Interview with PPA Executive Director John Pappas
Wednesday, March 19th, 2008There will be no comic today because I don’t want the focus on anything else but this interview with John Pappas, Executive Director for the Poker Players Alliance. I am sure you understand…
Grab a cup of coffee because I’m sure this will be a long read. I’ll try and keep it interesting.
First, I want to say thank you to John for taking the time out of his busy schedule to answer some of our concerns. I very much appreciate his willingness to sit down and discuss these important issues. Matt Waldron and I conducted the interview via email and his answers are word for word as received, without any editorial changes. There are a few notes made in YELLOW by me for the sake of this blog entry. There were no follow-up questions asked because quite frankly I have heard enough.
Before we get started I would like to say a few things starting with the resignation/withdrawal of my PPA membership effective today. I will request proof of my membership termination as I no longer want my name or body counted as a supporter of their agenda. I will be pro-actively seeking other PPA members who wish to do the same. We will then submit a list of a predetermined number and ask for a group withdrawal. (look for details soon) Instead of their little counter meter moving forward it should move back, even if for just a few minutes. The size of the dent doesn’t matter because it is all about the symbolism. A concept the PPA refuses to adapt. So if the PPA won’t publicly condemn cheating by well known top tier sites than I say boycott the PPA. They don’t speak for me anymore. As of this posting there were 934,798 members. I expect a posted drop by 1 should there be no new members today.
It should also go without saying, but effective immediately I am also withdrawing all support of the PPA by Life’s A Bluff. The series of supporting PPA comic strips will be removed and I ask that they be taken off any and all other websites that may still be showing them. This includes the PPA.
It is clear now to me they have no intention of keeping to their mantra of ensuring the integrity of the game. I am also now convinced the political position of the PPA will only in the long run hurt poker. I no longer think regulation is needed. We need less laws, less big brother, not more. In fact I worry that we are headed for some very dark times should the PPA get their way. Has anyone truly thought for a second what regulation could mean? Because I tend to think the majority of poker players don’t really understand what is going on or what the UIEGA and wire act is or means. They are just as confused about recent legislation as the banking institutions are. Maybe I have this all wrong so correct me if I do… and explain it to me like you would a child.
How do you expect they (the man) plan to regulate Internet poker? Is the plan to stop the flow of traffic to sites certain states deem inappropriate or against local laws? Since online poker is illegal in Washington State for example, would they block them from going to Full Tilt? Even though a site like Tilt offers games for fun without wager? Are we really going to allow the government to make a morality decisions on what will end up (is) a free speech issue? I want to know exactly what this regulation would mean. Because the day we start regulating the flow and telling people which sites they can and cannot visit is the day liberty dies. Are we that close to being China?
I will never understand why they are taking a position for a carve out, when what they are essentially asking for is a carve out of something that doesn’t even pertain to poker. (child like explanation here too … yeah thanks) They are raising an issue where none needs to be raised. Poker is fine as is right now. Please again tell me if I am wrong. Anyone who has been on Tilt since the UIEGA has seen that site EXPLODE. Doyle’s Room is back. Online championships attracting record fields. The sky did not fall. Things are calming down and people are returning to business as usual. I can (and always have) fund any of my poker accounts any time I want.
Once again… POKER HAS NOT BEEN BANNED. The PPA and it’s propaganda machine would have you believe it is. They have everyone convinced the UIEGA pertains to poker and it clearly does not. I am no lawyer but I suggest you ask one familiar with the recent legislation. Or you can just listen to this debate between John Pappas and Preston Oade. Preston IS a lawyer and brings up quite a few good points that Pappas seem to not have any real answers for. Things I really thought he should know or have a quick fire response for were ignored.
As Oade illustrates better than I, the UIEGA as legislation is to enforce a law that was already in effect. The wire act. The wire act makes specific mention of all kinds of stuff EXCEPT POKER. If they wanted it included it surely would have been mentioned. People who draft laws are not morons. If they intend on something…. its in the bill. I suggest listening to that debate and decide for yourself who is right or wrong.
