|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/20/2008 3:41:03 AM PACIFIC |
 Dress Code for WPT, Andrew W, 7. Nov 2003 06:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I was just looking at the rule sheet for the World Poker Finals at Foxwoods, going on this weekend. (We're driving to Boston, and I want to stop in and see some action) I noticed that players in the final event have to sign a WPT release/waiver.One of the posted things is a dress code. They have to approve what you'll wear at the final table. I could see a concern for something offensive that couldn't be displayed on TV,but they specifically have an issue with logos. I guess the WPT doesn't want to give free advertising to poker rooms that don't buy time. But is a dress code appropriate for this? There is a great article on cardplayer.com about the pros andcons of TV and poker, and dress code was an issue mentioned. What happened to the American metaphor for freedom that poker represents? The last bastion of individuality in pop culture? Any thoughts? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Candide, 7. Nov 2003 07:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It's a legal issue for them. If you watch some of the WSOP or WPT when they show the earlier rounds, they "blur" out many shirts. I personally don't see any problem with them having a dress code. It is a private, not public, event and as such all of the freedoms that people think they have or want go out the window. Don't like it, don't play. In fact, (and I don't mean to go off on you, just speaking in general) one of the things that annoy me a lot lately is people constantly talking about freedoms of this or that, and especialy the right to privacy. No where in the constitution does it give a right to privacy. It is implied from the 9th ammendment I believe it is by more liberal minded people. It's like when you are on a board/forum, and someone is removing posts for whatever reason. You always see some idiot talking about freedom of speech and you can't do that. Well sure they can, they own and run the forum. You want to play in their house, you gotta live by their rules. Oh well, I'm rambling and the fire alarm just went off in our building. Candide | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Lottery Larry, 7. Nov 2003 08:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| "In fact, (and I don't mean to go off on you, just speaking in general) one of the things that annoy me a lot lately is people constantly talking about freedoms of this or that, and especialy the right to privacy. No where in the constitution does it give a right to privacy. It is implied from the 9th ammendment I believe it is by more liberal minded people" ----------- Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech ... Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. ------------- The question becomes- if there is an unalienable right to privacy since there isn't something specific in the Constitution that says that there ISN'T a right to privacy. Then again, I don't think the Constitution says anything specific about murdering your neighbor, either. Of course, we can't seem to agree on what Amendment II means, either- does Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution have any effect? But that's another topic. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, MozMan, 7. Nov 2003 17:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Precendence by court decisions generally asserts that privacy does not exist in public. The courts have said that you have certain privacy rights within your home, but not in your car, for example, because anyone can see in your car. Following this reasoning, there is no right to privacy in a public poker room, or especially on TV. As far as the First Ammendment goes, you have the right to wear whatever you want, but the WPT is not required to provide you a medium and audience, so they have the right to dictate what you can and cannot wear on their forum. You can wear what you want, but then you will have to buy your own TV time and have your own show. It all fits with the Constitution, and no one's rights are being alienated. -Moz "Did you exchange a walk-on part in a war for the lead-role in a cage?" | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, KJo, 7. Nov 2003 09:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Amen. People never seem to understand when/where the concepts of free speech actually apply. "Congress shall make no law" means exactly that- there will be no law prohibiting your speech (except for unprotected speech), but rules and regulations can apply in workplaces, private settings, internet forums, etc., just no laws. Eli on 7. Nov 2003 07:22 Candide wrote: > It's a legal issue for them. If you watch some of the WSOP or WPT when they show the > earlier rounds, they "blur" out many shirts. > > I personally don't see any problem with them having a dress code. It is a private, > not public, event and as such all of the freedoms that people think they have or want > go out the window. Don't like it, don't play. > > In fact, (and I don't mean to go off on you, just speaking in general) one of the > things that annoy me a lot lately is people constantly talking about freedoms of this > or that, and especialy the right to privacy. No where in the constitution does it > give a right to privacy. It is implied from the 9th ammendment I believe it is by > more liberal minded people. It's like when you are on a board/forum, and someone is > removing posts for whatever reason. You always see some idiot talking about freedom > of speech and you can't do that. Well sure they can, they own and run the forum. > You want to play in their house, you gotta live by their rules. > > Oh well, I'm rambling and the fire alarm just went off in our building. > > Candide | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Robert M, 7. Nov 2003 17:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Good point, for instance: You can't speak foriegn languages at a poker table, but it isn't written into any municipal, state, or federal law. