As I explained up front, in my first or second post on this subject, the motivation for the second resolution IMO has to do with the fact that TPL owes PTSC $2M. $1M of that is secured by future revenues from licensing the MMP. Under such circumstances, recognizing that PTSC, via PDS, is helping to fund Alliacense efforts, PTSC should have the right to dictate to a degree how Alliacense resources are dedicated. So, unless TPL owes other patent portfolio owners like money secured against their future licensing revenues (leveling the field), PTSC should have a strong "say". And apparently Lecky agreed, or else the resolutions would not have passed. Recall also how I explained how a concern here is the reaction of other patent portfolio owners - which goes EXACTLY to the point you make in your post..

All of this I have already explained.

As I said in my last post to you, I do not intend to keep re-explaining things to you due to an apparent inability to read, understand, and retain what's already been said.

So we can continue to agree to disagree, though at this point I'm unsure as to whether you understand what you are disagreeing with (or if there is real disagreement).

SGE