Player representative council

[Nathan Butler]

Questions worth thinking about!

Should we have one large Council with members from every region?
Maybe several smaller Councils that represent each region independently?
Should we have a hierarchy? or should all members be equal?
What should the Council govern and how should they Govern it?
What is an acceptable work load for a volunteer?

Once these questions are answered, then maybe we can return to the slegde-fest. At least then, we will know what we are all bickering about as oposed to just argueing over an idea about an idea... it's just crazy to me!

Any ideas/feedback that answer the above questions would be fantastic, so lets get back on topic!

Nathan Butler

[Garth Kay]

Hi there Garth and others. It's another long one but if it wasn't it wouldn't be me, would it????

The council would also act as a tribunal, in conjunction with the PM

In conjunction with the PM. But we can scrap this aspect.

Garth, I believe that would be a step in the right direction. Leaving the issuing of penalties and if necessary bans would be best when left up to the NPL and it's employees.

To Shannon;
I think it's ditto for you too Shannon in both Brett and Garths posts.

I think it's acceptable to say that anyone working for an alternate provider (read: competition, sort of) would not be permitted to sit on an NPL players rep council. Most of you are all stating there is a big enough conflict of interest simply from a players perspective. At the moment we have three contributors to this forum who work for alternative suppliers of pub poker. We allow them to contribute and discuss what they want, but do you honestly believe that some posts are not affected in the slightest by ulterior motives at times?

But why would you have to bring my brother into this Bob?

Unfortunately, I have no idea how or why I typed Bretts name as it was meant to be Bruces name and his comments to which I was refering Shannon too. (could it be I have sub man thoughts on Brett and Macca)

However, I'm sure I would be on the most "unwanted Garth list" M8.

How far off the mark you are Bob. Bob, I will be brutally honest here: you can be an absolute dick on this forum at times.

If I was a sensitive bloke, or I were like some other readers I too would only see the negatives in your reply post and centre my reply on the "Dick" comment. I'm neither so lets move on.

But in person you are a fantastic bloke, and a well rounded individual in all aspects of his personal and professional life, who in the right environment could contribute so much more to NPL and Players in a different environment.

In regards to your personal views of me as a person I say, thank you for your kind words. And yes I'm sure I would or could be an asset and help make a difference to NPL.

Also you are one of the minority who bucks the trend and is a true individual in every sense of the word. And don't get me wrong, I can be a dick at times as well.

Would you want me to be any different Garth? Let's face it M8, we are of a similar mold, mine is just a little bit older. But let me ask you this, if you went into battle, who would you want on your team to cover your back? Me or a sheeplike person??????

As I have said before I'm not in favour of a players councillor also being reponsible for being part of a tribunal. To sit in and only offer a player point of view would be acceptable but not be part of the final decission making.

My major concerns are the unknown repercussions to a non NPL employee being responsible for banning a fellow player.

So, if you were to as you say "scrap this aspect" as in your first reply on here, then that's a different story. For what it's worth, you'd have my support in setting up a players code of conduct, set penalties, ethics etc if the need arises.

In closing here's an example that I was involved in a few years ago and why I believe it's best to leave tribunal decissins in NPL's hands.

As chief steward for an Australian Sprint Title in Perth. I made a decission that changed the outcome of a competitors final placing which in turn affected his prize money.

Had I not been employed by "Aust Sprintcar Control Council" I could and or would have been sued personally by the offending driver and or his car owner. The fact that I was an employee their only recourse was to take their dispute to the "disputes committee".

They too were also payed and the driver was required to post a $3,000 bond to have his case heard so as to stop petty hearings. My decission stood as is and the committee in fairness refunded his bond provided their was a sincere apology made to me.

Take care M8, and be true to yourself and don't forget to send some flowers to your mum and tell her you love her.

Good post Bob. And I believed you covered all the pertinent points of our discussion. Good thing we are both not sensitive men.

I agree with your points and as always I am willing to be swayed on any point or issue I raise.

As to the battle? There's only one person I can think of that I have continually verbally sparred (read: gone to battle) with?

We are all apart of the one league, you're view is always based around your previous business experience but also as that of a player, and I am quite often walking a fine line trying to balance the needs of a business with the needs of clients and the needs of a league of individuals from varied demographics. We will always spar on certain issues and I quite enjoy it. It would be good to have you on my side 100% just one time! LOL.

In regards to Nathan's comments above in now way are they representative of the thoughts or feelings of NPL management. I am sure in time he will begin to understand that sometimes the personal thoughts have to be put on hold seen he is now an FHG employee.

[Garth Kay]

In regards to this: what if we had the major forum contributors form this council, they already have a large part of management's ears. They have proven to have the best interests of NPL and players at heart. And they do communicate a large volume of ideas, initiatives, discussion points, queries as is to NPL staff.

So if we declared selected major forum contributors as points of contact for the majortiy of NPL players not willing to discuss anything openly on a public forum would that work?

I thought you might be thinking something like that, so before I replied I tried to put myself in your average regular non-thinking players shoes.

The absolute underlying issue is getting them off their rear to actually ask something of ANYONE to begin with.

Assuming they did that, why would they (or should they) ask another player when there's a perfectly good, paid, TD or TA there to ask? If I didn't know me, I wouldn't trust me either and would be asking 'who the hell is this bloke?'. There would also be the perception of favourites to deal with.