I vote for the lawyer.
In fact it seemed to me that John was a little naive about some issues. Who knows. I may be as well. It simply doesn’t matter though because I am not the one using a million people to forward any agendas. I think the PPA is harmful to poker. I think they are more harmful to poker than the cheating scandals. If they have their way. We are in deep shit. Those of you who are PPA members need to seriously rethink what is really going on. You need to wonder if the PPA really does have YOUR best interests in mind. Or is it really the best interests of off-shore non-American gaming conglomerates….
You really have to wonder why the PPA refuses to condemn publicly the cheating scandals and those who own both Ultimate Bet and Absolute Poker. One of the state directors seems to think the situation has been rectified and nothing more needs to be said or done. I would like to know what exactly he means by rectified. If rectified means paying a measly fine (that is at best, a fraction of what was stolen) BACK to the body that is Kahnawake then you got to be out of your mind. We did a comic on what that basically was. As far as the UB thing goes… I think the surface is just being scratched.
You know… The PPA has been around for a few years now and they still don’t have the support of land based American casinos. How come? It really seems to me like they are super slow at doing much of anything. I mean, they put out a call for state directors sometime last year and just now picked them. They also only recently starting utilizing its massive member list to send out a newsletter. And then praise it as if it is some sort of profound idea or new technology. Some keep repeating it as if they expect pat on the back for it. This newsletter should have been and should continue to be a constant (and on a set reliable schedule) but it is as rare as Joe Sebok WPT final table. (lol kidding! Joe) 
Look… I am not trying to make waves where there are none. We are already in one helluva storm. The argument that we shouldn’t be raising a stink about integrity of online sites because we might give them more of a reason to say “this is why it should be banned” is ludicrous. If you think for one second any of our Senators or for that matter any major media are paying attention to this blog, 2+2, the PPA newsletter, or any other ‘in the know’ poker entities looking for more fire power… you need an ego check. And even if they were. It’s no reason to not stand up for the right thing and make your peers aware. And it’s not going to scare off any new players for the same reason. All I ask from the PPA and the poker media is to make sure poker players are fully aware. I can’t go one day without reminding someone as to why they shouldn’t play on those sites. And the answer when hearing about the cheating is always the same…. REALLY????
Yes really. And the PPA refuses to inform it’s membership to steer clear of shady sites and those who have cheated their customers.. I ask again… how is it they ensure the integrity?? I am not asking them to be the watchdog for shady sites. But when some confirmed news hits in regards to the community it CLAIMS to represent than I think it is their duty to make their members aware. What do you think?
Before I get to the interview I want to make sure everyone knows that I agonized over the decision to withdraw LaB support from the PPA. For a long time I was a loyal supporter. I did what I could to help increase membership and make others aware of various political issues. I really didn’t want to see the day where I was tossing in my membership.
Membership #36946….. I was proud of that number. Yet there are those within the PPA now who joined long after me who have insinuated that I have not done enough. To them… they know where they can stick it.
In closing…. I did not intend on ripping into Pappas or the PPA when starting this inquiry. So I apologize to him now if he feels bombarded here. I am still not quite sure if this blog post is an appropriate lead-in but I felt it very important. The PPA is speaking for a million people now and I think those people deserve a little help watching out. After all… the entire group is based on an idea of protecting its members. Isn’t it? The members are owed at least that.
They also expect to those in the upper echelon know they are talking about. I listened some recent interviews with PPA Chairmen Alfonse D’Amato and I am convinced the man has never played poker online. If he has, I bet he needs help logging in. Some of the misinformation he is constantly spewing is how regulation would assure that minors don’t gain access to poker sites. Well if he had ever tried to FUND a poker account he would know how strict each site is. I have had to fax in the front and back of both my debt card and drivers license along with copies of bills addressed to me. It is easier for a teenager to buy alcohol than it is for him to play for real money online. Al is clueless and has no idea what it’s like to be an online poker player. Why pick him? There are at least 20 other people in poker who would have been a better candidate. I also should have asked Pappas where he plays online. You would think that would be an important quality for a board member.