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, KJo, 8. Nov 2003 11:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Interesting you bring up that point, as it was tested in the courts a few years ago. Two players sued Artichoke Joe's in the Bay Area because they had been kicked out for refusing to observe the "English-only" rule. The courts found in favor of Artichoke Joe's, since the needs of their business outweighed any free speech or discrimination claims. Eli on 7. Nov 2003 17:24 Robert M wrote: > Good point, for instance: You can't speak foriegn languages at a poker table, but it isn't > written into any municipal, state, or federal law. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Bungus, 11. Nov 2003 00:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Wow, suddenly I have this intense hatred for you, Candide, you uptight, pompous tool | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Candide, 11. Nov 2003 07:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hehehe, and why is that? I think the majority of the people who have responded have felt along the same lines as myself. Big government=very very bad. It isn't pompous or uptight at all, I just don't want laws to dictate every little thing in our lives. Private entities have the right to run things the way they see fit within the law (and we could do without a few of them). Anyways, sorry ya hate me :) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Bungus, 11. Nov 2003 19:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| "No where in the constitution does it give a right to privacy. It is implied from the 9th ammendment I believe it is by more liberal minded people." -Candide I'm no doctor, but that seems to me like a pro "let's-put-government-run-cameras-in-every-US-citizen's-house" statement to me. And I'M sorry you're sorry I hate you... I think... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Palinya, 12. Nov 2003 07:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Wow, funny but I didn't get that impression at all... He wasn't saying "let's-put-government-run-cameras-in-every-US-citizen's-house" at all. I'm always amazed by people that let the letter of the law or a quote from the constitution override common sense and judgement. The cameras in every US citizens house comment is just silly. Saying that people don't have the right to wear whatever they want on national TV is a far cry from installing cameras in your house. on 11. Nov 2003 19:06 Bungus wrote: > "No where in the constitution does it give a right to privacy. It is implied from the 9th > ammendment I believe it is by more liberal minded people." > -Candide > I'm no doctor, but that seems to me like a pro > "let's-put-government-run-cameras-in-every-US-citizen's-house" statement to me. > And I'M sorry you're sorry I hate you... I think... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Bungus, 12. Nov 2003 11:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Read that first sentence of Candide's quote again... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Candide, 13. Nov 2003 07:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Well, I'm assuming you mean the first sentence of the 3rd (I think, the bigger one where I put the "i dont mean to go off" part). I'm guessing you've read way too much into a single statement. No, I don't want cameras in every house, or anything like that. I'm just tired of everyone claiming their right to this or that being violated when they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. It's just one of the many things the ignorant masses like to think. Sorta like the "cops can't lie, so if I ask a person if he is a cop, he has to tell me"...You have to be kidding me right? Yet, do you know how many times I hear someone say that? People get ideas, fueled by the media, hollywood, old customs, or whatever...and they stick with them assuming they are true. Most don't take the time to actually look into something and understand the truth, and more importantly, WHY something is the way it is. I assure you that the bill of rights and constitution was never meant to be taken today as some would like to. Some prefer to interpret it as loosely as possible, letting it justify their own desires. To be true to what was written, then you need to take it in the context of how it was intended at the time. If you don't like that, well, that is what amendments are for. As to privacy, no I don't want cameras in houses. But at the same time I am guessing I would be much more willing to "violoate" privacy for the good of society than you are. I can't possibly imagine why people complain about the cameras installed on the streets in Tampa (or for that matter, all over europe). How does that violate anything? They take wanted criminals, put their faces in to be recognized, and bust them. If a crime takes place nearby, it can be used to assist catching the criminal. Other than someone breaking the law, how does it impact you at all? Of course, I'm also not a conspiracy theorist. I have a lot of friends who are in their early twenties and still deluded to how the world should be, and that it is just "the man keeping me down" type of attitude. I try not to laugh too hard at them ;) I believe we each create our own futures, in some way. I came from a lower class background, and thus I had to work harder to get where I am today perhaps. I never complained (but boy did I wish I could have parents who bought me mustangs or bmw's