Who does PPA represent
When updating a recent post about PPA I said
>
In the comments dmw said
My doubt is about what special interest group they actually represent. I don't think they're being honest about that.
I have a lot of reasons for my doubt, two of the main ones are the offers of free membership and the goals they give.
The free membership is something I find really odd. They want a lot of people to sign up, but they don't care if any of those people actually support them (like with dues money). That just looks like pretense to me, that they want to be able to pretend that a lot of individual poker players support them with what counts, money.
The goals is something else again. Their goals don't help online poker players. Even if they achieve those goals poker players will still not have an ability to fund poker accounts online. In fact, I think that if they achieve the goals individual poker players will be worse off. Their goals include a failure to support the WTO rulings about the Anigua law suit in International Court which actually support the interests of individual poker players. More than a failure to support, they are taking a position that actually is contrary to the findings of the WTO.
The WTO is saying the US government does not have the legal authority to regulate the internet, PPA is taking a position that the US government does have that legal authority.
So, I don't see any evidence that they actually represent the interests of you and me. I think that makes them a scam.
Click on the PPA tag to see previous posts on the subject.
>
On a related not, Ed Miller shows really bad judgement by recomending PPA. The funny part about his post is that he's attracted by being able to join for free and that's one of the things that screams "scam" to me.
In the comments dmw said
I don't see where the con is. Sounds like they are a special interest group like any other one.
My doubt is about what special interest group they actually represent. I don't think they're being honest about that.
I have a lot of reasons for my doubt, two of the main ones are the offers of free membership and the goals they give.
The free membership is something I find really odd. They want a lot of people to sign up, but they don't care if any of those people actually support them (like with dues money). That just looks like pretense to me, that they want to be able to pretend that a lot of individual poker players support them with what counts, money.
The goals is something else again. Their goals don't help online poker players. Even if they achieve those goals poker players will still not have an ability to fund poker accounts online. In fact, I think that if they achieve the goals individual poker players will be worse off. Their goals include a failure to support the WTO rulings about the Anigua law suit in International Court which actually support the interests of individual poker players. More than a failure to support, they are taking a position that actually is contrary to the findings of the WTO.
The WTO is saying the US government does not have the legal authority to regulate the internet, PPA is taking a position that the US government does have that legal authority.
So, I don't see any evidence that they actually represent the interests of you and me. I think that makes them a scam.
Click on the PPA tag to see previous posts on the subject.
Labels: PPA
posted by Gary Carson at 1:00 AM
2 Comments:
The reason Ed supports the PPA is because they are the only lobby for poker players.
I'm sure Ed would support another poker player's lobby had he any choice. But currently, no one else is stepping up to the plate.
I don't think they are a lobby for poker players. I don't think wishful thinking is a rational reason for supporting them.
Post a Comment
<< Home