BTW as you know, Alfonse has endorsed John McCain for president. It seems the voice of the PPA feels Republican beliefs and morality are more in line with our goals than say oh I dunno, a poker playing Barack Obama. Anyone see anything wrong with that? Where did this guy come from and why is he the face of the PPA? How about Carrot Top? I nominate Carrot Top. Who were the other choices??
I have a theory as to why they won’t denounce the scandals publicly and it’s the same theory as to why some news sites are selectively reporting stories that may offend their advertisers. I believe the PPA does not want to offend those who may fund it either directly or indirectly. And while I am at it… There are some serious questions that now need to be asked of the PPA. It’s up to you (the poker media) to look into this. (that means investigate) I think the members should have a right to all accounting of PPA funds. How much do the board of directors make? Do they all work for free? Who has donated over $1000? Are special favors being granted for donations? (ie silence)
I hope I have done my part. I have raised a big ole stink and it seems to be making the rounds. It’s up to others to pick up where I leave off and take these people to task.
- ————————
John Pappas:
LaB : Does the PPA have a preference for the bills submitted to congress or an “ideal” compromise with the US government on regulation?
John Pappas: The PPA is encouraged by the pro-Internet gaming bills introduced during the 110th Congress. Just a year ago today, very few in the poker world, and even less in the world of politics would have predicted such legislative progress. Never-the-less, our ultimate goal is affirmative passage of new law, not simply the introduction and support of these bills.
Since their introduction the PPA has been the leading advocate on Capitol Hill for both H.R. 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation and Enforcement Act and H.R. 2610, the Skill Game Protection Act. The bills are very pro-poker (albeit, H.R. 2046 considers all Internet gaming) and have earned the sponsorship of dozens of Representatives
We are also active in seeking a Senate sponsor for a pro-Internet poker bill as noted in the March 14 edition of the Las Vegas Review Journal, “Study of regulations slated for ban on web gambling.”
The PPA does not favor one proposal over the other, since both are good for poker players, but we are realistic and are actively seeking opportunities to refine the bills in order to garner more support. For example, H.R. 2046 has been criticized for its provisions that would allow for regulated Internet sportsbook. Whether you agree with it philosophically, it is a political non-starter that is vehemently opposed by the NCAA and the major sports leagues. Thusly, the PPA has been in the middle of negotiations to adjust the bill so that this opposition will be removed – a significant step to the ultimate approval of the bill.
In short, any compromise or any new bill will only be considered “ideal” if it preserves the right and strengthens the protections for Americans who choose to play poker on the Internet.
–
LaB : Do you have a record or online location for the monthly newsletters where members and non-members alike can find them?
John Pappas: We do not have them archived on our current site, but will be posted on our new website which will launch soon. Of course, anyone can always come to our Web site and get updated news and information, not only about the PPA, but the poker world as it relates to political, policy and legal issues.
–
LaB: What is your purpose and goal with these newsletters?
John Pappas: To inform our members.
*doesn’t get much deeper than that.
To inform the members of what?
–
LaB: Outside of the membership fees in the PPA, where do you draw your funding from?
John Pappas: The PPA receives it funding from member dues, merchandise sales, individual contributions and financial support from the Interactive Gaming Council.
* The Interactive Gaming Council is comprised of online gaming sites. Members include; Full Tilt Poker, MicroGaming, Golden Palace, Poker Stars, and a slew of others. I didn’t see Absolute or UB up there but I assume they are somehow connected. You can view the complete IGC member listing here.
Some of you may remember an aggressive PPA member campaign a few months back where certain sites were offering free memberships by playing a ($1000?) freeroll. They signed quite a few members up during this time. Some people even signed up 3 and 4 times. I remember signing up at least 2 different times. I am not sure if they counted duplicates but I assume they did. I would like a complete member list made public. We can start by checking for dead people and dogs first.
