The W
Views: 99859123
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
20.10.14 1639
The W - Current Events & Politics - Alright, now it's Personal GOP! (Online Gaming Ban)
This thread has 5 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 6.37
Pages: 1
(527 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (20 total)
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.57
U.S. Congress passes online gaming ban slipped into Port Security bill at 11th hour (news.yahoo.com)

Okay, the war in Iraq sucked, but I wasn't fighting. The gay marriage thing sucked, but I'm hetero. The appt. of anti-choice SCOTUS judges sucked, but I use protection against STD's like AIDS, herpes, or children. So while I admit I did not like the GOP one bit, I never really took it all that personally.

But now they're screwing with my ability to play a little hold-em or drop a bet on the NFL on sunday's without having to risk getting robbed at gunpoint or have my knees broken. Gee thanks Bill Frist, I feel a whole lot freaking safer now. Seriously, they want to privatize Social Security because they trust us to make our own choices, privatize/voicherize education because they trust us to make good school choices, privatize Medicare because they trust us to make good choices about insurance, but they don't trust me to play a damn game of poker?! Well you know what GOP, here's what I plan on doing. I'm taking every dime that would have been going into my online poker/betting accounts (and it is substantial for me), and it's all going to MoveOn, the DSCC, and various Dem candidates. And judging from the reaction on places like 2+2 and other poker spots, I am not alone on this one.

Fuck you Bill Frist. Have fun finishing 6th in the Iowa caucuses.



Now I'll never be able to lead SPF's spfers! (The W)
Promote this thread!
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 476 days
Last activity: 476 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.51
You are slightly overreacting in saying that your gambling money would now go to political organizations rather than to one of the noblest endeavors of all, sports wagering. First, may I suggest Horse Racing; the Sport of Kings, at Arlington Park as a method of 'recreation'. Simulcasts throughout the country do provide you with multiple methods of which to 'recreate' legally. Also, places such as Southwest Vacations and Travelocity can get you round trip to Vegas and a hotel for a few evenings for slightly over $300 from Chicago, including taxes. This would be during the week, not weekend.
As for the law, I hate it and it is dirty Only benefit is if this convinces states to follow the lead of Nevada and allow legal bookmaking. I never bet online because I didn't trust it, stopped with bookies for other reasons, and only bet in Vegas through people going there because I don't trust myself there, so this doesn't hurt me. This is why I always favor when Congress is doing nothing rather than doing something.
Leroy
Boudin blanc








Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 4 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.80
What's worse is that it really looked as though the Senate wouldn't get to vote on it this session, but they slipped it into another bill while no one was paying attention. Thanks guys.

I really liked this little section of the article:



    "This represents protectionism, and the WTO have said you can't do that," said Whittaker, whose portfolio includes about 2 percent of online gaming stocks. "Overall, we'll probably remain with most of our holdings."


So I'm FOR teh WTO now? Jeez..

My gut feeling tells me this won't last. I think it'll be regulated in a few years. If money wasn't going to offshore corporations, then I don't think congress would have bothered. Once congress figures out a way to tax it, they'll work something out.







"Oh my God! They have a shit-load of Cockapoo stuff!"
-Jennifer's greatest quote... ever.
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.57
    Originally posted by Leroy
    What's worse is that it really looked as though the Senate wouldn't get to vote on it this session, but they slipped it into another bill while no one was paying attention. Thanks guys.

    I really liked this little section of the article:



      "This represents protectionism, and the WTO have said you can't do that," said Whittaker, whose portfolio includes about 2 percent of online gaming stocks. "Overall, we'll probably remain with most of our holdings."


    So I'm FOR teh WTO now? Jeez..

    My gut feeling tells me this won't last. I think it'll be regulated in a few years. If money wasn't going to offshore corporations, then I don't think congress would have bothered. Once congress figures out a way to tax it, they'll work something out.





I would agree more with the idea that it would get regulated had this not passed. Problem is that now in order to regulate it someone will have to come out and basically take the stand that they want to legalize gambling nationwide, which is NOT going to play well.

I think for poker its best hope is to at some point get an exemption akin to the horse racing or fantasy football exemptions stating that it is a game of skill rather than a game of chance.



