[DoTheMath]

Who should be on the board depends on whose interests the organization is promoting, on which issues the organization is confronting and on the knowledge, experience and connections that are needed to effectively promote those interests and address those issues.

What does the second 'P' in PPA stand for? We are talking here about the board of an organization called the Poker Players Allicance. Poker players have a number of interests in common with other Poker interest groups. For instance players, affiliates, and online site operators share concerns about the UIGEA, obtaining a carveout for online poker, etc. However, players also have some intersts in opposition to some of their allies on the foregoing issues, e.g. rake rates, market competition between sites, player protection, etc.

Some people seem to be viewing the question as: "who should be on the board of the Anti-UIGEA Alliance (AUA)?". If the PPA was renamed and repurposed as the AUA, perhaps there would be far fewer concerns about the makeup of the board. The fact that there really is no separate AUA seems to be at the root of many of the differences expressed in this thread.

A lack of clarity of interests and purpose seems to even confound OP:

[ QUOTE ]
... the composition of the PPA board ... in order to give it ... the best chance of success in general, and also to be assured of pursuing all of the broader range of goals that most rank and file members have, as opposed to primarily focusing on benefiting the business models of specific concerns.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
It would especially be enlightening if such reasoning included what a specific industry groups brings to the table that helps the cause of poker, and what it brings that harms the cause of poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are we talking about promoting the goals of members, i.e. players, or are we talking about something more nebulous -" the cause of poker" - whatever that is?

If the PPA really is, as it claims [ QUOTE ]
... a nonprofit membership organization comprised of poker players and enthusiasts from around the United States who have joined together to speak with one voice to promote the game, ensure its integrity, and, most importantly, to protect poker players' rights.

[/ QUOTE ] then its board should not be made up primarily of people connected to organizations from whom player may need their rights protected - organizations which make money from players.

I don't buy the argument that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". The enemy of my enemy could just as well be my enemy too, just one that finds our common enemy more of a threat at the moment. The enemy of my enemy is a temporary ally, but may not be a friend and is definitely someone distinct from me.

The history of the PPA Board membership reminds me of the fox guarding the henhouse. They are guarding us chickens from the wolves and bears, perhaps in order that we can get fattened up.

In a ideal world, there would be a PPA, and the PPA would be one partner in the AUA. Another partner would be the non-B&M Poker Industry Alliance (NBPIA). Another player in all this is the B&M industry. They would aoppear to be organized on another side of this issue - one that either keeps online play difficult, or positions themselves to become the key providers in the market.

A problem with this idealized view - each set of interest having their own organization - is that grass-roots organizations are notoriously difficult to form and to keep running over an extended period of time. Also, there are only so many people available for, and able to effectively perform, the roles of PPA board member and AUA board member. There may not be critical mass enough to maintain two organizations.

If there aren't enough resources to go around, you have to choose which goals are most important now, and concentrate on those. If that means working on poker's legal status, against the UIGEA, for a carveout, etc., are what is most important now, then focus your resources on that. Just don't make the claim that the organization with that purpose is soley made up of, and soley acting for, poker players. The danger in calling the AUA the PPA, and in having its board stacked with industry people is that once the PPA wins the current battles, its members may find that "their" organization is staffed by the enemy from the next battles.