I see all sorts of conflict of interest.
–
LaB: Are you willing to publicize a list of your donors of over, say, $1000.
John Pappas: The PPA lists its donors as required for a 501(c)4 under federal law.
* I would like to see this list.
–
LaB: Has the PPA accepted funding from casinos?
John Pappas: The PPA has not received funding from casinos. However, we would be thrilled with their support for poker community through direct contributions or in-kind contributions. We are actively engaging with the American Gaming Association, the casino industry trade association, on ways we can collaborate to advance the goals of the poker community.
–
LaB: Has the PPA accepted funding from the Kahnawake gaming commission?
John Pappas: No.
Again see the IGC member list and you will notice a listing for “Mohawk Internet Technologies“- MIT lists Kahnawake Gaming Commission under “community”. I am not sure what the connection between the two are. I think Mohawk hosts Kahnawake on it’s servers. I would like to know what the connection is. It sure does appear as if the PPA is taking indirect funding from all sorts of suspect places. Is this the real reason behind the lack of interest in the scandals?
–
LaB:Do you feel that the focus of the PPA will have to change as the landscape of online and live poker changes?
John Pappas: Of course! We must be able to serve the poker community as it evolves. We will always be responsive to the needs of poker players whether they play online or in home games. Fortunately, I have found very few instances where the interests of the online and terrestrial poker players are inconsistent with each other.
–
LaB: Is the PPA capable of growing or changing and does it have a contingency plan in place?
John Pappas: Again, the PPA must evolve and be responsive to our members. Are we capable of change? I think many would argue that we have changed, and for the better, in the past several months. We have added two new employees. Our membership relations manager has the primary responsibility of responding to our member questions and concerns and helping us develop new ways to communicate with our membership. Three weeks ago, we added another full-time employee who manages our grassroots and member relations. As I am sure you have seen, just this week we announced the selection of 50 PPA state directors and the formation of state committees so that PPA members can become more active in shaping and participating in our grassroots efforts. And I can only promise more positive change to come in the very, very near future.
–
LaB: What can the average poker player expect to get out of a PPA membership?
John Pappas: Whether you are a dues paying member of the PPA or not, the poker playing community has gotten and will continue to get a strong political voice in Washington D.C. and state capitols across the country. Does anyone truly believe that the bills introduced in the Congress, the multiple hearings on Internet gaming and the stalemate of the UIGEA regulations would have happened without the significant influence of the Poker Players Alliance? Of course not! Lawmakers respond to constituencies and the PPA has given poker a respected constituent voice.
The PPA is a conduit for the poker community to bring its policy concerns directly to lawmakers and we have access to these lawmakers not available to average citizens. We bring decades of lobbying and public policy experience to the fight to promote and protect poker. That is only part of the puzzle. We also inform and then activate our member to make their voices heard. In a 5 month period last year, PPA members using our online tools sent more than 25,000 letters/emails to Congress on the bills we support. That doesn’t include the thousands of phone calls and other communications we facilitated
These are just some of the substantive things you get with the PPA. And very soon we will be adding even more services (think legal support) to members. Not to mention other ancillary benefits such as discounts on purchases from thousands of online merchants. Stay tuned!
–
LaB: What role do the members have besides being a number if they feel their voice and concerns are not being aired?
John Pappas: Again the PPA provides the best opportunity for members to communicate directly with Congress. Last year we held a Washington D.C. “Fly-In” where more than 100 average Joe poker playing PPA members and some of the top pros in the game converged on Capitol Hill and had more than 50 meetings with lawmakers. We intend to do this again this year in early fall, before the elections, and hope that PPA members who want to get their voices heard will come to DC in droves.
–
LaB: Have you seen our poll concerning PPA members’ thoughts on how well the PPA is representing them?( http://lifesabluff.com/ main page, below our archive calendar) Is the result of this poll shocking or surprising to you? What could you do to change that?
John Pappas: Yes, I was very surprised that there were less than 100 votes. When one considers how vast the poker community is, that is very little response or interest in the question.