Now I'll never be able to lead SPF's spfers! (The W)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 3 min.
Last activity: 1 sec.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.26
Probably long since everyone's cared, but the text of the relevant (irrelevant) portion of the bill is up at the Library of Congress site (thomas.loc.gov).



CRZ
EddieBurkett
Boudin blanc








Since: 3.1.02
From: GA in person, NJ in heart

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.05
This week's I, Cringely has a rather interesting take on the whole Internet Gambling Ban. In short, he says that it shouldn't be too hard to work around this, leading to not only more ineffective regulation, but a way for terrorists to finance themselves and avoid legal scrutiny. My favorite line: "Any random group of 535 nerds is smarter than the 535 members of the U.S. Congress..."



You believe me, don't you?
Please believe what I just said...
Leroy
Boudin blanc








Since: 7.2.02

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 4 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.80
    Originally posted by EddieBurkett
    This week's I, Cringely has a rather interesting take on the whole Internet Gambling Ban. In short, he says that it shouldn't be too hard to work around this, leading to not only more ineffective regulation, but a way for terrorists to finance themselves and avoid legal scrutiny. My favorite line: "Any random group of 535 nerds is smarter than the 535 members of the U.S. Congress..."


The problem is that the more there are work arounds, the more dangerous it becomes to put money in a site. If it was regulated, then the players would have some recourse should a site try to get away with something (like the PokerSpot situation).

Not to mention a site can simply keep you money if you violate their terms of agreement - which is the case with many of the workaround I've heard about. If a site catches you, there goes you bankroll.





"Oh my God! They have a shit-load of Cockapoo stuff!"
-Jennifer's greatest quote... ever.
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 days
AIM:  
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.57
    Originally posted by Leroy
      Originally posted by EddieBurkett
      This week's I, Cringely has a rather interesting take on the whole Internet Gambling Ban. In short, he says that it shouldn't be too hard to work around this, leading to not only more ineffective regulation, but a way for terrorists to finance themselves and avoid legal scrutiny. My favorite line: "Any random group of 535 nerds is smarter than the 535 members of the U.S. Congress..."


    The problem is that the more there are work arounds, the more dangerous it becomes to put money in a site. If it was regulated, then the players would have some recourse should a site try to get away with something (like the PokerSpot situation).

    Not to mention a site can simply keep you money if you violate their terms of agreement - which is the case with many of the workaround I've heard about. If a site catches you, there goes you bankroll.



Also, from a practical standpoint, if all that's left are those willing to go to extreme lengths to play online, all that's left are other sharks. The edge online came from the people who watched an episode of WSOP, thought they would be Moneymaker, and come online and donk off $100. Last thing I want to do is play against some insane Swede who 12-tables and has PAHUD wired straight into his brain.



Now I'll never be able to lead SPF's spfers! (The W)
StingArmy
Andouille








Since: 3.5.03
From: Georgia bred, you can tell by my Hawk jersey

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 15 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.89
Anybody know when he's signing this stupid thing? I heard it was going to be signed Saturday afternoon and that the sites pulling out of the US would do so immediately. I play on Party right now, and they are the biggest fish leaving the market. They also said that if the bill was signed into law, they'd end their Monster promotion (because it would be logistically impossible to complete) and would give everyone the expected value of any freerolls won. However, yesterday I was able to play in the $100K weekly freeroll (finished 22nd, woohoo!) and right after I was able to qualify for NEXT week's $100K freeroll as well as the monthly $1mil tournament. Is Party dragging their feet or has he not signed the bill yet?

- StingArmy

EDIT: He's supposed to sign it Friday the 13th. How fitting.

(edited by StingArmy on 8.10.06 2206)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 3 min.
Last activity: 1 sec.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.26
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the bill is signed (hosted.ap.org).



CRZ
RYDER FAKIN
Six Degrees of Me








Since: 21.2.02
From: ORLANDO

Since last post: 40 days
Last activity: 39 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.62
Good. Now I can get back to breaking legs and holding people up at gunpoint(*). Never underestimate the overestimation of technology. Or separating other people from their money, for that matter

Speaking of which - I should probably pick this time to collect on an unpaid Superbowl bet! Someone here OWES ME MONEY

spf: Well you know what GOP, here's what I plan on doing. I'm taking every dime that would have been going into my online poker/betting accounts (and it is substantial for me), and it's all going to MoveOn, the DSCC, and various Dem candidates. And judging from the reaction on places like 2+2 and other poker spots, I am not alone on this one.

