*** OFFICIAL *** Druff & Drexel Show Thread for 2/19/2013 - $60 Freeroll - Rich Muny/PPA Debate!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I am just disappointed that most people who have commented thus far have failed to see the question-dodging he was doing, and that long speeches about semi-related matters are not good answers if you completely avoid the main points being raised by the other side.

---

Druff, when one considers you were up against someone that is very practiced at spouting the spiels he gave out, one must say you gave a very good acccounting of yourself. All of us are better served for your critical interview/debate. I too think the big money interests are in opposition to on-line poker and arguements such as homeland security, morality of poker, etc are all just a smoke screen. And I susect the PPA doesn't really want to do too good a job with legalizing on-line poker because it will mean the end of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrenadaRoger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I am just disappointed that most people who have commented thus far have failed to see the question-dodging he was doing, and that long speeches about semi-related matters are not good answers if you completely avoid the main points being raised by the other side.

---

Druff, when one considers you were up against someone that is very practiced at spouting the spiels he gave out, one must say you gave a very good acccounting of yourself. All of us are better served for your critical interview/debate. I too think the big money interests are in opposition to on-line poker and arguements such as homeland security, morality of poker, etc are all just a smoke screen. And I susect the PPA doesn't really want to do too good a job with legalizing on-line poker because it will mean the end of them.[/B]

---

exactly the PPA is a one trick pony, what does the PPA offer it's member poker players, group health insurance-no, a retirement savings program - no, legal representation in disputes against the casinos - no

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve-O

First off, it was a banger of an interviewer, not many people could let that go for 3 hours and still be listenable. It was very good and you shouldn't feel like anyone saying you lost is slighting you; it was just apparent that Rich had a far deeper understanding of the issues and more data to pull from.

The real problem was that when he rebutted or refuted something you said you didn't have a response or a follow-up. Normally you would set a trap and be like "A-HA!" but in the debate you were just like, "well I don't feel you did enough." Like the UB thing; he outlined what they did point for point and you couldn't prove or disprove your side of the arguement, so it came off as if you were debating an expert after reading cliff notes. The thing is, I think a lot of people agree with you on certain points, but you want everyone to agree with 100% of your points.

The whole thing about terrorists and national Security was a perfect example of where you just didn't have the facts. I remember a year or so ago when Tom Ridge and Louis Freel from FairPlay brought this to congress, and I remember even farther back this was one of the opponents of online poker's talking points, so the PPA had to address it, and addressed it as "legalizing and regulating the industry will negate this".

***EDIT: If you feel there was a question he sidestepped let me know and I'll ask him in our weekly interview, and link to the site and podcast***

---

With the UB thing, he didn't outline what they did "point for point". I kept asking if they ever e-mailed all million members with a warning about UB -- something that would have cost no money and taken very little time to have done.

He kept trying to dodge the question, answering with a bunch of nonsense about a D'Amato press release, and when I tried to nail him down about the e-mail, all I got in response was, "There was an e-mail."

He couldn't explain what was in the e-mail.

He couldn't explain why nobody remembered receiving it.

He couldn't explain why there was literally zero discussion on 2+2 of it, despite the fact that it obviously would have generated a lot of interest in 2008.

But I was just supposed to take his word for it that "there was an e-mail" warning all of the members not to play.

I laid out all of the reasons above why it's highly unlikely that such an e-mail ever existed, as there's no way such a thing could go completely ignored on 2+2, and there's no way all of my fellow anti-UB activists wouldn't have known about it. He just kept repeating, "There was an e-mail" or "I told you, Senator D'Amato did a press release..."

This wasn't just a 2008 issue. Everyone who had money on UB in April, 2011 lost their money. The PPA could have saved many of those people with a simple warning.

But the main reason I brought this up was to establish the theme that the Poker Players Alliance doesn't act in the interest of what's best for its members, even if just a quick and simple e-mail could have saved countless players a lot of money. If they want to admit that they are pretty much a cold lobbying group that doesn't actually give a shit about anything outside of the ultimate goal of US legalization, fine. But they won't admit this. You heard Rich last night. Rather than defending the group's inaction regarding UB, he lied and claimed that they did all they could to help.