*Nice non-answer. I guess the opinion of the LaB reader is not worth a response. Maybe its worth asking of the PPA members via a poll on the official website or within the “newsletter”. 100 people is enough sampling for any poll. If we could get 1 million PPA members to answer the question. The results would be pretty much the same.
–
LaB: Why was D’Amato chosen to be the spokesperson? Who chose him?
John Pappas: Senator D’Amato is a respected Washington dealmaker and a poker aficionado. This issue requires a special kind of operative to represent it to policymakers and Mr. D’Amato posses the qualities needed to be successful. We are pleased have him on our side and he is doing a good job for poker players.
He was selected by the PPA Board of Directors in March of 2007 to serve as Chairman and replaced Linda Johnson who served as the PPA’s first Chairperson
*I think someone should ask some very basic online poker questions of Mr. D’Amato and see if he can answer them. Maybe we can get him to agree to a Random Questions.
–
LaB: Do you find it strange that he supports John McCain for President, even though McCain is not showing favorably towards legalizing online gaming?
John Pappas: I think we are in a great position to move John McCain on our issues, particularly with the influence of D’Amato.
*Riiiiiiight
–
LaB: In November it is possible that Colorado voters will again decided to increase stakes to include no limit poker, craps, etc. Does the PPA consider various state issues relating to poker a priority? How do they plan on assisting? Will they grant resources to those pushing for the increase?
John Pappas: Yes, Yes and yes. While I will admit I have not given the Colorado issue my full attention as of yet, I can assure you we will be involved if in fact the proposal in question advances the rights of poker players. We will consult with our CO state director and make determinations on the best course of action.
We are very active in the states. For instance we are at the forefront of removing a provision in the Massachusetts casino gaming bill that would make it a crime to gamble online, punishable by two years in prison. Our surrogates have testified before the state legislature, we have successfully alerted the media to the hypocrisy of the bill, we have activated our members to write and call their local reps and as I type we are planning a pro-poker rally on the State House steps for another hearing scheduled for next week.
*This issue is very important to me. I think the PPA should be heavily involved and grant any available resources whenever possible. It should be top priority of the PPA at each State level to expand the game any way shape or form. Despite my withdrawal from the PPA , I plan to do what I can in regards to this and hope to work closely with those representing Colorado.
–
LaB: Does the PPA plan on being active in Europe considering the recent bans and ongoing challenges for online poker in Germany, etc.?
John Pappas: Our membership is almost exclusively people residing in the United States whom would have little influence over the European political system/process. We have no immediate plans to establish a PPA Europe
The following questions are based from current events as they relate to the mission statement for the PPA. I have copied the Mission Statement here for your reference.
The PPA’s mission statement:
Mission Statement
The Poker Players Alliance (PPA) is a non-profit membership organization comprised of online and offline poker players. Our membership consists of enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game, ensure its integrity and protect the right to play poker.
The PPA’s mission is to guarantee poker players a secure, safe and regulated place to play. Through education and awareness the PPA will keep this game of skill, one of America’s oldest recreational activities, free from egregious government intervention and misguided laws.
–
LaB: It is VERY clear that the integrity of the game is paramount in the PPA’s credo. Do you feel it is the PPA’s job to highlight and fight back against issues and occurrences that lack integrity or are obviously unethical?
John Pappas: Admittedly, our mission statement overstates the PPA’s interest in serving as the “integrity police” for the poker industry. Our fight needs to focus on providing the legal/legislative framework for licensed and regulated poker to prosper which will lead to a secure and safe place for poker players to enjoy the game they love. Like any industry (even highly regulated ones), there will be bad actors and those who will take advantage of consumers. What we should strive to achieve is an industry that can be held accountable by the players and compete (with integrity as their hallmark) for the business of poker players.
Sadly, the current prohibitionary stance of the U.S. government is depriving online poker players who are wronged the direct recourse they should be provided. We hope to rectify this by opening the U.S. market to licensed and regulated competition.
