Friday, August 31, 2007

PPA is a fraud

The PPA is a fraud and anyone who promotes their misrepresentations is just trying to con you. That includes Pokernews.com.

The PPA claims to be an organization of poker players, but that's simply not true. They're an organization of secret commercial interests who has a list of poker player names which they use as a front.

Individuals can join with no dues. They don't raise money at all from their "members", they raise money from un-named commercial interests and that's who they're going to serve, not you. They serve the money. You're just a name for them to put on a list and wave around in the air.

What does the PPA support? They support the idea that poker is illegal. According to John Pappas, the new head of PPA
Well, to be clear, there's really only one piece of legislation that's specific to poker and games of skill. That is the Wexler bill, and that is the bill that the PPA promised to deliver to its members. As soon as the UIGEA passed in the dark of night last year, we were going to get an exemption. And that's exactly what the Skill Game Protection Act, HR 2610, introduced by Robert Wexler, seeks to do. So that is the only bill that's specific to poker.

The UIGEA only applies to poker if poker on the internet violates US law. No US court has found that to be the case, but PPA supports the argument that internet poker does violate US law.

Why would they do that?

To give their commercial supporters monopoly control over online poker by giving the US government the power to regulate content on the internet. BoDog does not support PPA. FullTilt does. PPA is an organization of commercial interests who don't want their identity known who's goal is to establish monopoly control of internet poker.

But they constantly lie about who they represent. Don't trust the sonsofbitches and don't trust anybody who tries to tell you otherwise.

Labels:

4 Comments:

Blogger Dr Zen said...

I'm not keen on the whole "skill game" argument. I prefer the "it's none of the government's fucking business that I spend my money this way" argument. But this is not an argument on principle.

I'm not sure about your analysis of PPA, but it sounds pretty plausible. Regulation will definitely be of benefit to some, not others. One could expect the final deal on online poker to include excluding foreign-domiciled sites, or similar restrictions.

5:44 PM  
Blogger Gary Carson said...

They claim to represent players.

However, none of their money comes from players. None.

They will not reveal their revenue sources.

That makes them frauds. Con artists. Crooks. Slime.

They simply can't be trusted.

It's not just regulation they lobby for. They actively lobby against any online gambling that might compete with online poker rooms.

They are not acting in your best interest and people like Chris Ferguson and Linda Johnson and Annie Duke should be ashamed of themselves. They are trash.

10:18 PM  
Blogger Dr Zen said...

Well, it makes them suspicious, Gary, but it doesn't necessarily make them crooks. Probably best not to have the hanging before we've had the trial.

3:25 PM  
Blogger Gary Carson said...

Dr zen, this is America. We don't need trials. We have Gitmo.

6:58 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home