If there's anything you should bring up in a future interview, it's that, because it's easiest to disprove. Ask him specifically what was in this "e-mail", how many received it, and how clear it was that the PPA strongly advised everyone to get their money off UB and stop playing there. I have a feeling that, if there was an e-mail, it was some BS like, "The PPA is aware of the ongoing cheating scandal with UB, and will be monitoring developments as they occur." There's no way they sent any kind of real warning via e-mail. He very clearly said several times last night that they did.

This was something that was easy for me to question because it defied common sense, and I had the lack of discussion on 2+2 (and my own communication with other anti-UB activists over the years) as evidence to use against his claims.

I didn't have such strong evidence regarding many of his claims in other areas, so when he said, "We did this", it was hard for me to respond, "No, you didn't" without any kind of hard facts to back up my counter-claim. That was one problem last night that I had to deal with, and the other was trying to keep him on topic and directly answering the tough questions, many of which he sidestepped.

But as I think Cokehead pointed out, anyone hearing the UB part who came away with the belief that he "answered the questions" wasn't listening very well.

I wish to thank Todd for taking the time to debate me on these issues and everyone here for listening and for sharing your comments.

I have no desire to reopen the debate, preferring to let the three hours of discussion -- coincidentally the precise length of each Lincoln-Douglas debate -- stand on its own. So, please forgive me if I don't contribute much more here.

I did wish to address questions regarding PPA's contemporaneous statements on the AP/UB scandal and share further info. First, here is Sen. D'Amato's press release from that time period: http://www.scribd.com/doc/4031226/Pr...ating-Scandals.

Quote:

---

Statement of PPA Chairman Senator Alfonse D’Amato in Response to Online Poker Cheating Scandals

Washington, D.C. (July 22, 2008) – Former Senator Alfonse D’Amato, chairman of the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with over one million members nationwide, today issued the following statement in response to recent online poker cheating scandals.

“The Poker Players Alliance (PPA) is the political and public policy voice for poker players in America. Central to our mission are advocacy efforts in Washington D.C. and around the country to protect poker players from misguided and vague laws and to establish licensed and regulated Internet poker in the U.S. To be clear, the PPA is not a regulatory body for poker players or the poker industry, nor do we seek to be. We are, however, compelled to speak out when our public policy mission is potentially undermined by actions which present Internet poker in a negative light.

“Trust is paramount in poker. Sadly, this foundation has been undercut by admissions from two well-known online poker companies, Absolute Poker and Ultimate Bet, that cheating has occurred on their poker sites. The Poker Players Alliance condemns any and all cheating in poker no matter the forum in which it is played. Because of the current legal uncertainties and the lack of federal regulation and oversight, it is especially troubling when cheating occurs in online poker. This has created an untenable atmosphere and has denied the proper means to investigate allegations, administer due process and then apply appropriate penalties for the wrongdoers. We urge these companies and their regulating authority, the Kahnawake Gaming Commission, to provide a full and transparent accounting of these breaches of the public trust to help lift the black cloud that has been placed over the industry.

“The recent cheating scandals underscore the need for U.S. licensing and regulation of online poker to help protect consumers. While even the most highly regulated industries are susceptible to fraud and abuse, regulation does provide assurances that when consumers are harmed they have recourse. Further, it is abundantly clear that regulation will also address other consumer concerns by successfully providing ways to bar access by children to gambling Web sites and providing the necessary services for problem gamblers.

“The federal government cannot continue to abdicate this basic responsibility to millions of its citizens who choose to play poker on the Internet. The attempt to enforce an outright prohibition of online poker is deeply flawed and unworkable, not to mention it invades upon the personal freedoms of law-abiding adults who wish to engage in a game of skill.

“Remaining consistent with our organization’s mission, we will continue our efforts on Capitol Hill to ensure lawmakers are well educated about the benefits of regulation to protect consumers and enable the rights of poker playing adults. These scandals will not and should not be the demise of a responsible government approach to Internet poker. Instead, this can be the pathway to understanding that regulation is the key to protecting citizens and the future of America’s card game.”