There probably *will* be a certain itch to book losers now that these online gambling places are biting the dust. Human Nature

But, if you're serious, I'll bet that the Dems don't take control of Congress - I will need (at least) 4-1 odds. From what I hear, especially after this bill is signed, IT'S OVER FOR THE GOP! But that's why it's called gambling

FLEA

(edited by RYDER FAKIN on 13.10.06 1421)


Demonstrations are a drag. Besides, we're much too high

1ryderfakin.com
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 days
AIM:  
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.57
    Originally posted by RYDER FAKIN
    Good. Now I can get back to breaking legs and holding people up at gunpoint(*). Never underestimate the overestimation of technology. Or separating other people from their money, for that matter

    Speaking of which - I should probably pick this time to collect on an unpaid Superbowl bet! Someone here OWES ME MONEY

    spf: Well you know what GOP, here's what I plan on doing. I'm taking every dime that would have been going into my online poker/betting accounts (and it is substantial for me), and it's all going to MoveOn, the DSCC, and various Dem candidates. And judging from the reaction on places like 2+2 and other poker spots, I am not alone on this one.

    There probably *will* be a certain itch to book losers now that these online gambling places are biting the dust. Human Nature

    But, if you're serious, I'll bet that the Dems don't take control of Congress - I will need (at least) 4-1 odds. From what I hear, especially after this bill is signed, IT'S OVER FOR THE GOP! But that's why it's called gambling

    FLEA

    (edited by RYDER FAKIN on 13.10.06 1421)

I do think the Dems take over Congress, though obviously not because of this. After all, Poker Stars is still open, so all us degenerates are still too busy on there to get active

Full control I'd say 4-1 is too high. 4-1 that they take the House I think would be about right from the latest district-by-district counts. The Senate will probably go 51-49 GOP or 50-50 with Cheney breaking the tie.

And as for the gunpoint, having been at underground games with guns pulled, I stand by that one. I have not however had my knees, or known anyone who personally had their knees broken by a hired thug. So I'll retract that one.



Now I'll never be able to lead SPF's spfers! (The W)
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 28 days
Last activity: 2 days
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.68
4-1? Are you serious? Pretty much all the various pollsters and pundits and analysts are calling for something along the line of a +20 house gain and +5 Senate gain on average. That puts odds at a little less than 2-1 if you ask me.

Late October, Early November I'll make a "call it" thread where we can all put our money where our mouths are. Figuratively speaking now, of course.

(edited by MoeGates on 13.10.06 1819)


Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-
Euripides


StingArmy
Andouille








Since: 3.5.03
From: Georgia bred, you can tell by my Hawk jersey

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 15 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.89
PartyPoker was pretty much ready to hit the ByeBye Button as soon as the bill was signed into law, so the changes have already gone into effect. Luckily for me, I had already started accounts at numerous other poker sites* (in the process discovering the Party was close to bottom of the barrel in everything other than traffic).

To make things all the sweeter, Party ALREADY made good on their promise to reimburse people the expected value of their freerolls in their "Monster" promotion. For my one Monster $100K weekly freeroll and my one Monster $1mil monthly freeroll, I got a cool $450. Not too shabby for a $12 investment. I only wish I won a few more $100K freerolls since it only took me one try to win the one I had.

- StingArmy

* Absolute Poker, Bodog, Full Tilt, Poker Stars, Pokerroom, and UltimateBet are my new homes. Call me obsessed.
RYDER FAKIN
Six Degrees of Me








Since: 21.2.02
From: ORLANDO

Since last post: 40 days
Last activity: 39 days
AIM:  
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.62
4-1? Are you serious? Pretty much all the various pollsters and pundits and analysts are calling for something along the line of a +20 house gain and +5 Senate gain on average. That puts odds at a little less than 2-1 if you ask me.

Okay with me

Late October, Early November I'll make a "call it" thread where we can all put our money where our mouths are.

Right on. But if you are willing to give me 2-1 now, don't NOT do it when things get close.