in high school). I could have stayed like some of the friends I grew up with, playing basketball and talking about how unfair life is, but I couldn't figure out really how it was that unfair. So I had to perhaps study a bit more so that I could get scholarships. Big deal. I also strongly believe we should all be held responsible for our actions. I'm so sick of seeing someone filmed on TV shooting someone, then you see the mom saying "my baby didn't do it". Huh? Having spent time in the courts, I know the technicalities don't get people off as much as tv shows portray, but it still irks me a bit when they do. I do realize it isn't right to just say well screw it, get rid of the illegal search and siezure rules. Again, part of me thinks, well if you don't do anything wrong then how does it matter? Oh well, this has nothing to do with poker, but I'm bored at work :) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Bungus, 14. Nov 2003 00:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Apology Accepted | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Bungus, 14. Nov 2003 00:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| No, seriously, I see where you were coming from, but from your first post it seemed like you said we had no right to privacy in our own house or some shit like that. And the cameras in every house thing was a joke. But if movies like Minority Report and Judge Dread have taught us anything, its to be wary of a heavy handed and omnipotent government, sitting inside their glass supercomputers waiting until we defiantly rip the labels off our mattresses in our bedrooms so they can bust in through the windows and taser us unto submission. No, seriously, I probably would be more opposed to violating peoples privacy for the "good" of society than you. I break a lot of laws. Like gambling for instance. I play poker illegally all the time at home, and have been sneaking into Atlantic City since I was 18. I've probably smoked a quarter of the weed that's come in from Canada between 98-00'. And don't even get me started on my college years, or public drunkenness. Now most of these laws have at least some sound justification behind them; legalize gambling and there'd be a horde of whores outside every bar, abolish the drinking age and I'd never get and sleep cause every twenty minutes some drunk high schooler would be slamming his mom's Explorer into the side of my house. But the government is notoriously bad at exercising common sense. Take this story from my local news paper Monday days ago, where some 80 year old WWII vet was arrested for "soliciting" donations for a disabled veterans fund outside a Foodtown. Thanks god the police found out about that one in time, before some old guy that got his fucking legs blow off by a hand grenade 60 years ago might have gotten enough donations for a new wheel chair. I'm guessing had there been cameras out there, the police could have arrived on the scene sooner, thus stopping the law breaker from raising enough cash to pay for a 87 year old veteran's new walker. No, seriously, if you wanna get a funny take on some stupid fucking lawsuits, check this site out. http://www.seanbaby.com/news.htm on 13. Nov 2003 07:37 Candide wrote: > Well, I'm assuming you mean the first sentence of the 3rd (I think, the bigger one where I put the "i dont mean to > go off" part). I'm guessing you've read way too much into a single statement. > > No, I don't want cameras in every house, or anything like that. I'm just tired of everyone claiming their right > to this or that being violated when they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. It's just one of > the many things the ignorant masses like to think. Sorta like the "cops can't lie, so if I ask a person if he is a > cop, he has to tell me"...You have to be kidding me right? Yet, do you know how many times I hear someone say > that? > > People get ideas, fueled by the media, hollywood, old customs, or whatever...and they stick with them assuming > they are true. Most don't take the time to actually look into something and understand the truth, and more > importantly, WHY something is the way it is. I assure you that the bill of rights and constitution was never meant > to be taken today as some would like to. Some prefer to interpret it as loosely as possible, letting it justify > their own desires. To be true to what was written, then you need to take it in the context of how it was intended > at the time. If you don't like that, well, that is what amendments are for. > > As to privacy, no I don't want cameras in houses. But at the same time I am guessing I would be much more willing > to "violoate" privacy for the good of society than you are. I can't possibly imagine why people complain about the > cameras installed on the streets in Tampa (or for that matter, all over europe). How does that violate anything? > They take wanted criminals, put their faces in to be recognized, and bust them. If a crime takes place nearby, it > can be used to assist catching the criminal. Other than someone breaking the law, how does it impact you at all? > > > Of course, I'm also not a conspiracy theorist. I have a lot of friends who are in their early twenties and still > deluded to how the world should be, and that it is just "the man keeping me down" type of attitude. I try not to > laugh too hard at them ;) > > I believe we each create our own futures, in some way. I came from a lower class background, and thus I had to > work harder to get where I am today perhaps. I never complained (but boy did I wish I could have parents who > bought me mustangs or bmw's in high school). I could have stayed like some of the friends I grew up with, playing > basketball and talking about how unfair life is, but I couldn't figure out really how it was