---

Here's a screen capture of the PPA home page at that time (the archive.com link: http://web.archive.org/web/200807290...rsalliance.org ):

This was stickied to the top of all of 2+2 by Mason Malmuth himself. Stickies are not saved in the system, but here's a post he made at the time (here):

Quote:

---

Hi Everyone:

We at Two Plus Two think this is a terrific statement and applaud Senator D'Amato and the Poker Players Alliance (PPA) for issuing it at this important time. It puts the PPA and us on the same page when addressing this topic, and it will also help both of our groups to move forward on many other issues and improve the overall relationship between the PPA and Two Plus Two.

Best wishes,

Mason Malmuth
Owner and Publisher
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
www.twoplustwo.com

---

Here are some articles and the 2+2 thread on this from that time:

• http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...andals-256563/
• http://www.pokernews.com/news/2008/0...et-scandal.htm (the Haley Hintze one I mentioned in the interview)
• http://www.pokernewsdaily.com/ppa-re...g-scandal-193/
• http://www.4flush.com/online-poker-n...ng-scandal/880
• http://www.pokerlistings.com/damato-...scandals-29388
• http://www.richardmarcusbooks.com/20...-calls-for.htm

I hope that helps address this important question. Thanks.

The Engineer Stole (my $25 for a t-shirt)

:knife

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

The Engineer Stole (my $25 for a t-shirt)

:knife

---

Where's yeb these days.

Things could have been so much better if you didn't steal from him. Butterfly effect

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

The Engineer Stole (my $25 for a t-shirt)

---

Are you the one who mentioned it on the show? Send me your info and we'll get one to you.

BTW, i wasn't even a PPA member at that time, much less on the board, so it wasn't me. ;-)

One more thing. Here's an interview on the social media effort:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-mHdZbYWKU

I still dont understand why this is being framed as a Debate.


Engineer...thanks for coming on last night.

It should have just been considered a time for Mr. Muny to come on the show and answer questions, while providing knowledge about how the PPA is working for the cause.

Both he and Druff performed admirably.


Hopefully, Mr. Muny will be available via email in the future should any members have specific questions we could ask (serious questions....nothing about his G4 being in the shop).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

The Engineer Stole (my $25 for a t-shirt)

---

Are you the one who mentioned it on the show? Send me your info and we'll get one to you.

BTW, i wasn't even a PPA member at that time, much less on the board, so it wasn't me. ;-)

---

if you have any PPA "swag" like a chipset, i'd prefer you donate one in the name of Anthony Scacozza to our troops in Irag or Afghanistan instead

WillieMcFML


always sacrificing and willing to give so others may benefit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

if you have any PPA "swag" like a chipset, i'd prefer you donate one in the name of Anthony Scacozza to our troops in Irag or Afghanistan instead

---

You are most generous.

While I think we can find a way to get it shipped, how would you feel about it going to a disabled vet from one of those wars? We have worked with the Wounded Warriors Project (we had a fundraising poker tournament for them) and I know we could get it to them pretty easily. I also know they'd be very appreciative of the support. Either way, it will be for a great cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

if you have any PPA "swag" like a chipset, i'd prefer you donate one in the name of Anthony Scacozza to our troops in Irag or Afghanistan instead

---

You are most generous.

While I think we can find a way to get it shipped, how would you feel about it going to a disabled vet from one of those wars? We have worked with the Wounded Warriors Project (we had a fundraising poker tournament for them) and I know we could get it to them pretty easily. I also know they'd be very appreciative of the support. Either way, it will be for a great cause.

---

that would be awesome, thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheEngineer

You are most generous.

While I think we can find a way to get it shipped, how would you feel about it going to a disabled vet from one of those wars? We have worked with the Wounded Warriors Project (we had a fundraising poker tournament for them) and I know we could get it to them pretty easily. I also know they'd be very appreciative of the support. Either way, it will be for a great cause.

---

that would be awesome, thanks

---

um....rich..... please pay attention

:fraudalert

:siren

:fraudalert

:siren

:fraudalert

:siren

i guess baron doesn't support disabled vets

he probably hates babies too and eats the tuna that results in the most dolphin deaths

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

i guess baron doesn't support disabled vets

he probably hates babies too and eats the tuna that results in the most dolphin deaths

---

willie how could you!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron Von Strucker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillieMcFML

i guess baron doesn't support disabled vets

he probably hates babies too and eats the tuna that results in the most dolphin deaths

---

willie how could you!!

