[BluffTHIS!]

Hock,

It still remains that the following is true:

1) PPA has refused to make publicly available on their site necessary legal and financial data;

2) PPA has refused to change the above position.


So any failure to find that info or contact them when someone went to one of their offices, is on the PPA. And the main conclusion, which it is very proper for an attorney to make based on the above, is that such an organization couldn't be recommended for support. This is the same as any other organization whose bona fides can't be verified due to that own organizations failure to make available necessary information.

And note that I really want the PPA to succeed, which includes the PPA prez coming here and addressing this in this thread. If he won't do that, then they really can't be taken seriously anymore IMO.

Also note that Allyson Jaffrey Schulman is on their board. If she were asked to do a due diligence examination of an organization, and found the same state of affairs as with the PPA, I can't see her recommending her client support such an organization without exposing herself to a malpractive suit.

The legal and financial transparency issues with the PPA are the real issue here, not 2+2's stance on same.