that unfair. So I had > to perhaps study a bit more so that I could get scholarships. Big deal. I also strongly believe we should all be > held responsible for our actions. I'm so sick of seeing someone filmed on TV shooting someone, then you see the > mom saying "my baby didn't do it". Huh? Having spent time in the courts, I know the technicalities don't get > people off as much as tv shows portray, but it still irks me a bit when they do. I do realize it isn't right to > just say well screw it, get rid of the illegal search and siezure rules. Again, part of me thinks, well if you > don't do anything wrong then how does it matter? > > Oh well, this has nothing to do with poker, but I'm bored at work :) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, guinnessman, 7. Nov 2003 08:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Since the $25K entry into the WPT finals is an add on to the pool and not from the player's entry money, I think they have the right to put any rule in place they want. If there was no money added, I don't think they should have a right to say anything about wearing logos. Guinnessman | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, KJo, 7. Nov 2003 09:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It makes no difference if there's an add on, like the other poster said it's their tournament, their rules. Regarding the logos, it's a simple thing about sponsorship- if a player is wearing a pokerstars.com hat while Party Poker is a sponsor of the show, that means WPT is technically promoting both but only getting paid for one, which will piss off WPT and especially Party. It would be no different than an NFL player putting a Budweiser logo on his helmet, obviously the NFL won't allow that for a variety of very good reasons. Eli on 7. Nov 2003 08:49 guinnessman wrote: > Since the $25K entry into the WPT finals is an add on to the pool and not from the > player's entry money, I think they have the right to put any rule in place they want. > If there was no money added, I don't think they should have a right to say anything > about wearing logos. > > Guinnessman > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Mark Barnett II, 7. Nov 2003 09:21 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| personally i think it just has to do with the *image* they are trying to convey about poker, that not everyone is a shady/sleazy type if i remember correctly Mike Sexton years ago wrote an article about this and also dressed the part *formal wear* poker is booming, the people in charge *running the tournements and such* have a serious influence on where poker goes from here *aka the no deals issue* if we want our activity to continue to grow and florish people have to have concerns that might turn off/disappoint large sections of the populace i wouldnt be surprised if in 5 years or less logos wont be an issue but at this early stage i dont have a problem with sponsers *those running the tournement* wanting to be the main thing people connect with, not someones logo Rule #1 of Poker Circumstances alter cases Rule #2 NEVER forget rule #1 | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, shorn, 7. Nov 2003 09:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Also, since most of the advertisements that people would wear would be for illegal gambling, perhaps many of the companies that buy airtime for commercials on the Travel channel are uncomfortable with that angle. Unfortunately, not everyone in the world (and especially in the US) believes that poker is a skill game like all of us that post here. If the companies threaten to pull their $$, then the Travel channel may just avoid the issue. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, LJH, 7. Nov 2003 09:46 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| DEAR ANDREW, YOUR CONCERN IS MISPLACED. RULES ARE FINE FOR POKER, ULESS IT IS STRIP POKER<G> LJH | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, gary ford, 7. Nov 2003 10:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 7. Nov 2003 06:19 Andrew W wrote: > I was just looking at the rule sheet for the World Poker Finals at Foxwoods, > going on this weekend. (We're driving to Boston, and I want to stop in and see > some action) > > I noticed that players in the final event have to sign a WPT release/waiver.One > of the posted things is a dress code. They have to approve what you'll wear at > the final table. I could see a concern for something offensive that couldn't be > displayed on TV,but they specifically have an issue with logos. I guess the WPT > doesn't want to give free advertising to poker rooms that don't buy time. > > But is a dress code appropriate for this? There is a great article on > cardplayer.com about the pros andcons of TV and poker, and dress code was an > issue mentioned. What happened to the American metaphor for freedom that poker > represents? The last bastion of individuality in pop culture? > > Any thoughts? I have lots of thoughts on this subject--but i abhor the current ACLU fueled debate about individual liberty etc. This is a commercial enterprise and as such they have the right to set the gound rules. No one is forcing anyone to enter, One of pokers problems in this growth curve is the absence of rules. If you want the Wild, Wild, West fine, but forget Tv money and forget sponsorship money. Poker is undergoing tremendous change as it goes mainstream. The "old " ways are changing, both in the play of the cards and the need for rules. You pay your money and take your choice. Be a Texas roadie or be on TV with all kinds of 3rd party money. Gary Ford---fuel the boom--don't kill it | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, hokie95, 7. Nov 2003 10:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 7. Nov 2003 10:20 gary ford wrote: > I have lots of thoughts on this subject--but i abhor the current ACLU fueled debate > about individual liberty etc. This is a commercial enterprise and as such they have > the right to set the gound rules. Um....guys? The Constitution says that Congress shall pass no law..... If you can point me to the law that is being enforced, I'll join you in being outraged. Unless and until, however, you explain to me how the Travel Channel is an extension of our government, any objections to dress code restrictions based on our fabulous form of government will be lost on me. