Poker Forum

I'm not excited about the PPA sticking it's nose in ANY discussions with the DOJ. At the end of the day, all the PPA can do is to make an argument of, "compromise", and reduce any player $$$ returns, not increase them. The PPA has a voice only, and no power whatsoever. In acting as an in-between with players and the DOJ, there's an appearance that the PPA is trying to rebuild trust with players and DO WORK. But the DOJ is gonna follow the law, and not recommendations, suggestions, pleas by the PPA about player reimbursements. And in fact, by offering compromise, the PPA could be letting the DOJ off the hook for reducing player refund amounts and/or percentages.

I just think there's a greater chance of players getting less money back than more, with the PPA involved in the conversation.

Percival: How could doing nothing possibly help anyone? You really think the DoJ will hunt you down to reimburse you if no one complains or asks them for it? Sorry, but it's absolutely imperative that we stand up for our rights here.

Respectfully Rich, if the PPA is going to step in the middle of a discussion with the DoJ, it should publish it's meeting notes so that members know exactly what's being discussed. Simply, there's an appearance that the PPA is speaking on behalf of Full Tilt members that are owed money. But not all of those Full Tilt customers are PPA members, and may take issue with any PPA discussion with the DoJ that includes accepting X percentage, rather that Y percentage in a distribution of available funds.

I'm not at all suggesting that the PPA has deviate motives. But I don't think it's appropriate to be speaking on behalf of individuals that have not signed on with the Poker Players Alliance. If the PPA has a specific objective with respect to Full Tilt player funds, it should spell it out, so that non-PPA members can understand exactly what you're arguing, explaining, negotiating or ??? with the DoJ in these meetings. I mean, is your position that players should just trust that the PPA is doing the best thing for poker consumers, whatever the specific nature of the discussion? With all due respect Rich, that seems a bit arrogant of the PPA to assume so much discretion over player rights, when there's more players that aren't PPA members that you're speaking on behalf of. It's very noble, but also seems over-reaching and irresponsible.

When I asked you in June about the PPA's role in affecting player rights, you were quick to explain that this, and not that, are the PPA's objectives. But your meeting with the DoJ seems to conflict with what you explained to me at the RIO.

Percival: Just so I am clear. You are not a member of the PPA, you would rather the PPA not have discussions with the DOJ on behalf of its' MILLION+ members, but feel the PPA should listen to a NON-member and go hide under a rock? GET REAL! Who is the one being arrogant? Thank you Rich Muny for keeping us informed.

RichMarkgraf: That's not what I said, suggest you re-read my post. To be clear, I was always, and will always be an advocate for poker player rights.

I've been a supporter of the Poker Players Alliance in the past, and I hope to contribute in the future, as I do believe the PPA is a just cause. But from my first hand discussions with PPA representatives during the WSOP in Las Vegas, and now learning about it's meeting with the DoJ, I have concerns. If you and your buddies want to have blind faith in whatever the PPA discusses with the DoJ, that's your decision. I'm not of that camp. I want to see the PPA continue to grow and thrive, I really do. But I want the Poker Players Alliance to honor the code that poker businesses haven't so far, and not go about it's day to day business assuming the sheep will follow. If its talking with the DoJ about player funds, I want to know specifically what was discussed, and if any suggestions or concessions were made, and by whom.

I have great respect for Rich and other PPA board that I've met in the past. I don't know the scope of discussions, or what suggestions may have been traded, in the PPA's meeting with the DoJ. But I would be disappointed if the Poker Players Alliance took liberties in negotiating with the DoJ, or assuming that it knows what's best for Full Tilt members.