Figuratively speaking now, of course

Yep. And eye-et quay on the etbay uffstay. HOT CHICKS TITS F'N SHAPIRO! FUN OLD SCOTT KEITH WITH TERRI PLAYBOY SLASH

Pollsters and Pundits and Analysts don't vote

FLEA

(edited by RYDER FAKIN on 13.10.06 2119)

Demonstrations are a drag. Besides, we're much too high

1ryderfakin.com
Jim Smith
Goetta








Since: 17.10.04
From: Bloomington, IL

Since last post: 2297 days
Last activity: 1728 days
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.12
Shouldn't the title of this thread be about an online gambling ban? I clicked on this thinking Congress had put the kibosh on MMORPGs out of nowhere.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 28 days
Last activity: 2 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.69
    Originally posted by RYDER FAKIN
    4-1? Are you serious? Pretty much all the various pollsters and pundits and analysts are calling for something along the line of a +20 house gain and +5 Senate gain on average. That puts odds at a little less than 2-1 if you ask me.

    Okay with me

    Late October, Early November I'll make a "call it" thread where we can all put our money where our mouths are.

    Right on. But if you are willing to give me 2-1 now, don't NOT do it when things get close.

    Figuratively speaking now, of course

    Yep. And eye-et quay on the etbay uffstay. HOT CHICKS TITS F'N SHAPIRO! FUN OLD SCOTT KEITH WITH TERRI PLAYBOY SLASH

    Pollsters and Pundits and Analysts don't vote

    FLEA

    (edited by RYDER FAKIN on 13.10.06 2119)


OK. Your $20 to my $10 that the Democrats control both houses of Congress next session. 50-50 Senate's a push.



Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-
Euripides


redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 476 days
Last activity: 476 days
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.51
    Originally posted by MoeGates
      Originally posted by RYDER FAKIN
      4-1? Are you serious? Pretty much all the various pollsters and pundits and analysts are calling for something along the line of a +20 house gain and +5 Senate gain on average. That puts odds at a little less than 2-1 if you ask me.

      Okay with me

      Late October, Early November I'll make a "call it" thread where we can all put our money where our mouths are.

      Right on. But if you are willing to give me 2-1 now, don't NOT do it when things get close.

      Figuratively speaking now, of course

      Yep. And eye-et quay on the etbay uffstay. HOT CHICKS TITS F'N SHAPIRO! FUN OLD SCOTT KEITH WITH TERRI PLAYBOY SLASH

      Pollsters and Pundits and Analysts don't vote

      FLEA

      (edited by RYDER FAKIN on 13.10.06 2119)


    OK. Your $20 to my $10 that the Democrats control both houses of Congress next session. 50-50 Senate's a push.





I still have some faith that the Democrats will find a way to screw up in the last 2 weeks yet again. However, how would you qualify Lieberman in terms of the bet and the make-up of the Senate? Would the Democrats have to have 51 without Joe to be considered a win, or is Connecticut considered a Democrat win either way?
StingArmy
Andouille








Since: 3.5.03
From: Georgia bred, you can tell by my Hawk jersey

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 15 days
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.90
    Originally posted by Jim Smith
    Shouldn't the title of this thread be about an online gambling ban? I clicked on this thinking Congress had put the kibosh on MMORPGs out of nowhere.

The statute in question uses the term "gaming" as do many people (most?) in the industry.

- StingArmy
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 28 days
Last activity: 2 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.69






I still have some faith that the Democrats will find a way to screw up in the last 2 weeks yet again. However, how would you qualify Lieberman in terms of the bet and the make-up of the Senate? Would the Democrats have to have 51 without Joe to be considered a win, or is Connecticut considered a Democrat win either way?


Unfortunately, I actually agree with you. Joe's a Dem, Bernie Sanders is a Dem, anyone who votes for Harry Reid for leader is a Dem, anyone who votes for Bill Frist is a GOPer.



Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-
Euripides


Thread rated: 6.37
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Clear Channel Considers Sale
Next thread: David Kuo rolls on GWB
Previous thread: Air America files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
(527 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
(dies laughing) And I thought that Dave Barry bit about France declaring war on itself (and losing) wouldn't actually HAPPEN. Maybe if they want people to stop mocking them, they should stop giving us material.
- drjayphd, D'oh! (2003)
The W - Current Events & Politics - Alright, now it's Personal GOP! (Online Gaming Ban)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.135 seconds.