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Candide, 7. Nov 2003 12:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hokie, I took Gary as having the same opinion as you...That there are no laws that apply to it in this situation, and that he is frustrated with the idiots (generaly, I think I remember once when I agreed with them) at the ACLU keep trying to spout out the rights of the individual rather than societies. His outrage is at people who would try to apply gov't rules to the private sector. (I think that is what he meant) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, hokie95, 7. Nov 2003 12:52 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Yeah, I was agreeing with Gary, which is why I highlighted that portion of his response. Funny related story -- a very close friend of mine was railing one day about his company having informed the employees about not being able to do something or other. (I don't remember what the specific topic was, trust me that it was something the company had the right to control.) He was saying over and over that his first amendment rights were being violated. I looked him square in the eyes and said: "Congress shall pass no law." He felt pretty stupid, and we laugh about it a lot. -Hokie95 | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, gary ford, 7. Nov 2003 13:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You're close--I'm opposed to big government-- That was the intent of the Founding fathers, but the lawyers keep taking bites out of it. A majority of the members of Congress are lawyers, by the way. Shakespeare was right--"first, we must kill all the lawyers " | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, hokie95, 7. Nov 2003 13:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 7. Nov 2003 13:01 gary ford wrote: > Shakespeare was right--"first, we must kill all the lawyers " NOW, I disagree with Gary. Read the Shakespeare quote in context. The context was that they wanted to take away people's freedoms. The first step? Killing all the lawyers. -Hokie95 | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, shorn, 7. Nov 2003 13:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Right on brother. Rat bastards will take every dime of ours if we let them... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, gary ford, 7. Nov 2003 21:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| the application of shakeaspeares words to the modern day ( as the quote is usually used ) creates a different context. How many pages in the IRS code????? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, hokie95, 8. Nov 2003 04:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| So, if it's long and complicated, it's bad? Put down Super/System! -Hokie95 | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Bungus, 11. Nov 2003 01:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'd take every dime of yours, too, if you play poorly enough. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, shorn, 11. Nov 2003 07:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Name the site...1 on 1 baby. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, Bungus, 11. Nov 2003 19:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 7. Nov 2003 13:54 shorn wrote: > Right on brother. Rat bastards will take every dime of ours if we let them... I said if you play poorly enough... My statement was meant to illustrate a point that we as poker players are trying to take the other players every last dime if they let us, ie play poorly enough. That is the point of poker, is it not? Take all the less skilled players cash you can? To play me in poker would be a lose-lose proposition for you; if you out skill me and win, you are only proving my point and showing by your aforementioned statement that you are a hypocrite. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, LJH, 7. Nov 2003 19:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| DEAR GARY, YOU MISSED THE POINT OF SHAKESPEARES WHOLE POINT. THE CHARACTER WHO SAID IT WAS A REVOLUTIONARY, AND HE WANTED TO KILL ATTORNYS SO THERE WOUL;D BE NO LAW. LJH | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, gary ford, 12. Nov 2003 12:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 7. Nov 2003 19:32 LJH wrote: > DEAR GARY, YOU MISSED THE POINT OF SHAKESPEARES WHOLE POINT. THE CHARACTER WHO SAID IT WAS A > REVOLUTIONARY, AND HE WANTED TO KILL ATTORNYS SO THERE WOUL;D BE NO LAW. LJH so, whats your opinion of ANARCHY??? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Dress Code for WPT, mkpoker, 7. Nov 2003 11:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The Travel Channel/WPT isn't barring anyone from wearing anything (it would be quite different if they refused to seat you if you wore a certain logo). Rather, the travel channel is declining to BROADCAST that particular image, for obvious commercial reasons (they're not going to give away free advertising). Players have a right to wear whatever they want (within reason, of course) and the Travel Channel has a right to broadcast whatever it wants (also within reason). Bottom line: there is absolutely no problem here. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|