the fact. In my clarification post it seems quite obvious to me that I was a bit chagrined, otherwise I would not have posted the clarification, let alone contact Norm with a course of action to resolve the discrepency (last night).

With respect to the later portion of your post, there are many people that feel the same way about roulettes and NCVs, especially in light of the fact that some casinos have allowed collectors to have such chips. The signage (and the requirement) is a Nevada Gaming Regulation, not some whim of a casino, and I imagine that 'selective enforcement' is the rule of thumb.

However, this roulette, NCVs, chips and tokens thing has been talked to death and I am not interested in a rehash of what has been said on this BBS over and over and over and over again.

The subject at hand was the willful dissemination of a known un-lisenced NFL affiliated product and the possible wrongful involvement by Club members. In light of the fact that there is evidence that the NFL is willing to pursue its Rights it is possible that a participant in our community may be out some money (I am referring to the winning bidder). In my first post I thought that I would ask if something to the contrary had developed. Evidently not.

Jim Follis