If they don't want to speak face to face there's the forum and/or email (get a computer if you don't have one, it's TWO THOUSAND AND NINE!) or there's always the telephone.

I'm half expecting someone to say 'oh, but that isn't working as well as it could now' to which I reply in advance 're-read the underlying issue comment'. If they're not saying anything it's because they are lazy.

First of all - I know you and I don't trust you, so I get your point.

Okay let's move away from a rep council formation, and for the record I hate the word govern.

How about we look at something like an "NPL Think Tank", I think someone has already recommended this (smart person whoever it was), and these players are kinda of like a sounding board for NPL ideas and initiatives, but these ideas are bounced in both directions. A sample consumer base if you would (whats the phrase when they test movies on a sample audience, mental block) and they would test out new products and thoughts.

I would still like to form some form of rules committee, a conglomerate of senior players and TD's who would update and regulat rules used in tournaments, set a player code of conduct as well as an NPL contractor code of conduct and also set to work out regulated punishments for breaches in etiquette, rules and acceptable social behaviour; these of course would be fully enforced by NPL contractors and management.

Sorry for the drastic change in direction but it looks like it may be required.

[BigPete33]

I think an NPL think-tank has a lot more merit as an idea that's practicable.

You already do a fair amount of that now and have also in the past.


I can't see why that sort of role couldn't also include the rules committee type scenario so yes I think that would work well.

*edit* and again there's nothing stopping any one from suggesting an idea on here!

[Bob B]

Nice post Pete. On a given nite or day during a tourney I too believe it's up to the player to either approach the TD or TA with their concerns.

To Nathans questions worth thinking about!!!!

Should we have one large Council with members from every region?

A two person per region seems feasable, but from past committee experiences too many = too much time wasting. A central location is a must and considering the expanse of the NPL's regions it would be unfair to expect country folk to attend every meeting. So, they could either forward their concerns via email or text message or attend if they choose.

Maybe several smaller Councils that represent each region independently?

This would make a whole lot more sense Nathan. Any topics or queries could be emailed to for a better word, "Ground central". Anything that may still require consideration would be placed on an agenda and emailed to the various regional groups for their opinions.

Their results would then be forwarded to "Ground central", to be discussed by a select group. Ths final group to consist of represetatives from NPL management, TD's, and of course Players reps. Each topic to be reviewed and hopefully a final decission can be made. Unless the situation requires more input from the regional members.

Should the council also consist of a Venue operators representative??? It would nice considering there isn't a basic venue standard re; stamping values!!!! So, maybe it would be a good idea to get them involved and hear their side of selected topics that concern them and us.

Should we have a hierarchy? or should all members be equal?

In all cases there "MUST" be a chair person to control any of the meeting. A time limit per question depending on the seriousness of the topic and obviously an open vote. One should never feel he or she feels intimidated at any time.

What should the Council govern and how should they Govern it?

IF, the council consists and represents each group there would be a common interest in all things poker related. Chop out the mystery of "what ifs we did this or did that" etc. Cut to the chase and table things openly that can help to improve our prizes, stamping system, types of games cash or freeroll, Freeroll final table prizes, future tournaments, and obviously a code of ethis, standards etc, etc. Hopefully for the betterment of NPL and it's punters.

What is an acceptable work load for a volunteer?

That is a very open and somewhat unanswerable question Nathan. Each individual has something different timewise to offer and therefore once a month may be a starting point. I said in a previous post, that I felt it would be in NPL's interest to finance the initial gathering for at least one day. This way it allows time to discuss your time query and maybe establish a code of ethics and penalties so there is a standard set in place. No grey areas any more. Time permitting ongoing items for discussion can be heard and possibly voted on.

In addition, I think the role of a council member would be to openly chat with players during the breaks as one would normally do today. Any urgent concerns that may need immediate attention should be brought to one or both of the TD or TA's attention.

That's about my lot Nathan. There's obviously more but in the short time I have available plus the old two fingers are cramping up. That it for me. Take care and tell your woman she has a lovely smile.

[Bob B]

Need a couple of clarifications Garth. And BTW your almost getting 96% don't push it or I'll be a little bit sheepish LOL.

A FHG employee??????
And PM????

PS ....... There's been a lot of water go past this ol boy Garth. I find it's so much easier to show an example or an experience or even a quote or two that I have personally experienced in my 65 years on this planet.

[Scotty]

FHG = Full House Group

PM = Poker manager

[Bob B]

FHG = Full House Group

PM = Poker manager

Thanks Scott. Now to be more nieve are they FHG part of NPL or another provider???

[Garth Kay]

FHG = Full House Group

PM = Poker manager

Thanks Scott. Now to be more nieve are they FHG part of NPL or another provider???

Full House Group is our company, we have several different brands, I won't go into it too much. But one of the brands we distribute is NPL.

So we own the rights (so to speak) to distribute NPL in SA, Vic and TAS.

And Sydney (who owns NPL) has every other state for NPL.

FHG also does Sportspick and we have a few other projects on the go.

[AceLosesKing]

FHG = Full House Group

PM = Poker manager

Thanks Scott. Now to be more nieve are they FHG part of NPL or another provider???

They own NPL. I'm guessing the distinction between the two would be an increased workload/more responsibilites. And you gotta hold your tongue a bit more, it seems

Edit: Garth ninja covered it.