Which Groups *DO NOT* Deserve a Seat on the PPA Board?

[Skallagrim]

I have heard this issue debated many times now. I will therefore not repeat what I have said before in detail, just give my basic view:

The issues about the board are POTENTIALY legitimate. There is an excess representation of CP and "affiliate farms." My problem with the folks who insist on the board changing before participating in it, IS THAT THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO POINT TO A SPECIFIC PPA ACTION THAT CLEARLY BENEFITED THESE INTERESTS OVER THE INTERESTS OF EVERYONE WHO WANTS CLEARLY LEGAL ONLINE POKER. Given that, and the fact that the current board were there first to help create the PPA, I see it as insulting to ask them to resign at this time. Until they DO something showing partisanship, they ought to be given the benefit of the doubt.

As to transparency, I have 2 thoughts: First, the fact that there may have been a fair amount of industry money given to the PPA is not a debilitating fact politically (if proven and exposed), Americans nowadays expect that sort of thing. Gun manufacturers give to the NRA. and pornographers give to the ACLU, are you shocked? Second, the PPA has reporting requirements legally - AFAIK, it is in full compliance with its legal requirements - why should 2+2 or anyone else demand more?

I am not dismissing your concerns Bluff, but I am saying that this is not the time to make fights among any group that supports legal online poker. If and when a situation arises where you can show me a direct conflict, THEN I may think of changing my attitude.

Skallagrim