation that just passed to Ban ‘our game’.
Let's just skip over the part about using scare quotes. People who use scare quotes can't be trusted to have any communication skills or intent to actually engage in straightforward communication.
But what federal legislation are they talking about? (and why capitilize it?) There is no federal legislation to ban poker. None.
The law they refer to is a bad law. The primary problem with it is the way it was passed. But it doesn't ban poker.
They are simply using the objections that poker players might have to that law as a hook to raise money for no purpose. If you really want to lobby to make sure poker is legal you don't open a mail drop in DC, you open real offices staffed with real people in Austin, Albany, Oklahoma City, Sacramento, Little Rock, etc, etc. State Capitols.
There is no evidence at all, none, that PPA has any intention of doing anything or any competence even if they do intend to do anything.
Yes, it's a bad law. But that doesn't mean that you should support PPA. They aren't going to do anything with your money that helps you.
posted by Gary Carson at 3:33 AM
3 Comments:
Well, I agree with you, and I was one who saw little reason to join PPA in the first place. Color me curmudgeonette or something, because to me the PPA looked like a frivolous waste from the very start.
I originally questioned them because of their motto "Keep Poker Legal".
Well, in most places where we have public poker rooms poker isn't legal -- it's regulated. Playing poker outside the regulation is illegal. Here in Oklahoma, for example. You can play poker legally at an Indian Casino. But, not in your own home.
In Texas poker is legal in your home or in a private club, but you
can't play it in a public place (and you can't rake it under any
circumstances)
They don't want to keep poker legal, they want to regulate poker, and apparantly they want federal regulation of poker. I think it's pretty obvious why they don't want to make their source of funds public.
I think Ed Miller's wife wrote her entry to point out that MM's lawyer's analysis regarding the PPA was incomplete and misleading. I don't think she cares about poker or the PPA. She just hates MM. I think MM is try to sue her.
Post a Comment
<< Home