They got a lotto nerve. What are the odds that those jerks will change their imperial policy here in the kingdom of Oregon?

I never heard of this ORcade thing before, since I use this site to filter my local news.

The proposed online signup asks for birth date. I do not supply that to anyone online, because it is a piece of information that any imposter can find useful. Maybe they could demand at least as rigorous an identity check as that demanded by private credit bureaus, which must be in writing.

I believe that the entire advertising budget for the lottery division should be eliminated. That would render any debate about nuance, and whether it appeals to kids, moot.

Every utterance of "we do good things" is PR crap because it fails to acknowledge that every dollar not spent on gambling is another dollar that would be spent or invested, which would do good things too. If the site is not for gambling then it must be strictly for PR (for "fun")?

Searching on ORcade reveals a recent trademark application, including a description that includes this: "providing points to online game players which players can redeem for prizes"

Winnings are described as prizes, and are measured in, or convertible, to dollars. This is gambling, unless someone were to define gambling for entertainment purposes only as something other than "gambling."

The Lottery Commission is tone deaf. It's bad enough that the lottery scam continues as a voluntary tax on the math challenged, but the promise of easy riches ends up fleecing the citizens who can least afford it. And if all this isn't bad enough, the Oregon Lottery Commission continues the wrong-headed campaign aimed at teaching our kids that random chance is the preferred method of financing education. "Scratch Its for Schools" is back again in 2011. Our education system reflects the values that fund it -- how our kids fare in Oregon schools is not much more than a gamble. Unbelievable:
http://www.scratchitforschools.org/

Lets not overlook the many Lottery Delis that have sprung up across Oregon and most of them associated with independent mini-marts that were already magnets for less than legal activity.

Another giant step in our ever declining society where greed is good and criminal activity is being ignored.

Taylor Branch elaborates
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rv44zUgfPU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Perhaps "no time" is the realistic portrayal of matters. Same as when there is time and to no avail, like talking to the wall.

However, in the final analysis, "no time" is worse, because one can not put matters into the record.

Question then is: What happens to what is put into the record? The information is there, but unless one has lawyers lined up to take the matter further, ....
I imagine it would be good to be put into the record anyway, so that if not dealt with now, years from now, if a book is written about the state/city affairs of this time, a list can be made of those who did object and testify and why.

What is the window of time that one can do something legally about decisions?
Statute of Limitations?
I believe it varies, depending on issues, and then state, county, or city.

I recall, after a city council hearing, it was three weeks to take a land use case to LUBA. If Lee or lw read this, they may have current time frames as I believe they are following the happenings at South Waterfront.

Didn't the mob used to run all sorts of "lottery-type" games? Oh that's right, we shouldn't compare the
O-lottery scams with anything the mob dreamed up because that would be wrong and that's for sure.

For those inclined, why not send Larry Niswender (who happens to lead the lottery, I think) an email?

Larry.Niswender@state.or.us

Clinaman, A LUBA notice of intent to appeal must be made no later than 21 days after a decision is mailed to parties having standing. Then after you have many time periods that can be extended to get the record, correct the record, file briefs, etc. It can take a long time.

They should at least give you a 1 in 10 chance at getting heard...

Lee,
Thank you.
What I see as difficult is that intent to appeal period, if the situation is that one needs to raise funds for a lawyer, that doesn't give one much time.
Realize raising funds can be attempted before decision...but until that decision is made, many may not contribute.

Clinamen, the intent to appeal period time is okay. Yes, more time would be better to jell issues, interest, money to appeal. But remember, this is only "Intent". Person(s) have the ability to rescind the "intent". In fact anywhere along the line, like finding things in the record that doesn't help your interest, you can end the process and save money/time if you've already invested some.

In fact we did two appeals without spending any money except for records, printing, etc., all without an attorney. It is still doable if you've got the time and interest and a good case.

Lee,
By we, I assume you mean individuals or a group of individuals? My understanding is that an organization, such as a NH Assoc. can only file with an attorney?

Clinamen, The "we" was a group of individuals in one case, and individuals in others, all filed without attorney. I'm not sure anymore about NA having to have an attorney-check LUBA's website. Since many NA have several individuals testifying, submitting comment/ info, they have standing. We just listed all the people who wanted to enjoin as petitioners who had any kind of standing. Three times we did it with attorneys, but did much of the work ourselves to keep the cost down.