---

:knife

Welcome to PFA, Rich, and thank you again for spending 3 hours of your time on the show.

I am also glad to see that you are making Willie's 7-years-running t-shirt dreams come true.

Regarding UB, I never doubted that Senator D'Amato actually issued a press release regarding the UB scandal, but my points about the matter were as follows:

1) The press release was not really warning people to stay away from UB/AP, but rather urging the companies and Kahnawake to display transparency in their investigations. The rest of the press release went on to relate the situation to the need for regulated online poker in the US. I agreed with all of D'Amato's points in the press release, but this by itself did not serve as a proper warning to the PPA membership regarding these companies. It was more of a statement that we needed regulated online poker because of scandals like this.

2) More importantly, it is rather clear that most of the PPA's membership of 1,000,000 players did not see this. To be honest, there is only one way to make sure you reach everyone in an online group, and that's via e-mail. You cannot count on them to visit your website or scour the web for press releases from Senator D'Amato. This is why so few people remember the PPA making any statement about UB at all.

Simply put, had the PPA drafted a simple letter urging its entire membership to stay away from UB, it would have been extremely effective, and it wouldn't have cost the organization any money or any kind of appreciable time. It would have been an effortless gesture that would have resulted in a lot of positive repercussions, in both 2008 and the future.

That was the point I was attempting to raise regarding the UB issue. I never felt that the PPA needed to take an active role in investigating UB, but rather should have utilized its giant membership base and respect within the community to issue a clearly-worded, concise warning via e-mail.

Regardless, I still felt the debate was an interesting and valuable segment for PFA Radio, and I'm glad you were able to join us on Tuesday night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo Tomasi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron Von Strucker

willie how could you!!

---

:knife

---

i hate some private conversations

WillieMcFML: you're a fucking idiot . what is your problem
WillieMcFML: what is wrong with a chipset for disabled vets
Me: you should buy them one if you like
Me: you are a scammer just like jasep i think
WillieMcFML: what did i ever scam?
WillieMcFML: the $25 for a t shirt is a true story
Me: prove it
WillieMcFML: swear on my grandfather's grave
Me: what ever
WillieMcFML: how the fuck can i prove it?
Me: you cant so i say bull shit
Me: bullsheet
WillieMcFML: this was from 05 or 06 and registered from an email account (aol) that i no longer use or have access to
Me: boolll sheets
Me: so cry me a river
WillieMcFML: i don't care if you believe me, do you think disabled veterans getting a chipset is a bad thing?
Me: thats your fault not theres
WillieMcFML: what is my fault?
WillieMcFML: wtf are you talking about?
Me: it think war is a crime in its self
Me: that you lost your cash
WillieMcFML: i paid $25 to the ppa on my first withdrawal from party and i was suppose to get a t shirt
WillieMcFML: i never got one, rich said he'd make up for it and i asked if they had any free PPa swag like a chipset to give it to veterans
Me: so you bring this up now??
WillieMcFML: and you see a problem in that???
WillieMcFML: i didn't lose my cash, i was cashing out a five figure sum
Me: i would say that would be a good idea if you bought a chip set for the disabled vetrens
WillieMcFML: i donated to the ppa and they said i would get a t shirt and didnt get one
WillieMcFML: its not like this is really a big deal to me, i said it for the lulz even though its 100% truth
Me: not you booolll sheestsing the ppa to buy one of them for you youcheep cunt
WillieMcFML: rich promised he would make a right and made a nice offer to give a chipset to vets
WillieMcFML: and you have a probelm with that
WillieMcFML: you are fucking retarded
WillieMcFML: i will give you no more attention limitles 2.0
WillieMcFML: bye
Me: i know you said it for the lulz and so did I
Me: i agree you are takning advantage of some ones good will to make a donation
Me: and were is your generous donation

willy is a sketchy scum bag with little to no redeeming qualities....... ask yebsite

he conspired to defraud a online website not to mention assisting in laundering stolen funds

shall i post your admission to this crime again??

most people only resort to posting pm's when it makes THEM look good

but clearly you aren't playing with a full deck