*Then they should remove all mention of integrity from their statements.
LaB: Does the PPA have an official stance and statement on the AP cheating scandal? For that matter, the current UB scandal?
John Pappas: We have not issued an official statement on either. We are pleased that the industrious actions of poker players uncovered the improprieties and that continued pressure from the community forced action. I have no doubt the dutiful commitment of those poker player who were cheated did much, much more than a statement from the PPA could have done.
*yeah he is right. Notifying 1 million poker players wouldn’t have done anything. Except maybe prevent future sites from doing the same. Just maybe. Instead what we have now as a precedent is minimal embarrassment and minimal fines. Scary.
–
LaB: Why is making no statement on the AP and online cheating issues better than releasing a note condemning those responsible for the cheating and those that supported it?
John Pappas: I don’t understand the question.
*With all due respect…. does anyone reading this NOT understand the question? Come on. John is a smart guy. He knows what we meant. It may be a poorly phrased question but it’s clear what we are asking. This non-answer single handedly sealed my decision to resign my membership.
–
LaB: If not a public position, then why not at least an email to the 800,000 person member base to apprise them of the situation and warn them of what has happened? It may be past the time to do it with any effect, but if it happened again, would this be an option?
John Pappas: Again, the PPA does not endeavor to be the “integrity police” for online poker. We believe that poker players are smart people and don’t need to be told by a grassroots political and public policy advocacy organization where to play poker. Just like we wouldn’t send a mass email to players should an online poker site be named the “most trusted” in the game and encourage them to play there.
We did provide regular and updated news on our Website as it was made available and the issue was discussed on our forums.
*didn’t understand the first question but the followup to it was no problem? I don’t recall seeing the regular updated news on the Absolute OR UB scandals… does anyone else? And the issue was discussed on the forums WHEN I brought it up. And if poker players are such smart people how come a great majority of them believe the UIEGA banned poker? Could it be all this mis-information by party leaders?
–
LaB: Should sites associated with a site found guilty of cheating be forced to have an outside audit, overseen by a third party, to ensure the safety of their players?
John Pappas: This certainly is something that should be closely considered when online poker is regulated in the U.S. It would be excellent if sites voluntarily submitted to these types of audits. Unfortunately, it is impossible to mandate this type of regulation on other countries where these sites operate.
–
LaB: Would the PPA be inclined to “certify” online rooms?
John Pappas: No we would not be inclined to do this. Rather, we would prefer to establish a regulatory regime in the U.S. which will license online rooms and give consumers the assurance they need and deserve.
*and what do we do with the majority of offshore sites that will be “impossible to mandate” or license? Ban access to them?
–
So in conclusion I get from the interview that the PPA has no interest whatsoever in being the “integrity police” of poker. So I fully expect them to throw out the clause in the mantra about ensuring the integrity because they fail miserably there. And false advertising is illegal. They are putting up a false front duping possible members. I was duped for sure. I joined the PPA when there was no UIEGA. We had no battle on our hands. I thought the idea was to make sure we had the right to play poker freely and safely within all accordance to rules and regulations. We would be a club/group who stood up when the average player was getting the shaft and made sure it didn’t happen. Turns out it’s all a crock.
So what happens if tomorrow all was right with the world and online poker was a perfect oiled machine? Regulated and taxed. We solved all the social issues with the “potential tax revenue”. Poker is now considered the National pastime and is taught in every school. What role does the PPA take then? Do they just disband without a cause? The way John Pappas puts it, it seems as if they would. Even though it would make sense to revert into a role of watchdog using it’s million person muscle to ensure the integrity of the game.
I think I have asked enough rhetorical questions to last a lifetime. As the reader and a poker player you must decide for yourself which position you most agree with. There are enough facts and questions here for you all to do your thing. Figure it out.
- Frank
Possibly Related Posts:
- Blanks Family Curse - pt 2
- 5 friends.
- The Blanks Family Curse
- It’s worse than bestiality…
- Personal Blogs
